Discussion:
C.P. Addition: Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford
Add Reply
Douglas Richardson
2020-09-09 19:23:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage inexplicably left Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died in 1380, out of its publication. Richard was summoned to Parliament from 8 Jan. 1370/1 to 20 October 1379, by writs directed “Richardus de Stafford, le Piere.”

As to his marriages, Sir Richard de Stafford married (1st) before 3 Feb. 1339 (date of fine) Isabel de Vernon (whose parentage is well established), and (2nd) before 6 Nov. 1371 (date of license for settlement of land) a certain Maud [see Cal. Patent Rolls, 1370–1374 (1914): 151].

Hardy, History of the Parish of Tatenhill 1 (1907): 66–67 has identified Maud, 2nd wife of Richard de Stafford, as Maud de Stafford, daughter of Sir John de Stafford, and widow of Edmund de Vernon. See the following weblink for this source:

https://books.google.com/books?id=XSFJAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA66

Recently, however, I encountered a recent interesting article by Anthony Cox "Prayers for the dead - Vernon chantries and benefactions to monasteries" published in Derbyshire Miscellany 17(6) (2006): 138-149. In footnote 32 on page 148, Mr. Cox plainly states that Sir Richard de Stafford's second wife, Maud, "could not be the widow of Edmund de Vernon who died 1379; Cal. IPM XV 1970 no. 287."

This article can be viewed at the following weblink:

https://www.derbyshireas.org.uk/DM17-06.pdf

Mr. Cox's comment would put him in sharp disagreement with what Mr. Hardy published back in 1907. Who is right?

As it turns out, Mr. Cox is correct. Calendar of Close Rolls, 1377–1381 (1914): 288, proves Maud, daughter of John de Stafford, and wife of Edmund de Vernon, predeceased Edmund and died without issue before 1 March 1380. This record may be viewed at the following weblink:

https://archive.org/stream/calendarofclos01grea#page/288/mode/2up

As to exactly when Maud, wife of Edmund de Vernon, died, it appears she was living in 2 Richard II [1378-1379] as indicated by the following record found in the online Discovery catalog:

Reference: E 210/2377
Description:
Roger, parson of the church of Broughton, John de Eton, and Thomas Howkyn, chaplain to Edmund de Vernon and Maud his wife : Grant of their manor of Hanwell by Banbury with the advowson of Hanwell church, etc., which they had by the feoffment of the said Edmund : ( Oxon. )
Date: 2 Ric. II.

From the records cited above, it appears that Maud de Stafford, wife of Edmund de Vernon, predeceased Edmund and died without issue sometime between 1378/79 and 1 March 1380. She is obviously an entirely different person than Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died 30 March 1400.

As for further evidence Maud, wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, long survived Maud de Stafford, wife of Edmund de Vernon, I find that in 1401 and 1403 Nicholas Bradshawe and Robert Mauveysyn, Knt., executors of the will (later called administrators of the goods and chattels) of Maud, widow of Richard Stafford, Knt., sued Laurence Feckenham, goldsmith, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of £20. [Reference: Wrottesley, Staffordshire Suits: Plea Rolls (Colls. Hist. Staffs. 15) (1894): 99, 109; Court of Common Pleas, CP40/570, image 891f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT2/H4/CP40no570/aCP40no570fronts/IMG_0891.htm)].

Douglas Richardson, Historian & Genealogist
CE Wood
2020-09-11 00:02:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I am confused. You have two different death dates for the same person.

Is " Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died in 1380" the same person as "Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died 30 March 1400"?

Also, regarding the identity of Maud who married Edmund de Vernon, is this reliable info?

"A writ on Mem. Roll 30 E. III. dated May 1, states that the King had committed to John de Stafford the custody of the moiety of all lands belonging to Sir Philip de S. in the counties of Lincoln, Northumberland and Notts, viz., the moiety of Matilda the daughter of John de Stafford, kinswoman, and one of the heirs of Philip, who was under age, in the King's custody, to hold to the full age of Matilda, rendering £35 annually, and on March 28 last the said Matilda had proved her age and the King had taken the fealty of Edmund Vernon who had married the said Matilda. John de Stafford was therefore exonerated from this payment,
The proof of Matilda's age states that she was born at Banbury and was 15 years of age on the Feast of St. Thomas last past. Heiresses who were married were considered legally of age as soon as they were sufficiently grown up to be marriageable.

