Thanks for your kind words. I don't know why, but there are some families in my ancestry that I have a greater affinity for than others. I must have inherited more than a normal share of Lanyon DNA. Over the years I have accumulated various pieces of Lanyon related material that has been filed away and forgotten. As there are several others in this group researching the Lanyons this would appear to be a good time to make what little I have available to others. Maybe in a few years time we will be in a position to draft an updated re-Visitation of the Lanyon pedigree.
Post by lipkatatar on Feb 29, 2020 10:04:25 GMT -5
Lanyon possessions in Cornwall at the beginning of the Sixteenth Century.
The dispute between Richard Lanyen and his step-mother Katryn (1502-1503) shows that, at his death, John Lanyen was in possession of 12 messuages, 300 acres of land, 40 acres of meadow, 200 acres of pasture, and 200 acres of furze and heath. (I assume the 300 acres refers to good quality land). This land was situated in Coswyn Wolward, Lanyen, Tregamenyan, Rysyk, Bossowolowe and elsewhere in Cornwall.
I have attempted a transcription of John Lanyen's bill of complaint. I had replaced the missing letters in words in italics, but all the formatting was lost when I pasted the text here. The word "ptestacon" possibly means that John Lanyen had declared these properties for tax purposes.
"Mekely besechyth your gode Lordshipp your oratour Richard Lanyen son and heir of John Lanyen of the Counte of Cornwall that where the seid John was seased of XII messuag CCC acre of londs XL acre of medowe CC acre of pasture CC acre of furze and heth with their appurtenances in Coswyn Wolward Lanyen Tregamenyan Rysyk Bossowolowe and elsewhere in the counte aforeseid in hys demesne as of fee tail and of such estate by ptestacon (protestation) died seased after whose deth the premisses descended unto your seid oratour as to son and heir of the seid John by reason whereof your seid oratour entred in to the premisses and their apputenances and thereof was seased in hys demesne as of fee tail and yet is and it is so gracious lord that all the evydens charters and munements concernyng the premisses that were the seid John fader to your seid oratour be come and in the possession and kepyng of one Katryn Lanyen Wedowe late wife to the fader of your seid oratour and steppe moder to the same and executryx of the testament of the seid John and howe be it your seid oratour hath oftentymes required the seid Katryn hys moder in lawe to delyver hym the evydens charters and munements concernyng the premisses and that to do has at all tymes refused and yet refuse contrarie to right lawe and gode constiens (conscience) as might thereof please your gode lordshipp the premiss tenderly considered to grant a derycte sub poena to be direct to the seid Katryn commandyng her by the same personaly to appear by fore the Kyng in hys chauncery at a certen day and under a certeyn payn by your lordshipp to be lymytted and this for the love of godde and in the way of charitie."
Post by lipkatatar on Feb 29, 2020 19:58:46 GMT -5
A 15th Century Lanyon Mystery.
The dispute discussed below, from the early 15th Century, involves the claimed abduction of the daughter and heiress of a John Lanyein. This is a bit of a puzzle as this would suggest a break in the Lanyon male line- but we know that the properties obtained by the Lanyons from Hugh Beauchamp in the 13th Century were handed down from generation to generation of Lanyons right up to the end of the 16th Century.
Plaintiff: John Fursdon. Defendants: Richard Trevaignon, of Carhayes, gent., John Trevaignon, of Trevaignon, gent., Thomas Trevaignon, of Tregony, bastard, and many others, nine of whom, mostly husbandmen, are named in the bill of complaint. Complaint: They smashed the doors and windows at Fursdon and, as well as taking money, property and documents and causing his wife Margaret to have a miscarriage, they abducted Johanna his step-daughter who was the daughter and heir of John Lanyein, Margaret's first husband. Date:1423
The bill of complaint is in French, but I have not attempted a full translation as the complaint is fully described both in the online History of Parliament and in the subsequent notice of oyer and terminer in the Close Rolls.
Extract from the Online History of Parliament.
