Powys-Lybbe Forbears - Person Sheet
Powys-Lybbe Forbears - Person Sheet
NameJohn le Brett 
[104, Basset of Drayton, Vol VII, pp. 256-7]
[104, Basset of Drayton, Vol VII, pp. 256-7]FatherRoger le Brett
Notes for John le Brett
Possibly his wife was Alice Kirketon. Rosie Bevan had these extracts:
"Hi MichaelAnne and Kevan
"Our posts crossed - interesting to see you have John le Bret married to
Alice relict of John Loudham. I suspect she was a Kirketon, as the following
PRO records would suggest.
"C 143/260/4
John de Kirketon to settle the castle of Tattershall and the manors of Tattershall and Tumby, with the knights' fees and advowsons thereto pertaining, on himself and Isabel his wife and the heirs of his body, with remainder to Robert de Litlebury and Florence his wife and the heirs male of the body of the said Robert, remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of John le Bret and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of Nicholas le Grey and the heirs male of his body, remainder to the grantor's right heirs. 16 EDWARD III. "
C 143/307/2
John de Kyrketon to settle the castle and manor of Tattershall, with the advowsons of Kirkstead abbey, Markby priory, Tattershall church, and the chapel of the said castle, on himself and the heirs of his body, with remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to Alice daughter of John de Loudham and the heirs male of her body, remainder to Isabel her sister and the heirs male of her body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife, and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right heirs of the grantor, who retains the manors of Tumby and Kirton in Holland. 26 EDWARD III. "
_______________________________________________________
Subseqently MichaelAnne <ClaudiusI0@aol.com> came up with:
From: ClaudiusI0@aol.com
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 15:38:12 +0000 (UTC)
Dear Rosie, Kevan and Doug,
Rosie Bevan has uncovered the answer to this line as to the identity of
Alice, wife of John le Brette and mother of Catherine le Brette.
The line appears to be:
1. Sir Simon de Driby (- aft. 1286) married Alice Fitzhugh, daughter of Hugh
FitzRalph by Agnes de Greasley.
2. Robert de Driby married Joan de Tatteshall (-Oct. 8, 1329)
3. Simon de Driby married Margery NN (died bef. Aug. 8, 1322 sp)
3. Robert de Driby, aged 40 in 1332 died bef. 1334, heir to his
brother Simon.
3. John de Driby, aged 40 in 1329 heir to his mother, married
Huegilina and died sp leaving as his heir his sister Alice, wife of
William Bernake aged 50 or more in 1334.
3. Alice de Driby (-April 12, 1341) married (1)William Bernake
(1284-March 20, 1344/5)
married (2) Sir John Folville (-1363).
4. John Bernake (1309-1349) married Joan Mamion(1313-1362)
5. Maud Bernake (1327-April 10, 1419) married Ralph de
Cromwell (1346-Aug. 27, 1398)
5. William Bernake (1321-1360)
5. John Bernake
4. Hugh Bernake, Parson of Hethersett
4. Elizabeth Bernake married Sir James Byron
2. Beatrix de Driby married Robert de Kyrketon
3. Florence de Kyrketon married Robert de Littlebury
3. Isabel de Kyrketon married Nicholas de Grey
3. John de Kyrketon (CIPM #150, 41 Edward III) married Isabel, widow
of George Meriot. He was Lord Kirketon and involved in
numerous lawsuits with Alice and William Bernake. He died sp.
3. Alice de Kyrketon married (1) Sir John de Loudham (2) John le
Brette
4. Catherine le Brette married Sir John Caltoft (- ca. June 24,
1353)
5. Alice Caltoft married William Chaworth (1352-December 1398)
The IPM of John de Kyrketon states he died Feb. 20, 41 Edward III [1367] and
his heirs were John de Ludeham, knight, John de Lyttelbyrs, John de Tylnaye
and William de Sutton, parson of the church of Whitewell.
Fine, Trinity, 8 Edward III, 1334. Between John de Driby of Tatershale, parson
of a mediety of the church of Hedersete, plaintiff, and Roger de
Estbriggeforde, chaplain, and John Cleymond, of Kirketon, defendants, of the
manors of Breedon and Holewell and 14 marks, 12 1/4 d of rent, the rents of 3
lbs. of pepper, 1/2 lb. of cummin, and amoiety of 4 capons and 2 hens, two
parts of a messuage and one virgate of land in Ketilby and Holewell, also a
third part of the manor of Somerdeby and the advowson of the priory of
Langleye by Diseworth. The above manors and lands are declared to be the right of
Roger, which Roger granted them to John de Dryby [for life], the reversion of
them to John son of Thomas de Dryby, and Amie the daughter of Piers de
Gaveston, and theor issue, and in default to John de Kirketon, chivaler, and
his issue, in default to Robert de Ltlebury, chivaler, and his issue, in
default to the right heirs of John de Driby forever."
There is also a long discussion of Tatteshall that was posted by Paul Reed in
2001. The thread is:
From: Reedpcgen (reedpcgen@aol.com)
Subject: Re: Amy de Gaveston - the 1334 fine
View: Complete Thread (39 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 2001-02-28 16:42:42 PST
Snipet as Follows:
On 20 March 1431, Ralph, 3rd Lord Cromwell, brought into Chancery record of
several suits between Maud de Bernake and her husband, Sir Ralph de
Cromwell, and Sir John de Kirketon [CPR 1429-36, 147-52].
Sir Ralph de Cromwell and Maud [de Bernake] his wife, brought suit against Sir John de Kirketon concerning the castle of Tateshale and manor of Scremeby-halle as her inheritance. The pleas were presented at Westminster before the justices of the Bench Trinity Term 33 Edward III [10 June-1 July 1360].
They claimed that Maud de Bernake's "ancestor," John de Driby, was seised of the holdings during Edward III's reign, that he died without issue, and that the plaintiff Maud is the next heir of John de Driby's sister Alice [m. Sir William de Bernake]. In John de Kirketon's reply, it states "that the
plaintiffs [Maud and Ralph Cromwell] recovered it [Tateshale Castle] that very day from him, the present defendant, as being her right by a writ _de consanguinitate_." So they got possession. Kirketon "craves leave to imparl"but defaulted later, though the plaintiffs showed up, so judgment was
granted Maud and Ralph.
Ralph and Maud (de Bernake) de Cromwell brought another suit forward to recover the manor of Kirkeby upon Bayne [and other lands] from Sir John de Kirketon. The result was the same. Kirketon craved leave to imparl, but defaulted, and judgment was again granted Maud and Ralph.
THEN, in Michaelmas Term of that same year [9 Oct.-28 Nov. 1360], Sir John
de Kyrketon brought suit against Ralph de Cromwell, knight, and Maud his wife,
concerning the castle of Tateshale and manor of Kirkeby upon Bayne.