_A History of the Parish of Tatenhill in the County of Stafford, Volume 1_, p. 66. Found at: https://tinyurl.com/y227emej

CE Wood
Post by Douglas Richardson
Dear Newsgroup ~
Complete Peerage inexplicably left Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died in 1380, out of its publication. Richard was summoned to Parliament from 8 Jan. 1370/1 to 20 October 1379, by writs directed “Richardus de Stafford, le Piere.”
As to his marriages, Sir Richard de Stafford married (1st) before 3 Feb. 1339 (date of fine) Isabel de Vernon (whose parentage is well established), and (2nd) before 6 Nov. 1371 (date of license for settlement of land) a certain Maud [see Cal. Patent Rolls, 1370–1374 (1914): 151].
https://books.google.com/books?id=XSFJAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA66
Recently, however, I encountered a recent interesting article by Anthony Cox "Prayers for the dead - Vernon chantries and benefactions to monasteries" published in Derbyshire Miscellany 17(6) (2006): 138-149. In footnote 32 on page 148, Mr. Cox plainly states that Sir Richard de Stafford's second wife, Maud, "could not be the widow of Edmund de Vernon who died 1379; Cal. IPM XV 1970 no. 287."
https://www.derbyshireas.org.uk/DM17-06.pdf
Mr. Cox's comment would put him in sharp disagreement with what Mr. Hardy published back in 1907. Who is right?
https://archive.org/stream/calendarofclos01grea#page/288/mode/2up
Reference: E 210/2377
Roger, parson of the church of Broughton, John de Eton, and Thomas Howkyn, chaplain to Edmund de Vernon and Maud his wife : Grant of their manor of Hanwell by Banbury with the advowson of Hanwell church, etc., which they had by the feoffment of the said Edmund : ( Oxon. )
Date: 2 Ric. II.
From the records cited above, it appears that Maud de Stafford, wife of Edmund de Vernon, predeceased Edmund and died without issue sometime between 1378/79 and 1 March 1380. She is obviously an entirely different person than Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died 30 March 1400.
As for further evidence Maud, wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, long survived Maud de Stafford, wife of Edmund de Vernon, I find that in 1401 and 1403 Nicholas Bradshawe and Robert Mauveysyn, Knt., executors of the will (later called administrators of the goods and chattels) of Maud, widow of Richard Stafford, Knt., sued Laurence Feckenham, goldsmith, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of £20. [Reference: Wrottesley, Staffordshire Suits: Plea Rolls (Colls. Hist. Staffs. 15) (1894): 99, 109; Court of Common Pleas, CP40/570, image 891f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT2/H4/CP40no570/aCP40no570fronts/IMG_0891.htm)].
Douglas Richardson, Historian & Genealogist
Douglas Richardson
2020-09-11 05:00:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, September 10, 2020 at 6:02:25 PM UTC-6, CE Wood wrote:
< I am confused. You have two different death dates for the same person.
< Is " Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died in 1380" the same person as "Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died 30
< March 1400"?

Dear Carolyn ~

In answer to your question, Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, died 13 August 1380. His widow, Maud, Lady Stafford died 30 March 1400.

As for further particulars of Maud, Lady Stafford, I find she occupied a house in Lichfield, Staffordshire in 1381. In 1382 she sued William de Ayleston regarding the third part of one messuage, mill, lands, and 100s. of rent in Bushbury, Staffordshire, which she claimed as her dower. In 1386 an assize was held to determine if Ralph Basset, Knt., of Drayton unjustly disseised Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, Knt., of the 4th part of the manor of Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire. In 1389 she sued Robert ?Somptmon and Katherine his wife in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of £20. The same year Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, Knt., executrix of the will of Isabel de Barton, sued John de Haselore, parson of the church of Yoxhall, Staffordshire, and another, executors of the will of Henry de Tymmore, clerk, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of 40s. In 1390 she sued John de Hampton in the Court of Common Pleas in a Gloucestershire plea regarding a debt of 40s. In 1398 William Walshale and Margaret his wife, widow of Rese ap Griffin, sued Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of 200 marks.

Reviewing the above material, I note that Maud, Lady Stafford, served as the executrix of the will of a certain Isabel de Barton. Quite possibly this is a clue to Maud’s identity. Margaret, wife of WIlliam Walshale, who sued her in 1398 was a Zouche.