John Fursdon of Fursdon in Liskeard. Son of James Fursdon of Fursdon by his wife Margaret. Married (1) Joan, before 1400; (2) before 1423, Margaret (? widow of John Lanyein).
In the course of his life, if he himself is to be believed, Fursdon suffered several assaults on his person and depredations of his property. On more than one occasion he brought suits in the King’s bench claiming that bands of armed men had forcibly evicted him from his land, and in the Parliament of 1423-4 he ‘suyst une bille’ against Richard Trevanion of Carhayes and his kinsmen who, he alleged, on 29 June 1423 had come to his house at Fursdon with 121 malefactors, broken down fences, gates, doors and windows, stolen goods worth £40, along with muniments and £9 in cash, assaulted him and his wife (nearly killing the latter and causing her to suffer a miscarriage), and abducted his stepdaughter, Joan (heiress, he claimed, to lands worth 100 marks a year). At other times, so Fursdon said, the Trevanions had lain in wait for him and had so threatened his life that he dared not go about his business except with a great ‘posse’, whereby he suffered much trouble and expense. This bill awaited the attention of the King’s Council with other ‘billes de Riottis’ for several months, and it was only after Fursdon appealed to the chancellor that in June 1424 a commission of oyer and terminer was set up to investigate the affair.
The notice of oyer and terminer appeared in the Patent Rolls on June 16 1424. This covered the complaint as above but failed to mention the claimed abduction of Johanna, daughter and heir of John Lanyein. (CPR H6 Vol I, p229)
The article in the History of Parliament casts serious doubts over the honesty of John Fursdon. It may be that the reference to losing a step-daughter worth 100 Marks a year (£67) and other money and valuables was the medieval equivalent of an insurance scam.
Could Johanna have been a daughter and heiress of John Lanyein? No-one at the time seems to have questioned John Fursdon's claim that his second wife, Margaret was the widow of John Lanyein or that Johanna was the daughter of John Lanyein and Margaret. Where would this John Lanyein fit in the Lanyein Pedigree? We have Raphe Lanyeyn involved in a dispute over Tregaminion in 1388. We have a John Lanyeyn receiving Lanyeyn deeds in October 1446, presumably soon after his father's death (CCR H6 V4 P450). This John could have been the one who died 1476 (Account Roll of Connerton) and would have been the father of the John Lanyeyn who married Isabel Ruthfrey/Ruthfos. There must have been a John Lanyeyn, son of Raphe, who died prior to 1423 and another Lanyeyn who died around 1446. Fursdon's complaint is helpful in filling in the generation gap between Raphe Lanyeyn and the John Lanyeyn of 1446. It may be that Johanna was the daughter but not the heiress of John Lanyein, or maybe John Fursdon was telling the truth and there is a break in the male Lanyon line. It is just possible that whoever married the heiress Johanna and received the Lanyon lands would have assumed the Lanyon name.
Hi Lipkatatar, thank you for posting such interesting finds. The more we share, the more chance we have of making connections based on evidence, or at least be able to make evidence based deductions.
It's also heartening to hear that there is the chance of making more discoveries amongst the Common Pleas at the National Archives. This would help, not just with the Lanyons, but another family I've been researching in Somerset.
I haven't found a great deal to do with the Treskillard/Trescullards.
I did find a redisseisin between John Penros v. Margery Trescullard and Ralph Trescullard but it's in a section dated 1407, and I've followed the links but can't read it!
It's located here and you'll need to scroll down for 1407.
But that's it. Very little on the family itself, but plenty of records about the Treskillard manor from the 17th century onwards.
Going back to the Lanyons, the pedigree could certainly do with more work.
This record on the Cornwall Records Office website (Kresen Kernow) and also the National Archives suggests that William Lanyon and Thomasin Tregian had another son called Edward Lanyon.
Reference number : AR/3/39 Date : 11 Feb 1586 Format : Manuscript Extent : 1 piece
Exemplification of record of lawsuit over Crugmorreck, St Merryn
Parties: 1) Edward Lanyen [Lanyon]
2-3) George Arundell and John Michall.