Sir John de Kyrketon claimed that he had been seised of the castle and manor during his own lifetime during the reign of the present king. Kyrketon acknowledged that John de Driby had seisin during his lifetime, BUT he produced a deed in court [!], dated at Tateshale Tuesday after St. Barnabas, 8 Edward III [14 June 1334 (which would indicate that even if the deed was false, the parson might have then been alive, according to personal knowledge of Kirketon)], by which, by the name of John de Driby, lord of Tateshale, granted it with warranty to Kyrketon. [This wording would seem odd, as by that time John styled himself parson of Hetherset.]
THEN Sir John de Kyrketon claims he appeared before the king's justices at Westminster the quinzaine of Michaelmas 26 Edward III [about 23 Oct. 1353] and levied a fine to three men. They, in return, granted the castle and lands back to the said John de Kirketon and the heirs of his body, WITH REMAINDER TO John de Loudham, then to Alice his daughter, then to Isabel her sister [and the heirs of their bodies], with remainder to John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife and the heirs of their bodies, with ultimate remainder to the right heirs of the said John de Kirketon.
John pleaded that BY VIRTUE OF THIS FINE he held the castle, and he put himself on the grand assize.
Curiously, they had difficulty finding enough knights to make up the jury, all the knights in the county being associated or related to one or other of the parties. BUT eventually a grand assize was made, and THE JURORS SWORE upon their oath that regarding the castle of Tateshale "Ralph and Maud have the better right, as in her descent, than the said John de Kirketon...by reason of the deed and fine as he seeks.... So as regards the castle, it is adjudged that Ralph and Maud are to hold it as in her right ... quit of the said John de Kirketon and his heirs for ever." John de Kirketon was to be in mercy for his false claim. And note that if there had ever been a fine, it was not upheld,as the Loudham family did not receive the reversion of lands after Sir John's death.
Notes for Alice Fitzhugh, wife of Simon de Driby:
Alice is the daughter of Hugh FitzRalph (apparently by Agnes de Greasley). She married Sir Simon de Driby. She is specifically called his daughter in an assize record abstracted in _Linconshire Notes & Queries_ 3:239-40. Alice's brother, Ralph FitzHugh, son and heir apparent of Hugh FitzRalph by Agnes, daughter and heir of Ralph de Greasley (of Greasley, Nottinghamshire), left one daughter and heir Eustache, her grandfather's heir, who married (1) Sir Nicholas de Cauntelo and (2) Sir William de Ros, of Ingmanthorpe (CP 11: 117-118). This William de Ros also had interests in the manor of Lavynton, which was held of him by Simon de Driby in 1286.
Notes for Joan Tatteshall:
George F. Farnham, Leicestershire Medieval Village Notes, Vol. V, W. Thornley & Son, 1931, Leicester, sub Breedon, Tonge and Wilson, pages 70-73:
Cal. Inq. p.m. Joan de Driby, 16-22, vol. vii, p. 172. Taken on Tuesday before St. Martin, 3 Edward III. 1329. The jury say that Joan held no lands or tenements on the day she died in co. Leicester, for, eleven days before her death, she granted her manors of Bredon and Somerby, which are held of Henry, earl of Lancaster, by knight service, and her manors of Holewell and Ketelby, which are held of Ralph Basset of Weldon by knight service, to John de Drybi, her son, and his heirs for ever. She died on 8 October 1329. John de Drybi, her son, aged 40 years and more, is her next heir. In the Lincoln inquisition he is called John, son of Robert de Dryby.
De Banco roll 207. Michaelmas, 8 Edward II, 1314, membrane 403, Leycester. Joan de Dryby, lady of Tateshale, acknowledges that she owes Ralph Basset of Drayton 1600 marks, to be repaid at certain dates; Simon de Driby acknowledges that he owes Ralph Basset 600 marks; Thomas de Cayly acknowledges that he owes Ralph Basset 600 marks.
Cal. Inq. p.m. John de Dryby. File 38-28. Vol. iii, p. 404. There is no extant inquisition for the county of Leicester. In co. Lincoln the jury say that John de Dryby held in Baston two parts of a messuage, lands and rents, which were sometime of Simon de Driby, and which Margery, late the wife of the said
Simon, holds as dower.
Alice, the daughter of Robert de Dryby, whom William de Bernak, knight, married, aged 50 years and more, is the next heir of John.
This with Rosie's original post:
"C 143/260/4
John de Kirketon to settle the castle of Tattershall and the manors of Tattershall and Tumby, with the knights' fees and advowsons thereto pertaining, on himself and Isabel his wife and the heirs of his body, with remainder to Robert de Litlebury and Florence his wife and the heirs male of the body of the said Robert, remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of John le Bret and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of Nicholas le Grey and the heirs male of his body, remainder to the grantor's right heirs. 16 EDWARD III. "
C 143/307/2
John de Kyrketon to settle the castle and manor of Tattershall, with the advowsons of Kirkstead abbey, Markby priory, Tattershall church, and the chapel of the said castle, on himself and the heirs of his body, with remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to Alice daughter of John de Loudham and the heirs male of her body, remainder to Isabel her sister and the heirs male of her body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife, and the heirs of his
body, remainder to the right heirs of the grantor, who retains the manors of Tumby and Kirton in Holland. 26 EDWARD III. "
MichaelAnne
__________________________________________________________
Sep and Oct 2005: mj...@btinternet.com added various researches:
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: le Breton of Walton, Derbyshire
Date: 20 Sep 2005 02:48:01 -0700
Rosie Bevan has very kindly drawn my attention to a series of posts to which she contributed in May 2004 dealing with various aspects of the Breton/Loudham family.
This allows me to put together a more detailed stemma, but also calls into question (by reference to primary sources) one or two of the details previously listed in relation to the Loudhams.
1. John Deincourt (d 1257) married Agnes Percy nee Neville [Cal. IPMs Henry VII V3 #370; also the source of the following, unless stated otherwise]. Issue:
2a. Edmund Deincourt (CP)
2b. Roberta Deincourt married Roger le Breton of Walton [see Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/107/7: 'Roger le Breton, Lord of Walton, 13 July 1305]. Issue:
3a. Robert le Breton, son and heir of Roger le Breton [Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/59/1 dated 14 August 1323; Cal. IPMs Vol 6 #408]; IPM 24 Edward III [Cal IPM Vol 9 #392-3]; married Margaret [c 143/162/16] dead by 17 Edward II. Issue:
4a. Isabel le Breton, daughter and heiress, aged 26 in 1350 and married to Sir John Loudham [Cal IPMs Vol 9 #392-3]
3b. John le Breton, remainderman to the manor of Timberland, Lincs; married Alice Kirketon, widow of Sir John Loudham [parents of the foregoing Sir J L]. Issue:
4a. John le Breton
4b. Catherine le Breton, married John Caltofte. Issue:
5a. Alice Caltofte married [Sir William] Chaworth, leaving issue.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
I am not presently sure where Roger Deincourt fits in. I note he was knighted by 6 November 1337 [Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/104/4] when he witnessed a Derbyshire deed. He also appears as a witness together with Roger le Breton in an undated Derbyshire deed regarding land at Haseland [DD/P/CD/118].
