Post by Zenobia on Jun 20, 2007 18:03:25 GMT -5
I recently purchased two documents from the PRO in hopes of expanding my Roscruge ancestry. Although the documents should be clear cut, they are actually quite contradictory, so am posting them here for some feedback.
The documents are from The Chancery Court, Six Clerks Office, and are dated 1515-1518 based on the fact that both are addressed to Thomas Cromwell, while he was Chancellor.
Here is a summary of the two documents:
C 1/439/27
Not dated; addressed to Thomas Cromwell, Archbp. of York and Chancellor of England
Petitioners: Richard Rescruke and Udon his wife, one of the daughters and heirs of John Tregithiowe of Tregithiowe in Cornwall.
Summary: That John was seized in his demesne of certain lands and that he gave them by deed poll to Isote his daughter (and to the heirs of her body etc) for the use of the said Udon to pay a rental (amount and times specified) yearly to him and after his death to the said Udon and the heirs of her body. That Isote took to husband one Thomas Trevirgy. That John Tregithiowe died in the twenty year of (our late) sovereign lord Henry vij (ie: 1504). And that the said Thomas Trevirgy and Isote refused to pay the rent to Udon etc.
C 1/439/28
Not dated; addressed to Thomas Cromwell, Archbp. of York and Chancellor of England
Petitioners: Richard Rescrouge, cosin (sic) and next heir of the body of Udon Tregonwell, that is, son of Jane, daughter of the said Udon.
Summary: That John Tregitheowe was seized in his demesne of certain lands and that he gave them by deed poll to Isote his daughter, yielding to him yearly (amount and times specified) and after his death to the said Udon and the heirs of her body. That Isote was seized of the lands and the said Udon died and afterward Jane mother of the orator at the feast of St. Michael Archangel in the xx year of (or late) sovereign Lord Henry vij (1504). And the said Isote died and the lands descended unto one Thomas Trevergy, son and heir of the said Isote. And that the said Thomas refuses to pay etc…
Now, there are some obvious problems (or at least anomalies) with these documents.
1. Although they are supposedly written within a three year period in 1515-1518 (and would have to be written after April 1509 since Henry VII is referred to as ‘late’) the first suit is brought by the grandfather, while the second suit in this short time period is now brought by the grandson.
2. In the first suit, John Tregitheowe dies in 1504, but in the second suit Jane dies in that year, Udon and John having already died previously (so Udon is bringing the first suit 10+ years after her own death?)
3. Udon was obviously Udon Rescruke in the first suit, by the second she is called Udon Tregonwell.
4. In the second suit, Richard, although a Rescrouge, is claiming ancestry through his mother, not through the Roscruge line, causing all sorts of potential ancestral convolutions….
A few notes to help with this problem.
There is a pedigree of Roscruge in Vivian’s Visitations, signed by Anthony Roscruge. Obviously any generation earlier than Anthony’s father (or possibly grandfather) would have to be backed by primary sources (but I have been fortunate with that as you will see below).
The pedigree is as follows:
1. Anthony Roscruge (age 47 in 1620)
2. John Roscruge m. Ellinor Chenoweth
3. Thomas Roscruge m. Jane Tripcony
4. Richard Roscruge m. da. of _____ Treowe (Elizabeth Trewoof)
5. Thomas Roskruge m. Udon Maseley
So far, the only thing in this pedigree that I have not been able to prove using original and transcribed primary sources (Wills, IPMs, Henderson’s etc.) is the name of the last Thomas’ wife.
Number 4 above, Richard Roscruge, would be the man bringing the second suit in court.
This Richard was born ca. 1479/80, as he gives his age as 60 in a deposition taken in 1539. In the same deposition he also states that his father was Thomas Roscruge.
Furthermore, Henderson’s Cornish Manuscripts shows a suit in the Star Chamber (undated, but temp. Hen. VIII) by Thomas, son of the above Richard, in which the ancestry was shown thus:
Thomas, son of Richard, son of Thomas, son of Johanne (this Johanne was female and the dispute revolved around some lands seized by one of the granddaughters of her brother Rawlin). Johanne’s surname cannot be surmised, since it is unknown whether the granddaughter of Rawlin was married or unmarried (she was a Brencoys) and further, Joahnne’s husband’s name is not given.
So, dating problems aside, I can reach only three possible conclusions regarding the two Chancery suits which I have summarized first above.
1. Richard (2nd petitioner) was the grandson of Richard (1st petitioner) by Johanne, and afterward the elder Richard married Udon, d/o John Tregitheowe, who had a daughter Jane by a former marriage (perhaps Tregonwell? Perhaps Maseley?) and then Jane married her stepbrother Thomas Roscruge (very medieval – let’s keep all the land in the family!)
2. Richard (2nd petitioner) was son of an unnamed Roscruge who was somehow related to Richard (1st petitioner) (possibly a brother, or uncle?) and Jane was the daughter of Udon by Richard (1st petitioner) and the marriage of Jane to Richard (2nd petitioner’s) father was a cousin marriage of some degree
3. The whole suit was a lot of kaka, made up by Richard (2nd petitioner), who was looking to get some money he was not entitled to….
(It is further interesting to note that both of the Chancery suits are signed by the same witnesses!)