Letters patent of Queen Elizabeth, giving record of a lawsuit in court of the Queen's Bench, enrolled Easter term, 1570 (12 Elizabeth), in which (1) had brought a bill in Hilary term last past  against (2)-(3) 'in custod' marr' maresc' Domine Regine' in a plea of trespass and ejection of farm.
Recites that Richard Lanyen esquire, on 20 September 1569 (11 Elizabeth), had granted to party (1) 30 acres of land, being one close called Crukemorecke (parish of Seynt Meryn), for (1) to hold for term of 6 years from St Bartholomew last past [24 August 1569]; on the following 26 September , (2)-(3) forcibly entered the tenement and ejected him from it, to (1)'s damages of 20 marks.
Now on Wednesday 12th/19th April (Wednesday after 18 of Easter) 1570, (2)-(3) came to reply, pleading not guilty.
(1) said that Peter Edgecombe esquire was sheriff of Cornwall, and a kinsman of (1), being son of Elizabeth, daughter of Joan daughter of Thomas Tregian, who was also father of Thomasina, mother of (1); therefore an order was given to have come 12 men of the view of Seynt Meryn [St Merryn] before the Queen at Westminster on Friday 3 November (Friday after the morrow of All Souls).
Later it was respited until Saturday 9 October 1574 (Saturday after the octave of Michaelmas, 16 Elizabeth), unless previously [resolved?] on 16 August at Launceston Castle by form of statute. On which date [9 October] some of the jurors impanelled came (namely Thomas Trenance de Wythyell, William Achyb gentleman, Richard Braye de Saynt Clare, and William Kyllyowe de St Tethe), and some not, so that others present were appointed at the request of (1), namely Thomas Hawke, William Lytell, Edward Murthe gentleman, Richard Drenyok, Thomas Bugge, William Blygh de Polhille, Thomas Roche and John Frenche. Then (1), though solemnly summoned, did not appear, and his bill against (2)-(3) was not further prosecuted.
So (1) to be in mercy for a false claim, and (2)-(3) to go free without a day.
Royal seal. Dated 28 Elizabeth.
So Edward Lanyon himself states that his mother is Thomasina Tregian, daughter of Thomas Tregian, IF the record has been correctly transcribed of course.
I've found another record, also concerning Crugmorreck/Cruckmorreck in St Merryn dated 1574, which was a case in the Court of Star Chamber for non-payment of rent. I believe the name should read John Lanyeyn.
"Avice Earysie of Earisy, Cornwall, widow, late wife of Richard Earysie & ward of James Earysie her son. Distraint for non-payment of rent on land in Cruckmorreck against John Lanycyn of Gwynyar.(dk)"
You can find the reference here on the Waalt website, scroll down to Erisey v. Jenkyn;
So, the John Lanyon of Gwinear above, is this Richard and Margaret Treskillard's son who in the pedigree is designated John Lanyon of Lanion? If so, and he also held an interest in St Merryn, then I can't help but speculate that John Lanyon who died in St Merryn in 1605, with a wife called Margaret (possibly his second wife) was the son of Richard, and grandfather to Richard Lanyon who died in St Ervan in 1636.
At the time of Richard's birth, his great-great-grandfather Richard held Lanyon in Gwinear while his great-grandfather John and his family resided in Madron. John inherited Lanyon in Gwinear in 1592 but it appears that many of his descendents remained in the Madron-Sancreed area. Richard's father had married into the Trewren family of Sancreed and his children were all born there. We do not know when Richard's grandfather died, but by 1606 Richard (father of Paskis) had inherited his grandfather's land (his father Francis having pre-deceased his grandfather).
Sorry to quote your own postings back to you Lipkatatar, but you suggested that Richard had inherited his grandfather's lands by 1606, which would fit the date of John Lanyon Esq in St Merryn's death.