There is also an earlier Roger Deincourt, who is named along with Walter Deincourt and John Deincourt in a Derbyshire Quitclaim said to date from the reign of Henry III - ie not later than 1272.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Two documents which relate to the settlements of Kirketon family properties makes me question the previously established Loudham stemma, viz:
1. Sir John Loudham d c1318, married Alice de Kirketon (married 2. John le Breton). Issue:
2. Sir John de Loudham c1314-1387, marred Isabel le Breton, born c1324. Issue:
3a. Sir John de Loudham c1357-1390
3b. Isabel de Loudham, born c1360; coheiress, 1390, married Thomas Bekering, c1361-1425. Issue:
4a. Thomas Bekering, born c1383; died young
4b. Alice Bekering, born c1395; heiress 1425; married Sir Thomas Rempston
3c. Margaret de Loudham, born c1362; married Thomas Foljambe
------------
Firstly, we see from C 143/307/2, dated 26 Edward III (1352/3) that John de Kirketon settled the castle of Tattershall with various family remainders, including:
(i) 'John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body' [JK's nephew, 2 above];
(ii) 'Alice daughter of John de Loudham' [identified in May 2004 as sister of the foregoing, whose father was also named JL; I read it as referring to his daughter rather than his sister, elsewise the
remainder would appear to repeat itself by referring twice to the 'right heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body']
(iii) 'Isabel her sister' [I read this to be Isabel, daughter of John de Loudham (1314-1387); if so then either she must have died young, and another daughter, who subsequently married Thomas Bekering, have been given the same name, or Thomas Bekering's wife Isabel was born before January 1353 at the latest - this would make her at least 41/2 when her eventual heiress Alice was born, which I find questionable.]
(iv) 'the right heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife and the heirs of his body' [Sir John Loudham d c1318].
----------------------
The second document is C143/342/16 dated 36 Edward III (circa 1362) whereby John de Kirketon settles the manor of Tumby, with remainder to John de Loudham, knight, for life, remainder to John son of the said John de Loudham, Katherine his wife and the heirs of their bodies.
John de Loudham I identify as Sir John (c1314-1387), but it is highly unlikely that John his son (born c1357) should have married a wife Katherine by 1362.
Perhaps a radical possibility is that there should be an additional generation here, viz:
1. John de Loudham, died c1318; married Alice de Kirketon. Issue:
2. John de Loudham, born c1314, living 1362, married Isabel le Breton, born c1324. Issue:
3a. Alice de Loudham, living 1352
3b. Isabel de Loudham, living 1352
3b. John de Loudham, living 1352, died 1387; married Katherine. Issue:
4a. John de Loudham c1357-1390, married Margaret de Burgh d 1451
4b. Isabel de Loudham born c1360, married Thomas Bekering c1361-1425
(son Thomas born c1383, daughter Alice born c1395)
4c. Margaret de Loudham, born c1362, married Thomas Foljambe
MAR
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
and:
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: le Breton of Walton, Derbyshire
Date: 20 Sep 2005 15:07:16 -0700
Some elucidation.
Douglas Richardson posted the following on 13 May 2004:
"I find that Trevor Foulds in his book, Thurgaton Cartulary, pg. clvi, states that Roger le Bret above married Sarah of Coston (Leics.), granddaughter of Alice, sister of Richard III of Wiverton. I suspect,
however, there were two separate and distinct Roger le Bret's, one who married Roberta Deincourt and one who married Sarah of Coston. I believe Roger le Bret (husband of Roberta Deincourt) had his chief seat at Wiverton, Nottinghamshire and Williamsthorpe, Derbyshire. He was presumably living in 1319, as indicated by a record provided below from the A2A Catalogue. His son and heir was named John le Bret. The other Roger le Bret resided at Coston, Leicestershire. He was living in 1302/3, and died before 1313/4, being survived by his wife, Sarah. His son and heir was named Roger le Bret."
This has some significance, because the Bretons of Wiverton are ancestral to the Chaworths of the same place, and are supposed to be descended from the Bassets.
Douglas is quite right when he says that it is important to distinguish between two different men named Roger le Breton. However, it appears some confusion has crept into his account above, because the Coston and Wiverton le Bretons are one and the same, and the Williamsthorpes may
be as well. They are in any case quite separate to the Bretons of Walton, as will be seen below.
++++++++++
1. Roger le Breton of Walton, died 1250 IPM: writ to Sheriff of Nottingham 16 October 34 Henry III: Robert aged 24 is son and heir; Derby: Waleton town or manor with 120 acres of land in Calehale held of the King in chief of Peverel fee by service of one knight's fee; Rudich: two carucates of land held of the heirs of Robert Duyn [Cal IPMs Vol 1 #192 p 48]
Issue:
2. Sir Robert le Breton of Walton, c1226-c1279; heir to his father, 1250, then aged 24; IPM: Robert le Bretun alias le Breton alias de Breton: writ 24 May 7 Edward I [1279], Inquisition Thursday before St John Baptist, 7 Edward I: Derby: Rudiche manor; Roger his heir is aged 19 1/2; Walton manor with the hamlet of Calale held of the King by service of one knight's fee; Roger his son aged 19 at the Feast of St Michael last is his heir [Cal. IPMs Vol 2 #317 p 185] Bore: per pale gules and azure, a fesse between two chevrons argent. [Knights of Edward I, Vol A-D, p 141] married Mary [op.cit. "dower to widow Mary 17 Jy 1279 (CR)"]; issue:
3. Roger le Breton of Walton, cSeptember 1259-1322; heir to his father, 1279, then aged 19 1/2;
named in deeds relating to Walton dated 18 August 1290 and 13 July 1305 (in latter referred to as "Roger le Breton, Lord of Walton") [Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/107/6-7]; and in Acquittance dated 13 June 1319 [DD/FJ/5/1]: (1) Henry de Faucomberg, (2) Roger son of Rob. Bretoun of Waleton: (1) to (2) for 8 marks in part of £22 which (2) adjudged, in assize of novel disseisin, to pay Roger le Bret of Williamesthorp" - [so we see that Roger of Walton and Roger of Williamsthorp in 1319 were
two distinct men - MAR] IPM: writ 6 November 16 Edward II [1322]; inquisition at Derby, Sunday
after St Marin, 16 Edward II: Walton: the manor held of the King in chief; Whytyngton and Brymyngton: manor held of Sir Thomas Wack'; Roudich: messuage and land held of Sir Robert Tochet. Robert his son aged 32 and more is his next heir [Cal. IPMs Vol 6 #408 pp 239-240] Issue:
