The following account of the Stanhope family is mostly from the wonderful research work of Michael Stanhope. For a full account go to: http://www.stanhopefamilyorigins.com
7 II. HROLLAGER RAGNVALDSSON (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6) See NORMANDY for earlier generations.
m. EMINA d'AVRANCHES (b.c.865, d. 935), d. of Baldwin I, Count of Flanders and Judith Carolingienne (d. of King Charles I)
"One of the chieftains that Rolf gave land to was his half-brother, Hrollager Ragnvaldsson, who married Emina d'Avranches, daughter of Judith Carolingienne, daughter of King Charles 11 of France, and Baldwin I, Count of Flanders.(1)
Judith had previously married two Kings of Wessex, father and son, Ethelwulf and Ethelbald. She eloped with Baldwin, much to the disapproval of her father. He later relented, however, and made Baldwin the first Count of Flanders. Through their descendant, Matilda of Flanders, who married William the Conqueror, the line of the Anglo-Norman Kings of England can be traced.(2)
Hrolf Ragnvaldsson was probably less of a significant figure than later Norman historians made him to be. He was one Scandinavian leader among several who vied for outright control of the relatively small amount of territory ceded to them. Although history tends to be written as if evolves around the actions of individuals - making it easy for people to identify with and understand - these leaders would have had the essential support of other powerful men.
In marrying a grandaughter of Charles II, King of France, Hrollager was affording that family protection against fellow Scandinavian raiders, and other French dynastic families, at a time of great instability and conflict. Such alliances were common. Hrollager's uncle, Malahule, married Maude de St. Pol, a daughter of Hernequin, Count of Boulogne et St. Pol, tenant-in-chief and probable uncle of Baldwin I, Count of Flanders. (3)
It is possible that Hrolf Ragnvaldsson's wife was Poppa de Senlis, daughter of Gui, Count of Senlis, whose ancestry can be traced to the Emperor Charlmagne. Gui, Count of Senlis, married a sister of Herbert I., Count of Vermandois, and had issue: Bernard, Count of Senlis, and, possibly, Poppa de Senlis, named in some accounts as the wife of Hrolf.(4)
(1) Histoire des Comtes de Flandre- Alexandre Mazas- pp. 378-380, 1843
(2) The History of the Anglo-Saxons- Sir Francis Palgrave, 1831. (3) Histoire des Comtes de Flandre- Alexandre Mazas- pp. 378-380, 1843
(4) Etudes sur la Naissance de Principautés Territoriales au France-J. Dhondt, 1948
8I. HROLF TURSTAIN (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7)
m. GERLOTTE de BLOIS (b.c.895, d.c.950), d. of Theobald, Count de Blois et Chartres and Richilde de Main/Bourges (grand-daughter of King Charles II)
Hrolf Turstain followed his uncle to Normandy, via Flanders, and founded the important Norman families of Avranches, Briquebec, Crispin, and Montfort-sur-Risle.
9 III. GUILLAUME de BEC (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8)
m. BERTHA de VERMANDOIS (b.c.920, d.c.990)- See MARTEL d.c.1000
That Guillaume de Bec was the progenitor of the family of Bec-Crispin is shown in charters of the Abbey of Mont-Saint-Michel, diocèse d'Avranches, c. 990, relating to the foundation of its priory at Abbayette near Lindivy, and in charters relating to the Benedictine Priory of Saint-Ymer-en-Auge et de Briquebec. The lineage of the early Crispins, and those closely related to them, was recorded in these charters, and notable French antiquaries, such as d'Anisy and de Sainte-Marie, used them as a basis for their work. Guillaume de Bec's ancestry and progeny are also recorded, as given above, in the work of the Duchess of Cleveland.(1): 'Hrollager's three grandsons each became the founder of an illustrious Norman stock. From the eldest, Anslac de Bastembourg, came the Bertrams, second, William, the barons of Bec-Crespin, and from the third, Ansfrid the Dane, who was Viscount of Exmers, or Hiesmes, before 978, the house of Avranches. He was the first Viscount of Hiesmes that is on the record, and his descendants inherited this dignity, as well as the surname of Le Gotz or Gois. Toustain Le Gois, his grandson, was Chamberlain to Duke Robert.'
As stated by d'Anisy and de Sainte-Marie, it is accurate to describe Guillaume/William as the immediate ancestor of the Seigneurs du Bec-Crespin. It was at a much later date - Guillaume Crespin IV. - that those of their lineage became the Barons of Bec-Crespin. It should also be noted that he was the first of his lineage to hold the name of William, a distinction wrongly given to his great-grandson, William Crispin I.