The pedigree itself states that Margaret Treskillard was daughter and heiress of Thomas Treskillard. If we have a John Lanyon Esq. selling a share of Treskillard manor then I don't think it unreasonable to suggest that his interest came from an inheritance. If he is also the son and heir of Richard Lanyon and Margaret Treskillard, well then it strengthens the case.
I would love to be able to prove this and hopefully one day the evidence may come to light, but until then it will just have to remain a theory, and more than likely controversial
You have given me a lot to think about. I will deal here with the John Hicka question.
I was aware of the item you refer to, but I had always been unsure of the phrase "namely John Hicka" - it is not what I would expect to see in a 15th Century document. I have now found another "snippet view" reference to this same Manor Roll from July 1463. This is in the Devon and Cornwall Record Society, Vol 41, 1955, p45.
"Goswyn [ Lanyon, formerly "Coswynwolward", in Gwinear]: 50 John Lanyeyn, the heir of John Hicka, in Goswyn, 2 acres Cornish, in socage; yearly rent, with common suit of court, 6s. at the 3 dates stated, and 20d. at Michaelmas (= 7s..); also for offering and aid at Michaelmas,3d." (Goswyn for Coswyn is probably an error by Google snippet view.)
The above extract is found amongst a list of heirs who have taken over properties. John Lanyeyn is described as "heir", not "son and heir", but all the others on the same list are also simply described as being "heir". This could tie in with the claim by John Fursdon that his step-daughter Johanna was the heir of John Lanyeyn. It could be speculated that sometime after 1423 the said Johanna had married a John Hicka (or Hicke) and that their son (or grandson) had taken the name Lanyeyn. If other court rolls from Connerton still exist they might help clear up the John Hicka question.
(This was later republished as The Cornish Lands of the Arundells of Lanherne: 2000. This later version has "John Lanyeen, sometime of John Hicke"). Unfortunately I only have access to a short extracts from "snippet view" for both versions.
The Arundell account rolls for 1446/7 have a James Hicke as "receiver" and "reeve" for Connerton, and other Hickes have served the Arundells as bailiffs, reeves, collectors, etc. during the 15th Century.
Hi Lipkatatar, those little faces are emojis, and appear when a certain combination of letters and characters are typed together without spaces. If you add a space between the number and 'd' for pence in your post, it should disappear. I'm not sure if you can turn them off when posting.
As to John Lanyeyn/Hick, I'm sure I've seen a reference to a document (probably on the National Archives or Kresen Kernow websites) where he was a witness to signatures on said document. The annoying thing is, I can't remember if I was searching for Lanyons at the time or another family, so I can't remember my search terms that brought the document to light. Because of the early date of the document, I didn't take note of it, doh!
I have found another document of interest because it shows the Lanyon connection to the St Merryn area at an earlier date, and mentions a Michael Ruthefoos.
Reference: C 1/341/56 Description: Short title: Nanscuvell v Tremayle.
Plaintiffs: John Nanscuvell and William, son and heir of Richard Lanyen.
Defendants: John Tremayle and Thomas Deane, feoffees to uses.
Subject: Messuages, land, rents, and services in Treveben, Tregollas, Trehenben, Trewynnyan by Trewothek, Trearnan, Treneryn, Tregonvoen, Trevethen,Tretharap, Padstow, Treyere, Crukker, Tregonwall, Trenansroly, Trethelen in Stithians, Trelesyk, Brongolowe, and Tregeninynyon, late of Michael Ruthefoos. Cornwall.
As well as the mention of Padstow, I believe 'Crukker' to be Crugmorreck/Cruckmorreck in St Merryn. Tregaminion is described as 'late of Michael Ruthefoos.' Or is it saying all the lands are late of Michael Ruthefoos?
A little later, William Lanyon's son Richard mortgages the manor of Treveglus and other lands, rents and services in St Merryn to John Cowlinge.
Reference: C 1/1420/52 Description: Short title: Cowlinge v Lanyen.
Plaintiffs: John COWLINGE.