4. Robert le Breton of Walton c1290-1350 heir to his father, 1322, then aged 32 and more;
C143/162/16: "Robert le Breton of Walton to retain the manor of Walton acquired from Roger de Eynecourt [presumably as a feoffee to uses: MAR] to himself and Margaret his wife, now deceased, and the heirs of their bodies: 17 Edward II"
IPM: writ 14 May 24 Edward III [1350]: inquisition at Chesterfield, Saturday before St Barnabas 24 Edward III: Derby: Walton and Calal manor; Brymyngton and Wyttyton manor; Roudiches by Derby: 100 acres of arable, 4 acres of meadow; two watermills and a windmill at Walton; he died Saturday after St John before the Latin Gate 24 Edward III; Isabel his daughter, wife of Sir John de Lowdham, knight, aged 26 years, is his heir [Cal. IPMs Vol 9 #567 pp 392-393] married Margaret, dead by 1324; issue:
5. Isabel de Breton, born circa 1324; heiress to her father, 1350; married Sir John Lowdham; issue, inherited Walton, Brimington and Rowditch.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is to be contrasted with the Wiverton de Bretons:
1. Roger le Breton of Coston and Wiverton (said to have borne: gules, bezante or, "une daunce de or"; "his wife Sarah inherits land at Wyverton, Notts, 1279-80"; overlord at Burton Noverary, Leics, 1307" [Knights of Edward I, Vol A-D, pp 139-140] - NB the accuracy of these three statements is not unimpeachable; I have not yet seen evidence that they each relate to the same man) dead by 1314 - see below married Sarah, daughter of Alice Bottlesford: "IPM Nottingham, Monday before St Peter in Cathedra, 8 Edward I: Alice late the wife of Walter de Bottlesford: Wyverton and Berneston, including land at former held of the priory of Thurgarton; Coleston Bassett. Sarah her daughter aged 28, wife of Roger le Breth, and Alice, daughter of Beatrice another daughter who is dead, aged 15 and unmarried, are her next heir(s)"
[Cal. IPMs Vol II # 372 p 370]
cf "Order to the King's steward, 8 March 1280, to deliver to Roger le Breth and Sarah his wife, first born daughter and one of the heirs of Alice late the wife of Walter de Botlisford, tenant in chief, a moiety of the lands of her said mother, he having done homage and she having done fealty, retaining in the King's hands the other moiety falling to Alice, daughter (sic) and other heir of the said Alice, and answering therefor and for the marriage of Alice" [Cal. Fine Rolls Vol 1 p 124]
PROCAT C143/98/2: "Sarah late the wife of Roger le Bret of Coston, and John de Mendham to grant messuages, land and rent in Wiverton and Barnston to High le Vaus of Garthorpe, Maud his wife and his heirs: Notts: 7 Edward II"
Issue:
2a. Roger le Breton, son and heir; living 1313
PROCAT C143/44/7: Roger le Bret the elder to grant a messuage and land at Coston to Roger his son and heir, retaining a messuage and land in Coston, Leics: 31 Edward I"
PROCAT C143/95/11: "Roger, son of Roger le Bret, and Thomas his brother, to retain land in Wiverton and Tithby acquired to them and the heirs of Roger from John son of John de Mendham: Notts: 7 Edward II" (NB I am indebted to Douglas Richardson for these and several of the foregoing references, from his posts of May 2004)
2b. Thomas le Breton, living 1313
+++++++++++++++
Presumably therefore the Chaworths of Wiverton descend from the Bretons of Wiverton. Apparent confirmation of this comes from Chris Phillips' post of 20 May 2004 detaling the Chaworth brass formerly in the Savoy Chapel, which included quarterings thus:
1. Chaworth
2. Alfreton
3. Caltofte
4. Brett: gules a fess dancetty between ten billets or - i.e. those arms attributed above to Roger le Breton of Wiverton, ff 1280-1302.
++++++++++++++
The Chaworths claimed descent from the Bretons is detailed in Rosie Bevan's post in which she notes the IPM of Joan Ormond nee Chaworth from 1508 [Cal. IPMs Henry VII Vol 3 #370]; this states that the line was as follows:
1. Agnes de Percy, widow of John Deincourt
2. Roberta, married Roger le Bretton
3. John le Breton
4a. John le Breton
4b. Catherine le Breton, married John Caltofte
5. Alice Caltofte, married Chaworth etc
++++++++++++++++
It is tempting - if not irresistible - to tie in here Alice de Kirketon, widow of Sir John Loudham (d 1318). As stated above, she had a son, John de Loudham born c1314, by her first husband, and very
shortly after being widowed remarried to John le Breton, and had a second son, John le Breton the younger. These relationships are evidenced by contemporary records, includes the Kirketon family
settlements. We know that the younger Sir John de Loudham was feoffee for John Caltofte in 1351, so it makes sense to equate John Caltofte's brother- and father-in-law, John le Breton the younger and elder, with the second son and second husband of Alice de Kirketon.
Having said this, because the le Breton ancestors of the Caltofte appear to be from the Wiverton line, I withdraw my earlier conjecture that the elder John le Breton and Robert le Breton of Walton were
brothers. Both seem to have been heirs of fathers called Roger le Breton: the former of Wiverton/Coston, and the latter of Walton. It appears that the fact that the former were descended from the
Deincourts, and the latter were connected with the Deincourts through relationships such as feoffees is not enough to entitle us to fuse the two le Breton lines.
+++++++++++++++
Alice Chaworth nee Caltofte claimed in 1391 to be an heir to the Bassets through the Heriz family. Douglas quoted a secondary source in May 2004 which claimed that Roger le Breton of Williamsthorpe (sic) was grandson of William de Heriz (husband of Maud Basset), and that William Heriz's daughter Joan married 'Sir Jordan le Bret', presumably posited as Roger's parents. Clearly these are not the ancestors of the Walton family; whether they are ancestors of the Wiverton family remains to be
tested.
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
and:
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: le Breton of Walton, Derbyshire
Date: 20 Sep 2005 23:03:45 -0700
One further anomaly has occurred to me, based on a chronology of the Wiverton line.
1. Agnes Neville ff 1291 married John Deincourt died 1257
2. Roberta Deincourt, born no later than 1258, marr. Roger le Breton
3. John le Breton married 1318 Alice Loudham nee de Kirketon
4. Catherine le Breton married John Caltofte
5. Alice Caltofte born circa 1343
cf
1. Roger le Breton, dead by 1314; married by 1280 Sarah [?Bottlisford] born circa 1252, survived her husband
2. Roger le Breton living 1313, his father's heir
How then could Roger le Breton, husband of Roberta Deincourt, and John their son fit into the Wiverton stemma? Chronology would suggest that he could not be the son of Roger and Sarah above, unless his wife were some years his senior?