< Also, regarding the identity of Maud who married Edmund de Vernon, is this reliable info?

< "A writ on Mem. Roll 30 E. III. dated May 1, states that the King had committed to John de Stafford the custody of the moiety of all
< lands belonging to Sir Philip de S. in the counties of Lincoln, Northumberland and Notts, viz., the moiety of Matilda the daughter of
< John de Stafford, kinswoman, and one of the heirs of Philip, who was under age, in the King's custody, to hold to the full age of
< Matilda, rendering £35 annually, and on March 28 last the said Matilda had proved her age and the King had taken the fealty of
< Edmund Vernon who had married the said Matilda. John de Stafford was therefore exonerated from this payment,
<The proof of Matilda's age states that she was born at Banbury and was 15 years of age on the Feast of St. Thomas last past.

Yes, this information is correct. Maud, daughter of John de Stafford, is the Maud who married Edmund de Vernon. As Mr. Cox correctly pointed out, she is not the Maud who was the 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford.

< CE Wood

DR
CE Wood
2020-09-12 00:52:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Ah so. your phrasing was confusing.

Rather than your phrasing:
"She is obviously an entirely different person than Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died 30 March 1400."

The more succinct and less confusing phrasing would be:
"She is obviously an entirely different person than Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford. She died 30 March 1400."

Grammatically, "who" would refer to the last named person. All the commas in the world do not change that. And, yes, I earned the moniker of "Grammar Gramma". :)

CE Wood
Post by Douglas Richardson
< I am confused. You have two different death dates for the same person.
< Is " Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died in 1380" the same person as "Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, who died 30
< March 1400"?
Dear Carolyn ~
In answer to your question, Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, died 13 August 1380. His widow, Maud, Lady Stafford died 30 March 1400.
As for further particulars of Maud, Lady Stafford, I find she occupied a house in Lichfield, Staffordshire in 1381. In 1382 she sued William de Ayleston regarding the third part of one messuage, mill, lands, and 100s. of rent in Bushbury, Staffordshire, which she claimed as her dower. In 1386 an assize was held to determine if Ralph Basset, Knt., of Drayton unjustly disseised Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, Knt., of the 4th part of the manor of Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire. In 1389 she sued Robert ?Somptmon and Katherine his wife in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of £20. The same year Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, Knt., executrix of the will of Isabel de Barton, sued John de Haselore, parson of the church of Yoxhall, Staffordshire, and another, executors of the will of Henry de Tymmore, clerk, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of 40s. In 1390 she sued John de Hampton in the Court of Common Pleas in a Gloucestershire plea regarding a debt of 40s. In 1398 William Walshale and Margaret his wife, widow of Rese ap Griffin, sued Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of 200 marks.
Reviewing the above material, I note that Maud, Lady Stafford, served as the executrix of the will of a certain Isabel de Barton. Quite possibly this is a clue to Maud’s identity. Margaret, wife of WIlliam Walshale, who sued her in 1398 was a Zouche.
< Also, regarding the identity of Maud who married Edmund de Vernon, is this reliable info?
< "A writ on Mem. Roll 30 E. III. dated May 1, states that the King had committed to John de Stafford the custody of the moiety of all
< lands belonging to Sir Philip de S. in the counties of Lincoln, Northumberland and Notts, viz., the moiety of Matilda the daughter of
< John de Stafford, kinswoman, and one of the heirs of Philip, who was under age, in the King's custody, to hold to the full age of
< Matilda, rendering £35 annually, and on March 28 last the said Matilda had proved her age and the King had taken the fealty of
< Edmund Vernon who had married the said Matilda. John de Stafford was therefore exonerated from this payment,
<The proof of Matilda's age states that she was born at Banbury and was 15 years of age on the Feast of St. Thomas last past.
Yes, this information is correct. Maud, daughter of John de Stafford, is the Maud who married Edmund de Vernon. As Mr. Cox correctly pointed out, she is not the Maud who was the 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford.
< CE Wood
DR
Adrian Channing
2020-09-12 16:31:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
“Richardus de Stafford, le Piere.” I think Piere may be a misreading of Pare, ODNB (under Stafford, Ralph, first earl of Stafford) describes him as Richard the father.