Defendants: Richard LANYEN and Robert TRENCREKE.
Subject: Money and 13,000 pounds of white tin delivered to the said Trencreke in satisfaction of a mortgage to the said Lanyen of the manor of Treveglus and other lands, rents and services in St Merryn. Cornwall
I believe this Treveglus/Treveglos to be the same place that Richard Lanyon (great grandson of the above Richard Lanyon) and his wife are located in 1624. A few years later, Richard is described in other documents as of St Merryn and of St Ervan.
From Cornish Records Office (before Kresen Kernow!)
R Rashleigh family of Menabilly Ref No: R/1235 Title: Lease, Brewinney in Paul churchtown Date: 3 Dec 1624 Format: Manuscript Extent: 1 piece Description:
Parties: 1) Richard Lanyon of Treveglos, esquire, and wife Jane, to 2) William Hutchens of Paul, husbandman. Lease for 99 years.
However, this document of the same time as the dispute on the mortgage on Treveglus, states that Treveglos is in Zennor. It looks like that it's someones assumption rather than from the document itself.
Reference: C 1/1448/6-9 Description: Short title: Lanyen v Cowlyng.
Plaintiffs: Richard LANYEN.
Defendants: John COWLYNG, Margaret his wife, and others.
Subject: Detention of deeds relating to the manor of Treveglos (in Zennor). Cornwall
Jumping forward in time to the inventory of John Lanyon of St Merryn in 1643/44, which is more than likely Richard Lanyon and Jane Mooringe's son.
"Inventory by John Mychell and William Williams.
One tenement in the Parish of St Meryne called Treveglen, £200."
Again, I think this is Treveglos, or part of it, that is still in Lanyon hands.
I'm trying to demonstrate that Lanyons have a long association with this area, and that it's not unreasonable to think that John Lanyon Esq the grandfather of the later Richard would end up in this area, although going by his administration, in much reduced circumstances. Reading between the lines, it would seem that this branch of the Lanyons ambitious as they were, had over-reached themselves and had fallen into debt. Richard Lanyon is described as an outlaw in the document from the National Archives already discussed, and again it mentions Treveglos.
Reference: E 134/10Chas1/Mich41
Description: Walter Orchard, late under-sheriff of Cornwall. v. Richard Lanyon, John Lanyon, Jane Lanyon.: Lands called "Inegeneger," in the parish of St. Ervan, and "Treveglas," in the parish of St. Merrin (Cornwall), lately belonging to Richard Lanyon, an outlaw (defendant's father), &c., &c.: Cornwall
Date: 10 Chas 1 (1634-1635)
From what I've read, it was usually debtors who had not answered a bill against them that were classed as outlaws.
I shall wrap up for now, but will keep looking for anything of interest on the Lanyons.
Thanks for explaining about the emoji's, Pollyq. I had been typing "6 d ." , without spaces, to represent sixpence. I was not sure if someone had added the emoji as a comment on my post.
I will need to spend some time revising my Lanion notes before attempting to respond to your Lanyon queries. In the meantime, I have set out below what I know about the Tresculards, up to 1538. The Tresculard family has clearly been around for centuries, but, so far, I can find very little about them of much genealogical value.
In 1533-38, Thomas Tresculard's widow Isabel took action against William Lanneyen and others over the detention of deeds relating to messuages and lands in Tresculard and elsewhere. Unfortunately this dispute is on C1 file 911 and the C1 images on AALT only go up to file 800.
In 1509-23, "Valuation of the lands of Penwith": Thomas Tresculard in 1509-23 held lands in Madron worth 6/- a year.
In, 1522, "Valuation of the temporal lands in St Constantine": Thomas Trusculard held lands worth 4/- year.
In 1442, there is a record of a Thomas Tresculard as Incumbant at St Gluvias.