________________________________________________________________
"Hi MichaelAnne and Kevan
"Our posts crossed - interesting to see you have John le Bret married to
Alice relict of John Loudham. I suspect she was a Kirketon, as the following
PRO records would suggest.
"C 143/260/4
John de Kirketon to settle the castle of Tattershall and the manors of Tattershall and Tumby, with the knights' fees and advowsons thereto pertaining, on himself and Isabel his wife and the heirs of his body, with remainder to Robert de Litlebury and Florence his wife and the heirs male of the body of the said Robert, remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of John le Bret and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of Nicholas le Grey and the heirs male of his body, remainder to the grantor's right heirs. 16 EDWARD III. "
C 143/307/2
John de Kyrketon to settle the castle and manor of Tattershall, with the advowsons of Kirkstead abbey, Markby priory, Tattershall church, and the chapel of the said castle, on himself and the heirs of his body, with remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to Alice daughter of John de Loudham and the heirs male of her body, remainder to Isabel her sister and the heirs male of her body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife, and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right heirs of the grantor, who retains the manors of Tumby and Kirton in Holland. 26 EDWARD III. "
_______________________________________________________
Subseqently MichaelAnne <ClaudiusI0@aol.com> came up with:
From: ClaudiusI0@aol.com
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: Another CP Correction: Chaworth-Basset Connection
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 15:38:12 +0000 (UTC)
Dear Rosie, Kevan and Doug,
Rosie Bevan has uncovered the answer to this line as to the identity of
Alice, wife of John le Brette and mother of Catherine le Brette.
The line appears to be:
1. Sir Simon de Driby (- aft. 1286) married Alice Fitzhugh, daughter of Hugh
FitzRalph by Agnes de Greasley.
2. Robert de Driby married Joan de Tatteshall (-Oct. 8, 1329)
3. Simon de Driby married Margery NN (died bef. Aug. 8, 1322 sp)
3. Robert de Driby, aged 40 in 1332 died bef. 1334, heir to his
brother Simon.
3. John de Driby, aged 40 in 1329 heir to his mother, married
Huegilina and died sp leaving as his heir his sister Alice, wife of
William Bernake aged 50 or more in 1334.
3. Alice de Driby (-April 12, 1341) married (1)William Bernake
(1284-March 20, 1344/5)
married (2) Sir John Folville (-1363).
4. John Bernake (1309-1349) married Joan Mamion(1313-1362)
5. Maud Bernake (1327-April 10, 1419) married Ralph de
Cromwell (1346-Aug. 27, 1398)
5. William Bernake (1321-1360)
5. John Bernake
4. Hugh Bernake, Parson of Hethersett
4. Elizabeth Bernake married Sir James Byron
2. Beatrix de Driby married Robert de Kyrketon
3. Florence de Kyrketon married Robert de Littlebury
3. Isabel de Kyrketon married Nicholas de Grey
3. John de Kyrketon (CIPM #150, 41 Edward III) married Isabel, widow
of George Meriot. He was Lord Kirketon and involved in
numerous lawsuits with Alice and William Bernake. He died sp.
3. Alice de Kyrketon married (1) Sir John de Loudham (2) John le
Brette
4. Catherine le Brette married Sir John Caltoft (- ca. June 24,
1353)
5. Alice Caltoft married William Chaworth (1352-December 1398)
The IPM of John de Kyrketon states he died Feb. 20, 41 Edward III [1367] and
his heirs were John de Ludeham, knight, John de Lyttelbyrs, John de Tylnaye
and William de Sutton, parson of the church of Whitewell.
Fine, Trinity, 8 Edward III, 1334. Between John de Driby of Tatershale, parson
of a mediety of the church of Hedersete, plaintiff, and Roger de
Estbriggeforde, chaplain, and John Cleymond, of Kirketon, defendants, of the
manors of Breedon and Holewell and 14 marks, 12 1/4 d of rent, the rents of 3
lbs. of pepper, 1/2 lb. of cummin, and amoiety of 4 capons and 2 hens, two
parts of a messuage and one virgate of land in Ketilby and Holewell, also a
third part of the manor of Somerdeby and the advowson of the priory of
Langleye by Diseworth. The above manors and lands are declared to be the right of
Roger, which Roger granted them to John de Dryby [for life], the reversion of
them to John son of Thomas de Dryby, and Amie the daughter of Piers de
Gaveston, and theor issue, and in default to John de Kirketon, chivaler, and
his issue, in default to Robert de Ltlebury, chivaler, and his issue, in
default to the right heirs of John de Driby forever."
There is also a long discussion of Tatteshall that was posted by Paul Reed in
2001. The thread is:
From: Reedpcgen (reedpcgen@aol.com)
Subject: Re: Amy de Gaveston - the 1334 fine
View: Complete Thread (39 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 2001-02-28 16:42:42 PST
Snipet as Follows:
On 20 March 1431, Ralph, 3rd Lord Cromwell, brought into Chancery record of
several suits between Maud de Bernake and her husband, Sir Ralph de
Cromwell, and Sir John de Kirketon [CPR 1429-36, 147-52].
Sir Ralph de Cromwell and Maud [de Bernake] his wife, brought suit against Sir John de Kirketon concerning the castle of Tateshale and manor of Scremeby-halle as her inheritance. The pleas were presented at Westminster before the justices of the Bench Trinity Term 33 Edward III [10 June-1 July 1360].
They claimed that Maud de Bernake's "ancestor," John de Driby, was seised of the holdings during Edward III's reign, that he died without issue, and that the plaintiff Maud is the next heir of John de Driby's sister Alice [m. Sir William de Bernake]. In John de Kirketon's reply, it states "that the
plaintiffs [Maud and Ralph Cromwell] recovered it [Tateshale Castle] that very day from him, the present defendant, as being her right by a writ _de consanguinitate_." So they got possession. Kirketon "craves leave to imparl"but defaulted later, though the plaintiffs showed up, so judgment was
granted Maud and Ralph.
Ralph and Maud (de Bernake) de Cromwell brought another suit forward to recover the manor of Kirkeby upon Bayne [and other lands] from Sir John de Kirketon. The result was the same. Kirketon craved leave to imparl, but defaulted, and judgment was again granted Maud and Ralph.
THEN, in Michaelmas Term of that same year [9 Oct.-28 Nov. 1360], Sir John
de Kyrketon brought suit against Ralph de Cromwell, knight, and Maud his wife,
concerning the castle of Tateshale and manor of Kirkeby upon Bayne.
Sir John de Kyrketon claimed that he had been seised of the castle and manor during his own lifetime during the reign of the present king. Kyrketon acknowledged that John de Driby had seisin during his lifetime, BUT he produced a deed in court [!], dated at Tateshale Tuesday after St. Barnabas, 8 Edward III [14 June 1334 (which would indicate that even if the deed was false, the parson might have then been alive, according to personal knowledge of Kirketon)], by which, by the name of John de Driby, lord of Tateshale, granted it with warranty to Kyrketon. [This wording would seem odd, as by that time John styled himself parson of Hetherset.]