ODNB states that his second wife was:
"Maud (c.1330–1400), the daughter of his [Richard's] kinsman, Sir John Stafford of Bramshall, Staffordshire."
I see that Bramshall had long since been held by the Staffords/Bagot, from Domesday (CP Vol 12i p 170 note b)

ODNB also states:
"Maud possessed a title to part of the manor of Pipe, which Sir Richard promptly claimed. Such was his authority that, while an assize concerning the property was being held at Stafford, in 1359, no less a figure than the sheriff appeared in court wearing Sir Richard's livery."

Richard (the father) left a son and and namesake who died (s.p. and v.p.) soon after the father was first summoned to parliament as a baron in 1370. ODNB states that this "ended any prospect that the title would become hereditary." I'm not sure why ODNB says this when the father left two further legitimate sons.

The son Richard had married the daughter and heir of Sir John Blount. An old email to gen_med named her as Alice

Adrian of Ewhurst
John Higgins
2020-09-13 04:35:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adrian Channing
“Richardus de Stafford, le Piere.” I think Piere may be a misreading of Pare, ODNB (under Stafford, Ralph, first earl of Stafford) describes him as Richard the father.
"Maud (c.1330–1400), the daughter of his [Richard's] kinsman, Sir John Stafford of Bramshall, Staffordshire."
I see that Bramshall had long since been held by the Staffords/Bagot, from Domesday (CP Vol 12i p 170 note b)
"Maud possessed a title to part of the manor of Pipe, which Sir Richard promptly claimed. Such was his authority that, while an assize concerning the property was being held at Stafford, in 1359, no less a figure than the sheriff appeared in court wearing Sir Richard's livery."
Richard (the father) left a son and and namesake who died (s.p. and v.p.) soon after the father was first summoned to parliament as a baron in 1370. ODNB states that this "ended any prospect that the title would become hereditary." I'm not sure why ODNB says this when the father left two further legitimate sons.
The son Richard had married the daughter and heir of Sir John Blount. An old email to gen_med named her as Alice
Adrian of Ewhurst
See vol. 7 (1896) of the "old" edition of CP regarding the succession to whatever barony may have created by the 1370 summons of Sir Richard Stafford This article (which, to use DR's words was "inexplicably" not carried forward to the "new" CP) says that Sir Richard "died 13 Aug. 1380, leaving male issue, but neither they nor any of their descendants were ever [summoned] to Parl. nor has any claim to this dignity been ever advanced."

This article names Sir Richard Stafford's 2nd wife as Matilda (d. sp 30 March 1400), but does not further identify her. Her identify, however, can be found in the article by Anthony Cox in Derbyshire Miscellany cited in the first post in this thread. She was the daughter of Sir Rhys ap Griffith [the elder] of Wichnor by his wife Joan Somerville.

Another post earlier in this thread said "In 1398 William Walshale and Margaret his wife, widow of Rese ap Griffin, sued Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of 200 marks." Margaret Zouche, wife of William Walshall [or Walsall, per HOP] was the sister-in-law of Matilda/Maud Griffith, the sister of Margaret Zouche's 1st husband Sir Rhys ap Griffith [the younger] of Wichnor.

BTW the mis-identification of Sir Richard Stafford's 2nd wife Maud as the daughter of John Stafford of Bramshall and his wife Elizabeth Somerville and the widow of Edmund Vernon is a long-standing error appearing in many sources - including both the 1st and 2nd Richardson editions of Magna Carta Ancestry
CE Wood
2020-09-13 22:06:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
“GRIFFITZ, Griffyn, Grufid, Gryffith, Gryffyht, Gryffyth, Rees ap, 5.
-, ……, …., JOAN wife of, sister of Elizabeth mother of Maud wife of Edmund de Vernon, knight, 2–5.

Source: M. C. B. Dawes, A. C. Wood, and D. H. Gifford, 'Index of Persons and Places: G', in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem: Volume 15, Richard II (London, 1970), pp. 459-464. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol15/pp459-464 [accessed 13 September 2020].