In 1409/10, There is a court record record of a case where Ralphe Tresculard raised an action against the son of John Penrose to have the judgement of an earlier case brought against him by John Penrose overturned, because of errors in the handling of the case. The case on AALT runs to 4 complete images and is quite complicated, and in Latin, so I am not going to attempt a translation, but there is a short account of the Tresculard/Penrose dispute below.
In 1387, John Tresculard, Esquire, accompanied John Treverbyn on a military naval expedition.
This is not an account of the Tresculard /Penrose case as such. That case is being used as an example in a discussion of complicated points of property law in relation to another case. It seems like Ralph Tresculard had previously dis-seised John Penrose of some property after which John Penrose raised an action of "redisseisin" against Ralph Tresculard, which he won, resulting in Penrose getting back his property and Ralph being outlawed for seising and causing waste to the property in the first place. Tresculard later raised an action against the son of John Penrose that challenged errors in the handling of the "redisseisin" case which had ruled in Penrose's favour. Tresculard appears to have been successful in his "error" case and the the legal question was then about whether anything following on from a judgement made in error in a "redisseisin" case, such as the outlawing of Tresculard, should automatically fall.
"Case 11 H.4. 6 a. b. where the case was, Trescullard brought a writ of error against T. son and heir of John Penros, upon a judgment against him in a writ of redisseisin, at the suit of the said J. Penros, and also of an outlawry thereupon against him pronounced for that cause; and assigned two errors: one, because the sheriff took the inquest in the town, and not on the land, according to the statute. 2. Because the sheriff made a precept to a bailiff to summon the jury, who returned a pannel, which was removed hither as parcel of the record, and the sheriff took the inquest by some who were not returned by the bailiff. And there Huls, as to the first error, said, if the sheriff cause the jury to view the waste, he may take the inquest at another place, so here. And as to the second error, he said, that the sheriff may vary from the return of the bailiff; for the sheriff himself is the person who makes the array, who is also a judge in the case. Gascoign, If the sheriff had not made the precept, and the return by the bailiff had not been made parcel of the record, it would be as you say; but he has sent this return as parcel of the record, whereby he affirms the return of the bailiff; and if he had process against the jury by Habeas Corpus, and had taken the inquest by others, it is error, quod Huls concessit; and Rolfe of counsel with the defendant in the writ of error pleaded, that the plaintiff should not be received to assign error, for after the judgment the plaintiff in the writ of error, by his deed which is here, released to the said John Penros, who recovered in the writ of redisseisin all his right in the land, and all actions and demands; and although both the errors were assigned in the principal record, and thereof by the said release he is stopped to assign error; and although the outlawry was good in process, yet because the record and judgment are the original of the process of the outlawry; therefore if there be defect in the original judgment, the outlawry which is depending upon it is reversible, by Gas coigne, quod Huls affirmavit; wherefore he reversed the outlawry, notwithstanding the release. Which judgment agrees By a release of all actions real and personal, such actions only are released in which the plaintiff should recover anything in the realty or personalty which is due to him."
National Archives entry. David Thomas v Thomas Tregean. Messuages and lands in Lanyon, Resyk, Chyw[oon], and Trengventon, assigned to complainant by John Lannyen, deceased, for repayment of a debt. Cornwall. Reference: C 1/367/7 Date: 1504-1515.
To William Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor of England.
John Lannyen being in "great necessitie and nede" borrowed £260 from David Thomas, and for guarantee of repayment "made estate" to D.Thomas of his messuages lands and tents in Lannyen, Resyk, Chy[woo]n and Trenyventon. The conditions of the loan were that D.Thomas should have possession and all the issues and profits of these properties until the loan was repaid. The terms for repayment were that there should be 6 payments of £20, followed by a payment of £40 and a final payment of £100. J.Lannyen guaranteed that his heirs or assignees would honour this agreement. At the time of J. Lanyen's death only the six £20 payments had been made. Richard Lannyen, son and heir of J.Lanyen then disposessed D.Thomas and installed Thomas Tregian in the said properties. T.Tregian promised D.Thomas that if he was given all the deeds to the said properties and documents relating to the loan that he would take over the loan, of which £140 was still outstanding. D.Thomas handed over all such documentation but T.Tregian has subsequently ignored all requests to repay the outstanding debt.