THEN Sir John de Kyrketon claims he appeared before the king's justices at Westminster the quinzaine of Michaelmas 26 Edward III [about 23 Oct. 1353] and levied a fine to three men. They, in return, granted the castle and lands back to the said John de Kirketon and the heirs of his body, WITH REMAINDER TO John de Loudham, then to Alice his daughter, then to Isabel her sister [and the heirs of their bodies], with remainder to John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife and the heirs of their bodies, with ultimate remainder to the right heirs of the said John de Kirketon.
John pleaded that BY VIRTUE OF THIS FINE he held the castle, and he put himself on the grand assize.
Curiously, they had difficulty finding enough knights to make up the jury, all the knights in the county being associated or related to one or other of the parties. BUT eventually a grand assize was made, and THE JURORS SWORE upon their oath that regarding the castle of Tateshale "Ralph and Maud have the better right, as in her descent, than the said John de Kirketon...by reason of the deed and fine as he seeks.... So as regards the castle, it is adjudged that Ralph and Maud are to hold it as in her right ... quit of the said John de Kirketon and his heirs for ever." John de Kirketon was to be in mercy for his false claim. And note that if there had ever been a fine, it was not upheld,as the Loudham family did not receive the reversion of lands after Sir John's death.
Notes for Alice Fitzhugh, wife of Simon de Driby:
Alice is the daughter of Hugh FitzRalph (apparently by Agnes de Greasley). She married Sir Simon de Driby. She is specifically called his daughter in an assize record abstracted in _Linconshire Notes & Queries_ 3:239-40. Alice's brother, Ralph FitzHugh, son and heir apparent of Hugh FitzRalph by Agnes, daughter and heir of Ralph de Greasley (of Greasley, Nottinghamshire), left one daughter and heir Eustache, her grandfather's heir, who married (1) Sir Nicholas de Cauntelo and (2) Sir William de Ros, of Ingmanthorpe (CP 11: 117-118). This William de Ros also had interests in the manor of Lavynton, which was held of him by Simon de Driby in 1286.
Notes for Joan Tatteshall:
George F. Farnham, Leicestershire Medieval Village Notes, Vol. V, W. Thornley & Son, 1931, Leicester, sub Breedon, Tonge and Wilson, pages 70-73:
Cal. Inq. p.m. Joan de Driby, 16-22, vol. vii, p. 172. Taken on Tuesday before St. Martin, 3 Edward III. 1329. The jury say that Joan held no lands or tenements on the day she died in co. Leicester, for, eleven days before her death, she granted her manors of Bredon and Somerby, which are held of Henry, earl of Lancaster, by knight service, and her manors of Holewell and Ketelby, which are held of Ralph Basset of Weldon by knight service, to John de Drybi, her son, and his heirs for ever. She died on 8 October 1329. John de Drybi, her son, aged 40 years and more, is her next heir. In the Lincoln inquisition he is called John, son of Robert de Dryby.
De Banco roll 207. Michaelmas, 8 Edward II, 1314, membrane 403, Leycester. Joan de Dryby, lady of Tateshale, acknowledges that she owes Ralph Basset of Drayton 1600 marks, to be repaid at certain dates; Simon de Driby acknowledges that he owes Ralph Basset 600 marks; Thomas de Cayly acknowledges that he owes Ralph Basset 600 marks.
Cal. Inq. p.m. John de Dryby. File 38-28. Vol. iii, p. 404. There is no extant inquisition for the county of Leicester. In co. Lincoln the jury say that John de Dryby held in Baston two parts of a messuage, lands and rents, which were sometime of Simon de Driby, and which Margery, late the wife of the said
Simon, holds as dower.
Alice, the daughter of Robert de Dryby, whom William de Bernak, knight, married, aged 50 years and more, is the next heir of John.
This with Rosie's original post:
"C 143/260/4
John de Kirketon to settle the castle of Tattershall and the manors of Tattershall and Tumby, with the knights' fees and advowsons thereto pertaining, on himself and Isabel his wife and the heirs of his body, with remainder to Robert de Litlebury and Florence his wife and the heirs male of the body of the said Robert, remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of John le Bret and the heirs male of his body, remainder to John son of Nicholas le Grey and the heirs male of his body, remainder to the grantor's right heirs. 16 EDWARD III. "
C 143/307/2
John de Kyrketon to settle the castle and manor of Tattershall, with the advowsons of Kirkstead abbey, Markby priory, Tattershall church, and the chapel of the said castle, on himself and the heirs of his body, with remainder to John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body, remainder to Alice daughter of John de Loudham and the heirs male of her body, remainder to Isabel her sister and the heirs male of her body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body, remainder to the right heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife, and the heirs of his
body, remainder to the right heirs of the grantor, who retains the manors of Tumby and Kirton in Holland. 26 EDWARD III. "
MichaelAnne
__________________________________________________________
Sep and Oct 2005: mj...@btinternet.com added various researches:
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: le Breton of Walton, Derbyshire
Date: 20 Sep 2005 02:48:01 -0700
Rosie Bevan has very kindly drawn my attention to a series of posts to which she contributed in May 2004 dealing with various aspects of the Breton/Loudham family.
This allows me to put together a more detailed stemma, but also calls into question (by reference to primary sources) one or two of the details previously listed in relation to the Loudhams.
1. John Deincourt (d 1257) married Agnes Percy nee Neville [Cal. IPMs Henry VII V3 #370; also the source of the following, unless stated otherwise]. Issue:
2a. Edmund Deincourt (CP)
2b. Roberta Deincourt married Roger le Breton of Walton [see Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/107/7: 'Roger le Breton, Lord of Walton, 13 July 1305]. Issue:
3a. Robert le Breton, son and heir of Roger le Breton [Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/59/1 dated 14 August 1323; Cal. IPMs Vol 6 #408]; IPM 24 Edward III [Cal IPM Vol 9 #392-3]; married Margaret [c 143/162/16] dead by 17 Edward II. Issue:
4a. Isabel le Breton, daughter and heiress, aged 26 in 1350 and married to Sir John Loudham [Cal IPMs Vol 9 #392-3]
3b. John le Breton, remainderman to the manor of Timberland, Lincs; married Alice Kirketon, widow of Sir John Loudham [parents of the foregoing Sir J L]. Issue:
4a. John le Breton
4b. Catherine le Breton, married John Caltofte. Issue:
5a. Alice Caltofte married [Sir William] Chaworth, leaving issue.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
I am not presently sure where Roger Deincourt fits in. I note he was knighted by 6 November 1337 [Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/104/4] when he witnessed a Derbyshire deed. He also appears as a witness together with Roger le Breton in an undated Derbyshire deed regarding land at Haseland [DD/P/CD/118].