I have sent a copy of this via email to Douglas Richardson, author of Plantagenet Ancestry and medieval documents expert. Will keep you all posted, but in the meantime, would love some of your analysis!
The documents are from The Chancery Court, Six Clerks Office, and are dated 1515-1518 based on the fact that both are addressed to Thomas Cromwell, while he was Chancellor.
Here is a summary of the two documents:
C 1/439/27
Not dated; addressed to Thomas Cromwell, Archbp. of York and Chancellor of England
Petitioners: Richard Rescruke and Udon his wife, one of the daughters and heirs of John Tregithiowe of Tregithiowe in Cornwall.
Summary: That John was seized in his demesne of certain lands and that he gave them by deed poll to Isote his daughter (and to the heirs of her body etc) for the use of the said Udon to pay a rental (amount and times specified) yearly to him and after his death to the said Udon and the heirs of her body. That Isote took to husband one Thomas Trevirgy. That John Tregithiowe died in the twenty year of (our late) sovereign lord Henry vij (ie: 1504). And that the said Thomas Trevirgy and Isote refused to pay the rent to Udon etc.
C 1/439/28
Not dated; addressed to Thomas Cromwell, Archbp. of York and Chancellor of England
Petitioners: Richard Rescrouge, cosin (sic) and next heir of the body of Udon Tregonwell, that is, son of Jane, daughter of the said Udon.
Summary: That John Tregitheowe was seized in his demesne of certain lands and that he gave them by deed poll to Isote his daughter, yielding to him yearly (amount and times specified) and after his death to the said Udon and the heirs of her body. That Isote was seized of the lands and the said Udon died and afterward Jane mother of the orator at the feast of St. Michael Archangel in the xx year of (or late) sovereign Lord Henry vij (1504). And the said Isote died and the lands descended unto one Thomas Trevergy, son and heir of the said Isote. And that the said Thomas refuses to pay etc…
Now, there are some obvious problems (or at least anomalies) with these documents.
1. Although they are supposedly written within a three year period in 1515-1518 (and would have to be written after April 1509 since Henry VII is referred to as ‘late’) the first suit is brought by the grandfather, while the second suit in this short time period is now brought by the grandson.
2. In the first suit, John Tregitheowe dies in 1504, but in the second suit Jane dies in that year, Udon and John having already died previously (so Udon is bringing the first suit 10+ years after her own death?)
3. Udon was obviously Udon Rescruke in the first suit, by the second she is called Udon Tregonwell.
4. In the second suit, Richard, although a Rescrouge, is claiming ancestry through his mother, not through the Roscruge line, causing all sorts of potential ancestral convolutions….
A few notes to help with this problem.
There is a pedigree of Roscruge in Vivian’s Visitations, signed by Anthony Roscruge. Obviously any generation earlier than Anthony’s father (or possibly grandfather) would have to be backed by primary sources (but I have been fortunate with that as you will see below).
The pedigree is as follows:
1. Anthony Roscruge (age 47 in 1620)
2. John Roscruge m. Ellinor Chenoweth
3. Thomas Roscruge m. Jane Tripcony
4. Richard Roscruge m. da. of _____ Treowe (Elizabeth Trewoof)
5. Thomas Roskruge m. Udon Maseley
So far, the only thing in this pedigree that I have not been able to prove using original and transcribed primary sources (Wills, IPMs, Henderson’s etc.) is the name of the last Thomas’ wife.
Number 4 above, Richard Roscruge, would be the man bringing the second suit in court.
This Richard was born ca. 1479/80, as he gives his age as 60 in a deposition taken in 1539. In the same deposition he also states that his father was Thomas Roscruge.
Furthermore, Henderson’s Cornish Manuscripts shows a suit in the Star Chamber (undated, but temp. Hen. VIII) by Thomas, son of the above Richard, in which the ancestry was shown thus:
Thomas, son of Richard, son of Thomas, son of Johanne (this Johanne was female and the dispute revolved around some lands seized by one of the granddaughters of her brother Rawlin). Johanne’s surname cannot be surmised, since it is unknown whether the granddaughter of Rawlin was married or unmarried (she was a Brencoys) and further, Joahnne’s husband’s name is not given.
So, dating problems aside, I can reach only three possible conclusions regarding the two Chancery suits which I have summarized first above.
1. Richard (2nd petitioner) was the grandson of Richard (1st petitioner) by Johanne, and afterward the elder Richard married Udon, d/o John Tregitheowe, who had a daughter Jane by a former marriage (perhaps Tregonwell? Perhaps Maseley?) and then Jane married her stepbrother Thomas Roscruge (very medieval – let’s keep all the land in the family!)
2. Richard (2nd petitioner) was son of an unnamed Roscruge who was somehow related to Richard (1st petitioner) (possibly a brother, or uncle?) and Jane was the daughter of Udon by Richard (1st petitioner) and the marriage of Jane to Richard (2nd petitioner’s) father was a cousin marriage of some degree
3. The whole suit was a lot of kaka, made up by Richard (2nd petitioner), who was looking to get some money he was not entitled to….
(It is further interesting to note that both of the Chancery suits are signed by the same witnesses!)
I have sent a copy of this via email to Douglas Richardson, author of Plantagenet Ancestry and medieval documents expert. Will keep you all posted, but in the meantime, would love some of your analysis!