The summary of the Nanscuvell-Lanyen vs Tremayle-Deane dispute below makes it clear that all of the properties mentioned in the Early Chancery Proceedings index entry for the above dispute were in the hands of Michael Ruthfos. I have also looked at other references to, or disputes involving Michael Ruthfos, and some of the same properties also appear in these other cases. However, there is no documentation, as yet, to say which, if any, of such properties passed from Michael Ruthfos to the Lanyens.
I have had the opportunity to examine the Nanscuvell-Lanyen complaint in more detail. It now appears that all three of John, Thomas and Richard Ruthfos died without heirs, and it would now appear more of a possibility that John Nanscuvell and Richard Lanyen were sons-in-law of Michael Ruthfos.
Plaintiffs are John Nanscuvell and William, son and heir of Richard Lanyen. Michael Ruthfoos was seased of acres of land, 1,000 acres of pasture, 500 acres of furze and heath with appurtenances, etc. in Treveven,Tregollas,Trehenben, Trewynnyan, Trewothek, Trearnan, Treneryn, Tregonvoen, Trevethen, Tretharan, Padstowe, Treyere, Crukker, Tregonwall, Trenansroly, Trethelen in the Parish of Stithyans, and Trelesek, Brongollowe and Tregemmynyon with all the rents of John Lawry and of John Porthenure and with the revision of the same, and of all the enclosed lands and tents in Kurkyrre in the county of Cornwall as of fee. Being so seased, in trust and confidence he co-feoffed John Tremayle and Thomas Deane and their heirs on the condition that they should ensure a sufficient estate in law to John Ruthfoos and his lawful heirs. And in default of such issues the remainder to go to Thomas Ruthfoos and his lawful heirs, and in default, the co-feoffees should make the premisses over to Richard Ruthfoos with a conditiion that a part of the estate should go to the wardens and keepers of the store of the Chapel of Our Blessed Lady of Nansenten - 20/- yearly for the repair and sustenance of the chapel. If all three, John, Thomas and Richard die without heirs then John Nanscuvell and Richard Lanyen were to have the estate to have and to hold to them and the lawful heirs of their body, making a yearly payment to the upkeep of the aforesaid Chapel. And it came to pass that John, Thomas and Richard died without heirs before any estate had been made to them and the said Richard Lanyen had issue William, one of the plaintiffs, and had since died. John and William, the plaintiffs have oftentimes required John Tremayle and Thomas Deane to enfeoffe them in accordance with their agreement with Michael and his will, which to do they have always refused, etc,
Below are a few more references to Michael Ruthfos.
Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol 1, Part 1, p266, PRO 1965. "Michael Ruthfos, Rudfos, Rutherfos, Roderfos of Treveven, Nanskevell and Padestowe, Corn., g., deputy of Thomas Elyot, John Style, and John Hereford, Henry VII's customers of Padistowe, Cornw., 27 May."
Plaintiffs, Margaret Trewynnyan and Richard Ruthfoos were executors of the testament of Michael Ruthfoos, lately deceased. Because of the great confidence he had in John Nanscuwell and his brother Benet, Michael entrusted them with coffers, chests and locked caskets containing sums of money, plate, writings, obligations, releases, acquitances etc. to keep for safety and deliver to his executors as required. They have many times requested John and Benet to deliver the aforesaid chests, etc. to them, without which they cannot perform their duties as executors of Michael Ruthfoos. John and Benet are refusing to release these items to them, etc.
Plaintiff is Richard Perkyn, cousin [nephew - Richard was son of Thomas Perkyn, brother to John.] and heir to John Perkyn who died seased of 2 messuages, 100 acres of land, and 200 acres of pasture in Trewynnyen. Richard took possession of the properties but all the evidences, etc., relating to the premises and the goods and chattels thereof had come to the hands of Michael Ruthfos and Henry Braynton, executors of the said John Perkyn. Richard has oftentimes asked for the evidences, etc., which they have refused to deliver to him, and he has no remedy under the common law as he has no knowledge of the number of documents or where they are contained, etc.