There is also an earlier Roger Deincourt, who is named along with Walter Deincourt and John Deincourt in a Derbyshire Quitclaim said to date from the reign of Henry III - ie not later than 1272.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Two documents which relate to the settlements of Kirketon family properties makes me question the previously established Loudham stemma, viz:
1. Sir John Loudham d c1318, married Alice de Kirketon (married 2. John le Breton). Issue:
2. Sir John de Loudham c1314-1387, marred Isabel le Breton, born c1324. Issue:
3a. Sir John de Loudham c1357-1390
3b. Isabel de Loudham, born c1360; coheiress, 1390, married Thomas Bekering, c1361-1425. Issue:
4a. Thomas Bekering, born c1383; died young
4b. Alice Bekering, born c1395; heiress 1425; married Sir Thomas Rempston
3c. Margaret de Loudham, born c1362; married Thomas Foljambe
------------
Firstly, we see from C 143/307/2, dated 26 Edward III (1352/3) that John de Kirketon settled the castle of Tattershall with various family remainders, including:
(i) 'John de Loudham and the heirs male of his body' [JK's nephew, 2 above];
(ii) 'Alice daughter of John de Loudham' [identified in May 2004 as sister of the foregoing, whose father was also named JL; I read it as referring to his daughter rather than his sister, elsewise the
remainder would appear to repeat itself by referring twice to the 'right heir of John de Loudham and the heirs of his body']
(iii) 'Isabel her sister' [I read this to be Isabel, daughter of John de Loudham (1314-1387); if so then either she must have died young, and another daughter, who subsequently married Thomas Bekering, have been given the same name, or Thomas Bekering's wife Isabel was born before January 1353 at the latest - this would make her at least 41/2 when her eventual heiress Alice was born, which I find questionable.]
(iv) 'the right heir of John de Loudham the father and Alice his wife and the heirs of his body' [Sir John Loudham d c1318].
----------------------
The second document is C143/342/16 dated 36 Edward III (circa 1362) whereby John de Kirketon settles the manor of Tumby, with remainder to John de Loudham, knight, for life, remainder to John son of the said John de Loudham, Katherine his wife and the heirs of their bodies.
John de Loudham I identify as Sir John (c1314-1387), but it is highly unlikely that John his son (born c1357) should have married a wife Katherine by 1362.
Perhaps a radical possibility is that there should be an additional generation here, viz:
1. John de Loudham, died c1318; married Alice de Kirketon. Issue:
2. John de Loudham, born c1314, living 1362, married Isabel le Breton, born c1324. Issue:
3a. Alice de Loudham, living 1352
3b. Isabel de Loudham, living 1352
3b. John de Loudham, living 1352, died 1387; married Katherine. Issue:
4a. John de Loudham c1357-1390, married Margaret de Burgh d 1451
4b. Isabel de Loudham born c1360, married Thomas Bekering c1361-1425
(son Thomas born c1383, daughter Alice born c1395)
4c. Margaret de Loudham, born c1362, married Thomas Foljambe
MAR
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
and:
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: le Breton of Walton, Derbyshire
Date: 20 Sep 2005 15:07:16 -0700
Some elucidation.
Douglas Richardson posted the following on 13 May 2004:
"I find that Trevor Foulds in his book, Thurgaton Cartulary, pg. clvi, states that Roger le Bret above married Sarah of Coston (Leics.), granddaughter of Alice, sister of Richard III of Wiverton. I suspect,
however, there were two separate and distinct Roger le Bret's, one who married Roberta Deincourt and one who married Sarah of Coston. I believe Roger le Bret (husband of Roberta Deincourt) had his chief seat at Wiverton, Nottinghamshire and Williamsthorpe, Derbyshire. He was presumably living in 1319, as indicated by a record provided below from the A2A Catalogue. His son and heir was named John le Bret. The other Roger le Bret resided at Coston, Leicestershire. He was living in 1302/3, and died before 1313/4, being survived by his wife, Sarah. His son and heir was named Roger le Bret."
This has some significance, because the Bretons of Wiverton are ancestral to the Chaworths of the same place, and are supposed to be descended from the Bassets.
Douglas is quite right when he says that it is important to distinguish between two different men named Roger le Breton. However, it appears some confusion has crept into his account above, because the Coston and Wiverton le Bretons are one and the same, and the Williamsthorpes may
be as well. They are in any case quite separate to the Bretons of Walton, as will be seen below.
++++++++++
1. Roger le Breton of Walton, died 1250 IPM: writ to Sheriff of Nottingham 16 October 34 Henry III: Robert aged 24 is son and heir; Derby: Waleton town or manor with 120 acres of land in Calehale held of the King in chief of Peverel fee by service of one knight's fee; Rudich: two carucates of land held of the heirs of Robert Duyn [Cal IPMs Vol 1 #192 p 48]
Issue:
2. Sir Robert le Breton of Walton, c1226-c1279; heir to his father, 1250, then aged 24; IPM: Robert le Bretun alias le Breton alias de Breton: writ 24 May 7 Edward I [1279], Inquisition Thursday before St John Baptist, 7 Edward I: Derby: Rudiche manor; Roger his heir is aged 19 1/2; Walton manor with the hamlet of Calale held of the King by service of one knight's fee; Roger his son aged 19 at the Feast of St Michael last is his heir [Cal. IPMs Vol 2 #317 p 185] Bore: per pale gules and azure, a fesse between two chevrons argent. [Knights of Edward I, Vol A-D, p 141] married Mary [op.cit. "dower to widow Mary 17 Jy 1279 (CR)"]; issue:
3. Roger le Breton of Walton, cSeptember 1259-1322; heir to his father, 1279, then aged 19 1/2;
named in deeds relating to Walton dated 18 August 1290 and 13 July 1305 (in latter referred to as "Roger le Breton, Lord of Walton") [Notts Archives DD/FJ/1/107/6-7]; and in Acquittance dated 13 June 1319 [DD/FJ/5/1]: (1) Henry de Faucomberg, (2) Roger son of Rob. Bretoun of Waleton: (1) to (2) for 8 marks in part of £22 which (2) adjudged, in assize of novel disseisin, to pay Roger le Bret of Williamesthorp" - [so we see that Roger of Walton and Roger of Williamsthorp in 1319 were
two distinct men - MAR] IPM: writ 6 November 16 Edward II [1322]; inquisition at Derby, Sunday
after St Marin, 16 Edward II: Walton: the manor held of the King in chief; Whytyngton and Brymyngton: manor held of Sir Thomas Wack'; Roudich: messuage and land held of Sir Robert Tochet. Robert his son aged 32 and more is his next heir [Cal. IPMs Vol 6 #408 pp 239-240] Issue:
4. Robert le Breton of Walton c1290-1350 heir to his father, 1322, then aged 32 and more;