Guillaume de Bec, c. 960, gave land to the Benedictine Priory of Saint-Ymer-en-Auge et de Briquebec; a confirmation charter sanctioned by Duke Richard I., and witnessed by Count Robert de Vermandois. One of Guillaume's fiefs was Bec-de-Mortagne, situated some three miles from Colleville-sur-Mer. As will be shown, it is from this latter commune of the Seine-Maritime that a branch of the Crispin family took its name. An act of Guillaume, son of Robert, granted tithes at Lisieux to Mont-Saint-Michel 'for the souls of his father and wife, Bertha'.
(1) The Battle Abbey Roll: With Some Account of the Norman Lineages, pp. 43-44, 1889
10I. CRISPIN de BEC (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9)
m. HELOISE de GUINES (b.c.958, d. 1015)
Crispin de Bec, a.k.a. Crespin-Ansgot, married his second cousin, Heloise de Guines. Heloise was the daughter of Siegfried, Count of Guines, (b.912, d. 965), and Elftrude de Flandre, (b.932, d.990), g.g. grandaughter of King Alfred, and daughter of Arnulf the elder and Adele de Vermandois.(1) Siegfried was the grandson of Godfried de Guines and Gisela de Lotharingia.
(1) The Plantagenet Ancestry- W. H. Turton, 1928
(2) Essays and reviews- Richard William Church- p. 138, 1834
11I. GILBERT CRISPIN (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10)
m. GUNNOR d'ANJOU (b.c.1000, d.c.1090) see MARTEL
One of Crispin's and Heloise's sons was Gilbert Crispin I 'who because of the shape of his hair was to be known as Crispin. For in his early youth he had hair that was brush-like and stiff and sticking out, and in a manner of speaking bristling like the needles of a pine tree. This gave him the name of Crispin, from 'crispus pinus, 'pine hair'. Gilbert Crispin I. was also noted by Milo Crispin as being 'of renowned origin and nobility.'(1) Duke Robert I. established Gilbert Crispin at Tillières to defend this important border castle for him.
(1) How The Holy Virgin Appeared To William Crispin The Elder And On The Origin Of The Crispin Family- Milo Crispin, ed. Migne, cols. 735-744, 1856
(2) The Normans: Warrior Knights and their Castles- C. Gravett, and D. Nicolle, 2006
(3) Recherches Historiques- A. T. Barabé- p. 223, 1863
12 II. WILLIAM CRISPIN (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11)
m. EVE de MONTFORT ( b.c.1009, d. 1099), d. of Amauri de Montford and Bertrade de Gometz
Cross at Neaufles-Saint-Martin- 11th Century
William Crispin I., the middle brother, was 'of outstanding manners, the best known of all; with military fame he rose above almost all his contemporaries. His famous prowess made many envious. William, duke of the Normans, called William Crispin to the castle of Neaufles and gave him, and his son after him, the castle and the vicomte of the Vexin. There William established his home to ward off French invasions. He revisited, however, the land he held elsewhwere in Normandy in the district of Lisieux.'(1)
'The Norman and French forces met at Mortemer [before Lent, 6 Feb., 1054]. The Normans were led by Count Robert of Eu assisted by Hugh of Gournay, Hugh of Montfort, Walter Giffard, William Crispin, Roger of Mortemer .... There at dawn battle was instantly joined and continued on both sides with bloodshed until noon. Finally, the defeated French took to flight including their standard-bearer, Odo, the King's brother. In this battle, the greater part of the French nobility was slain; the remainder were kept in custody throughout various Norman villages.' [Excerpt from Obert, Count of Eu. By his wife, Countess Lescelina.] William Crispin I. also fought on the side of the Norman dukes against fellow Normans in the Norman Civil War that followed the succession of William The Conqueror, whose lowly birth was used by some as an excuse to try to usurp his power. Those leading the rebellion included Neil II. de Saint Saveur, g.g. grandson of Malahule of More.
The military prowess of the Crispins was well esteemed: 'And like the Fabii, or the Anicii or Manlii, carried the tokens of fame [insignia] among the Romans, so the Crispins knew even greater fame among the Normans and the French.' William Crispin I. had a wife named Eve de Montfort, 'who suited him well on account of her origin and manners. Eve de Montfort bore him Gilbert, abbot of Westminster, William Crispin II., and many others.'(2) Eve de Montfort died in a fire at Le Bec in 1099, aged 90, and was buried there, next to her husband. It is recorded of her that she had to do penance for her love of lapdogs!(3) Eve de Montfort was the sister of Norman frontier lord Simon de Montfort, (b.1020, d.1087).(4) They were the children of Amauri de Montfort, (b.993, d. 4 Feb. 1031), and Bertrade de Gometz, (b. 994, d.1051). Amauri de Montfort was the son of William de Hainault, (b. 967, d.1003).(5) There was an existing close association between the families of Hainault and Crispin, in that William de Hainault was a direct descendant of Baldwin I., Count of Flanders.