"The heirs of Philip [de Somerville] were his daughter Joan and Matilda, the daughter of Elizabeth Stafford, his younger daughter. Joan was married before 1325, so must have been 45 or more. Matilda married 1st, Edmund son of John Vernon, 2nd, Richard Stafford of Clifton and Pipe, who died 1380. (See Shaw under Clifton Camville.) She held lands in Okeley and Moklaston, co. Stafford, and the Manor of Norton in Wales, co. Salop. (Inq. p.m, Richard Stafford, miles.) She was Lady of Tatenhill 1391-2 and of Shelford, co. Notts, 1393-8.
A writ on Mem. Roll 30 E. III. dated May 1, states that the King had committed to John de Stafford the custody of the moiety of all lands belonging to Sir Philip de S. in the counties of Lincoln, Northumberland and Notts, viz., the moiety of Matilda the daughter of John de Stafford, kinswoman, and one of the heirs of Philip, who was under age, in the King's custody, to hold to the full age of Matilda, rendering £35 annually, and on March 28 last the said Matilda had proved her age and the King had taken the fealty of Edmund Vernon who had married the said Matilda. John de Stafford was therefore exonerated from this payment,
The proof of Matilda's age states that she was born at Banbury and was 15 years of age on the Feast of St. Thomas last past. Heiresses who were married were considered legally of age as soon as they were sufficiently grown up to be marriageable."

Source: Hardy, Reginald, _A History of the Parish of Tatenhill in the County of Stafford_, Volume 1, p. 66-67. See: https://tinyurl.com/y66u25sr.

CE Wood
Post by John Higgins
Post by Adrian Channing
“Richardus de Stafford, le Piere.” I think Piere may be a misreading of Pare, ODNB (under Stafford, Ralph, first earl of Stafford) describes him as Richard the father.
"Maud (c.1330–1400), the daughter of his [Richard's] kinsman, Sir John Stafford of Bramshall, Staffordshire."
I see that Bramshall had long since been held by the Staffords/Bagot, from Domesday (CP Vol 12i p 170 note b)
"Maud possessed a title to part of the manor of Pipe, which Sir Richard promptly claimed. Such was his authority that, while an assize concerning the property was being held at Stafford, in 1359, no less a figure than the sheriff appeared in court wearing Sir Richard's livery."
Richard (the father) left a son and and namesake who died (s.p. and v.p.) soon after the father was first summoned to parliament as a baron in 1370. ODNB states that this "ended any prospect that the title would become hereditary." I'm not sure why ODNB says this when the father left two further legitimate sons.
The son Richard had married the daughter and heir of Sir John Blount. An old email to gen_med named her as Alice
Adrian of Ewhurst
See vol. 7 (1896) of the "old" edition of CP regarding the succession to whatever barony may have created by the 1370 summons of Sir Richard Stafford This article (which, to use DR's words was "inexplicably" not carried forward to the "new" CP) says that Sir Richard "died 13 Aug. 1380, leaving male issue, but neither they nor any of their descendants were ever [summoned] to Parl. nor has any claim to this dignity been ever advanced."
This article names Sir Richard Stafford's 2nd wife as Matilda (d. sp 30 March 1400), but does not further identify her. Her identify, however, can be found in the article by Anthony Cox in Derbyshire Miscellany cited in the first post in this thread. She was the daughter of Sir Rhys ap Griffith [the elder] of Wichnor by his wife Joan Somerville.
Another post earlier in this thread said "In 1398 William Walshale and Margaret his wife, widow of Rese ap Griffin, sued Maud, widow of Richard de Stafford, in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of 200 marks." Margaret Zouche, wife of William Walshall [or Walsall, per HOP] was the sister-in-law of Matilda/Maud Griffith, the sister of Margaret Zouche's 1st husband Sir Rhys ap Griffith [the younger] of Wichnor.
BTW the mis-identification of Sir Richard Stafford's 2nd wife Maud as the daughter of John Stafford of Bramshall and his wife Elizabeth Somerville and the widow of Edmund Vernon is a long-standing error appearing in many sources - including both the 1st and 2nd Richardson editions of Magna Carta Ancestry
taf
2020-09-14 00:15:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by CE Wood
“GRIFFITZ, Griffyn, Grufid, Gryffith, Gryffyht, Gryffyth, Rees ap, 5.
-, ……, …., JOAN wife of, sister of Elizabeth mother of Maud wife of Edmund de Vernon, knight, 2–5.
Source: M. C. B. Dawes, A. C. Wood, and D. H. Gifford, 'Index of Persons and Places: G', in Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem: Volume 15, Richard II (London, 1970), pp. 459-464. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol15/pp459-464 [accessed 13 September 2020].
"The heirs of Philip [de Somerville] were his daughter Joan and Matilda, the daughter of Elizabeth Stafford, his younger daughter. Joan was married before 1325, so must have been 45 or more. Matilda married 1st, Edmund son of John Vernon, 2nd, Richard Stafford of Clifton and Pipe, who died 1380. (See Shaw under Clifton Camville.) She held lands in Okeley and Moklaston, co. Stafford, and the Manor of Norton in Wales, co. Salop. (Inq. p.m, Richard Stafford, miles.) She was Lady of Tatenhill 1391-2 and of Shelford, co. Notts, 1393-8.
A writ on Mem. Roll 30 E. III. dated May 1, states that the King had committed to John de Stafford the custody of the moiety of all lands belonging to Sir Philip de S. in the counties of Lincoln, Northumberland and Notts, viz., the moiety of Matilda the daughter of John de Stafford, kinswoman, and one of the heirs of Philip, who was under age, in the King's custody, to hold to the full age of Matilda, rendering £35 annually, and on March 28 last the said Matilda had proved her age and the King had taken the fealty of Edmund Vernon who had married the said Matilda. John de Stafford was therefore exonerated from this payment,
The proof of Matilda's age states that she was born at Banbury and was 15 years of age on the Feast of St. Thomas last past. Heiresses who were married were considered legally of age as soon as they were sufficiently grown up to be marriageable."
Source: Hardy, Reginald, _A History of the Parish of Tatenhill in the County of Stafford_, Volume 1, p. 66-67. See: https://tinyurl.com/y66u25sr.
The original Edmund de Vernon ipm that gave rise to the Close roll entry can be seen here, and again it reports Edmund's heir to the Somerville land as Rhys, so his wife Maud was already dead:

https://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol15/pp114-122

(no. 287)

For her 1355/6 proof of age mentioned by Hardy, see:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.l0066756867&view=1up&seq=329&q1=334

(or if you can't see that: https://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol10/pp274-292 number 334)

taf
Douglas Richardson
2020-09-18 15:06:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Dear Adrian ~

Thank you for your good post. Appreciated as always.

ODNB is incorrect that Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, Lord Stafford, was the daughter of Sir John de Stafford. Sir John de Stafford did indeed have a daughter named Maud, but she married Edmund de Vernon, and predeceased him.

ODNB is also wrong in stating that Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, "possessed a title to part of the manor of Pipe, which Sir Richard promptly claimed."

There is a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1377 , in which Sir Richard de Stafford's son and heir, Edmund Stafford, clerk, sued Sir Richard's widow, Maud, regarding the manor of Pipe and other property in Staffordshire. Edmund specifically states in his lawsuit that feoffees had given this property to Richard de Stafford, Knt., and Isabel his 1st wife and their heirs. Edmund stated the property should descend to him as their son and heir. See the following weblink for this lawsuit:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101074352012&view=1up&seq=190&q1=%22Richard%20de%20Stafford%22

My research further shows that in 1337–8, Richard de Stafford's mother, Margaret, assigned him the manor of Pipe (in Burntwood), Staffordshire. I also find that in 1340 Richard's half-brother, James de Pipe, then of full age, sued him in the Court of Common Pleas regarding the manor of Pipe (in Burntwood), Staffordshire, excepting two messuages.

Clearly the manor of Pipe belonged to Sir Richard de Stafford, long before he married his 2nd wife, Maud. How ODNB could have missed these records is beyond me. I would not recommend ODNB as a source unless its statement are independantly verified.

As far as Mr. Cox's competing claim that Maud, 2nd wife of Sir Richard de Stafford, was the daughter of Sir Rhys ap Griffith [the elder], of Wichnor, Staffordshire, by his wife, Joan Somerville, I remain doubtful of this. I'd like to see the evidence to support this claim.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City Utah
Douglas Richardson
2020-09-18 15:09:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In my post just now, I said:

< There is a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1377 , in which Sir Richard de Stafford's son and heir, Edmund Stafford, clerk,
< sued Sir Richard's widow, Maud .....

I meant to say there is a Common Pleas lawsuit dated Easter term 1381, not 1377.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City Utah

Loading...