C143/162/16: "Robert le Breton of Walton to retain the manor of Walton acquired from Roger de Eynecourt [presumably as a feoffee to uses: MAR] to himself and Margaret his wife, now deceased, and the heirs of their bodies: 17 Edward II"
IPM: writ 14 May 24 Edward III [1350]: inquisition at Chesterfield, Saturday before St Barnabas 24 Edward III: Derby: Walton and Calal manor; Brymyngton and Wyttyton manor; Roudiches by Derby: 100 acres of arable, 4 acres of meadow; two watermills and a windmill at Walton; he died Saturday after St John before the Latin Gate 24 Edward III; Isabel his daughter, wife of Sir John de Lowdham, knight, aged 26 years, is his heir [Cal. IPMs Vol 9 #567 pp 392-393] married Margaret, dead by 1324; issue:
5. Isabel de Breton, born circa 1324; heiress to her father, 1350; married Sir John Lowdham; issue, inherited Walton, Brimington and Rowditch.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is to be contrasted with the Wiverton de Bretons:
1. Roger le Breton of Coston and Wiverton (said to have borne: gules, bezante or, "une daunce de or"; "his wife Sarah inherits land at Wyverton, Notts, 1279-80"; overlord at Burton Noverary, Leics, 1307" [Knights of Edward I, Vol A-D, pp 139-140] - NB the accuracy of these three statements is not unimpeachable; I have not yet seen evidence that they each relate to the same man) dead by 1314 - see below married Sarah, daughter of Alice Bottlesford: "IPM Nottingham, Monday before St Peter in Cathedra, 8 Edward I: Alice late the wife of Walter de Bottlesford: Wyverton and Berneston, including land at former held of the priory of Thurgarton; Coleston Bassett. Sarah her daughter aged 28, wife of Roger le Breth, and Alice, daughter of Beatrice another daughter who is dead, aged 15 and unmarried, are her next heir(s)"
[Cal. IPMs Vol II # 372 p 370]
cf "Order to the King's steward, 8 March 1280, to deliver to Roger le Breth and Sarah his wife, first born daughter and one of the heirs of Alice late the wife of Walter de Botlisford, tenant in chief, a moiety of the lands of her said mother, he having done homage and she having done fealty, retaining in the King's hands the other moiety falling to Alice, daughter (sic) and other heir of the said Alice, and answering therefor and for the marriage of Alice" [Cal. Fine Rolls Vol 1 p 124]
PROCAT C143/98/2: "Sarah late the wife of Roger le Bret of Coston, and John de Mendham to grant messuages, land and rent in Wiverton and Barnston to High le Vaus of Garthorpe, Maud his wife and his heirs: Notts: 7 Edward II"
Issue:
2a. Roger le Breton, son and heir; living 1313
PROCAT C143/44/7: Roger le Bret the elder to grant a messuage and land at Coston to Roger his son and heir, retaining a messuage and land in Coston, Leics: 31 Edward I"
PROCAT C143/95/11: "Roger, son of Roger le Bret, and Thomas his brother, to retain land in Wiverton and Tithby acquired to them and the heirs of Roger from John son of John de Mendham: Notts: 7 Edward II" (NB I am indebted to Douglas Richardson for these and several of the foregoing references, from his posts of May 2004)
2b. Thomas le Breton, living 1313
+++++++++++++++
Presumably therefore the Chaworths of Wiverton descend from the Bretons of Wiverton. Apparent confirmation of this comes from Chris Phillips' post of 20 May 2004 detaling the Chaworth brass formerly in the Savoy Chapel, which included quarterings thus:
1. Chaworth
2. Alfreton
3. Caltofte
4. Brett: gules a fess dancetty between ten billets or - i.e. those arms attributed above to Roger le Breton of Wiverton, ff 1280-1302.
++++++++++++++
The Chaworths claimed descent from the Bretons is detailed in Rosie Bevan's post in which she notes the IPM of Joan Ormond nee Chaworth from 1508 [Cal. IPMs Henry VII Vol 3 #370]; this states that the line was as follows:
1. Agnes de Percy, widow of John Deincourt
2. Roberta, married Roger le Bretton
3. John le Breton
4a. John le Breton
4b. Catherine le Breton, married John Caltofte
5. Alice Caltofte, married Chaworth etc
++++++++++++++++
It is tempting - if not irresistible - to tie in here Alice de Kirketon, widow of Sir John Loudham (d 1318). As stated above, she had a son, John de Loudham born c1314, by her first husband, and very
shortly after being widowed remarried to John le Breton, and had a second son, John le Breton the younger. These relationships are evidenced by contemporary records, includes the Kirketon family
settlements. We know that the younger Sir John de Loudham was feoffee for John Caltofte in 1351, so it makes sense to equate John Caltofte's brother- and father-in-law, John le Breton the younger and elder, with the second son and second husband of Alice de Kirketon.
Having said this, because the le Breton ancestors of the Caltofte appear to be from the Wiverton line, I withdraw my earlier conjecture that the elder John le Breton and Robert le Breton of Walton were
brothers. Both seem to have been heirs of fathers called Roger le Breton: the former of Wiverton/Coston, and the latter of Walton. It appears that the fact that the former were descended from the
Deincourts, and the latter were connected with the Deincourts through relationships such as feoffees is not enough to entitle us to fuse the two le Breton lines.
+++++++++++++++
Alice Chaworth nee Caltofte claimed in 1391 to be an heir to the Bassets through the Heriz family. Douglas quoted a secondary source in May 2004 which claimed that Roger le Breton of Williamsthorpe (sic) was grandson of William de Heriz (husband of Maud Basset), and that William Heriz's daughter Joan married 'Sir Jordan le Bret', presumably posited as Roger's parents. Clearly these are not the ancestors of the Walton family; whether they are ancestors of the Wiverton family remains to be
tested.
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
and:
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: le Breton of Walton, Derbyshire
Date: 20 Sep 2005 23:03:45 -0700
One further anomaly has occurred to me, based on a chronology of the Wiverton line.
1. Agnes Neville ff 1291 married John Deincourt died 1257
2. Roberta Deincourt, born no later than 1258, marr. Roger le Breton
3. John le Breton married 1318 Alice Loudham nee de Kirketon
4. Catherine le Breton married John Caltofte
5. Alice Caltofte born circa 1343
cf
1. Roger le Breton, dead by 1314; married by 1280 Sarah [?Bottlisford] born circa 1252, survived her husband
2. Roger le Breton living 1313, his father's heir
How then could Roger le Breton, husband of Roberta Deincourt, and John their son fit into the Wiverton stemma? Chronology would suggest that he could not be the son of Roger and Sarah above, unless his wife were some years his senior?
________________________________________________________________