George Denysell, son and heir of Peter Denysell, son of Peter Denysell, son of Peter Colyn, whose heir George the plaintiff is, was seased of the manor of Denysell with appurtenances, as well as 11 messauges, 500 acres of land, ?? acres of furze and heath, 60 acres of meadow and 100 acres of woods in Tregewennell, Corgellowe, Pellygarane, Tregollas, Trevorvanner, Padstowe, St Penatollyewe, Bonekyn, Lanwartha, ...nwolas in the county of Cornwall. George died seased of the aforementioned properties, which then descended to George as cousin and heir to the said Peter Denysell, that is to say son of the said George Denysell who was son of Remfre who was father to Peter who was father to Peter who died without issue, after whose death the properties came to the possession of Thomas Tresawell, John Tresodryn and Michael Ruthfos. And oftentimes since the death of the said Peter, George has asked Thomas, John and Michael for the charters, munniments, etc, which items they have refused to deliver to him or even say wherin they are contained, etc.
Plaintiff, Richard Perkyn is seased of a messuage and 60 acres in Trewynnyan. A John Tregonwell had a messuage and 80 acres of land in Trewynnyan which he had leased to a John Perkyn for 101 years. John Perkyn took possession of Tregonwell's property, made Richard Perkyn his executor and later died. Richard Perkyn took possession of the said property, but all the evidence, muniments, etc., are in the hands of Michael Ruthfos. Richard has requested the said documents and Michael has refused to hand them over, etc.
The relationship between Richard Lanyen and Michael Ruthfos.
I have had a rethink about the relationship between Richard Lanyen and Michael Ruthfos. Obviously, Richard Lanyen could not have been son-in-law of Michael Ruthfos or his children would have been Michael's heirs. In addition it would appear that Richard Lanyen and Michael,John,Thomas and Richard Ruthfos were of much the same age, as they all seem to have died within a few years of each other. What would work is that John, Thomas and Richard Ruthfos were brothers of Michael and the Isabel who married Richard Lanyen was a cousin of Michael Ruthfos, possibly the daughter of his uncle Thomas. It would make sense for Michael Ruthfos to leave his estate first to his brothers and only later to a cousin. Just a theory.
The relationship between Richard Lanyen and Michael Ruthfos
I am starting to confuse myself now with overexposure to the Lanyons. It was of course John, father of Richard, who was claimed to have married an Isabel Ruthfrey/Ruthfos. We do not know whether John, Thomas or Michael Ruthfos were brothers, nephews or cousins of Michael Ruthfos, but it is clear that none of them could have been the father of the Isabel who married John Lanyen. My best guess is that Isabel could have been a cousin of Michael Ruthfos. This could make Richard Lanyen a first cousin once removed to Michael Ruthfos, and still allow for Isabel to have been the daughter of a Thomas Ruthfrey/Ruthfos.
Hi Lipkatatar, thank you so much for outlining what you've gathered on the Treskillards, and for dissecting the Ruthfoos document. It's all very interesting. I agree the relationships in the document are difficult to determine, and there still might be a document out there which could shed more light on the relationships, but your theory is as good as anyone else's.
If I could just return to more recent Lanyons, one of the wills contained in 'Oswyn Murray's Collection of Wills' was of John Lanyon of Madron, proved 1634. These records can be viewed online now at FamilySearch.org, but only at a Family History Center or one of their affiliates. I don't suppose anyone reading this has such a Center near them that would be willing to look this will up for me?
John Lanyon, Gent was buried at Madron 15 Apr 1634.
The will was originally proved in the court of the Principal Registry of the Bishop of Exeter, 1559-1799. The abstract contained in Oswyn Murray's collection is the only surviving copy of this will and may contain useful information, or it may not But it would be good to know either way.