William was an Anglo-Norman lord who held land in Wetherby, Wheldrake, Coxwold, and Goodmanham in Yorkshire, and in Ancroft in Northumberland, as mesne-tenant of William de Percy. Goodmanham [Godmundin] is a small village situated 2 miles to the north-east of Market Weighton. It was the main pagan site of worship in the north of England, housing the Temple of Delgovine - the place of God's image - dedicated to Odin.
It became the custom of Norman landowners to change their name to that of the new lands they acquired. It was not always a case of a complete change of name, though, for, in many cases, families simply acquired an additional name. In fact, many poweful families had quite a stock of names, and would use any one of them at the same time. This was even more confusing after The Norman Conquest, when families used both their Norman and English names to signify their various landholdings. We have already mentioned that the Crispin family were entrusted with the fortresses of Tillières and Neaufles. They soon gained substantial property in surrounding lands, including the border castle of Damville, and land in Colleville-sur-Mer, situated close to Graville-Sainte-Honorine, the centre of Malet power in Normandy. This latter acquisition being granted to them after the Battle of Mortemer, 1054. They held Colleville as tenants of William Malet, Sire de Graville, who came from Graville-Sainte-Honorine, between Le Havre and Harfleur. He was probably descended from Gerard, a Scandinavian prince, and companion of Duke Rollo, who gave his name to the fief of Gerardville, or Graville, near Le Havre.
After the Battle of Hastings, 1066, because of his Saxon connection, Duke William entrusted William Malet to attend to the burial of the dead English king. According to some accounts, the body was buried under a pile of stones on top of a cliff at Hastings that overlooked the sea. William placed a stone on the grave with the epitaph: 'By command of the Duke, you rest here a King, O Harold, that you may be guardian still of the shore and sea.' Harold's body was later re-buried at Harold's Abbey at Waltham.(6)
King Harold's Tomb
The Malet Castle at Graville-Sainte-Honorine had an important strategic location, at the mouth of the Seine. The territorial associations in Normandy, between various families and the Malets, were continued in England after the Conquest. The Suffolk tenements which Gilbert Crispin held of Robert Malet, his nephew, are still called Carlton Colville and Weston Colville. Gilbert Crispin II. and William Crispin I. acquired the name Colleville [Colville] from their Norman tenantship of Colleville. In the lists published of the Companions of Duke William, the brothers Gilbert and William are sometimes surnamed Crispin, sometimes de Colleville, and sometimes appear under both surnames on the same list. It can be noted that the tenurial relationship between the Crispins and the Malets was not one sided - Robert Malet held land of Gilbert Crispin in Normandy at Le Mesnil-Josselin.
As stated, William Crispin, a.k.a. William de Colleville, was, according to a number of lists, a companion of the Conqueror, that is to say, he was primarily a mercenary who fought for Duke William at the Battle of Hastings, in return for promises of land.
In the sense that William de Colleville and his fellow nobles were mercenaries, they were not vassals of the Conqueror, in fact he was as much their vassal as they were his. They were a very formidable economic and military force whose interests had to be taken into account. All subsequent Kings and Queens of England were subject to the interests of this elite, rather like a present-day mafia boss who has to keep enough of his most powerful captains on his side so as not to risk being usurped. Monarchs did not make any decisions in their own right. They were the most public face of a ruling elite. If William Malet was a captain in this scheme of things, then his tenant in his Yorkshire desmesnes, William Colleville, was a lieutenant, much involved in the enforcement of the new order. Future centuries witnessed monarchs and Parliament as smoke-screens for the rule of factions of nobles.
(1) How The Holy Virgin Appeared To William Crispin The Elder And On The Origin Of The Crispin Family- Milo Crispin, ed. Migne, cols. 735-744, 1856
(3) Histoire de L'Abbaye du Bec- Adolphe Porée, 1901
(4) The Letters of Anselme of Canterbury- W. Frolich, trsl.- 1990-1994, nos. 22, 98, 118, and 147
(5) The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis- Marjorie Chibnall- Vol. IV, 1969-80
(6) Histoire de Guillaume le Conquerant- W. P. Foreville, 1952.
13 I. WILLIAM CRISPIN (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12)
m. AGNES MAUVOISIN (b.c.1065, d.1140)
William Crispin was Vicomte of the Vexin, Lord Colleville, and is reported in some accounts as being present at the Battle of Hastings, 1066, as a young squire. He was alive in 1132, being noted in charters as holding Colleville as tenant of Ranulph of Chester, Bishop of Bayeux his distant kinsman. His English land ownings were on the northern frontier of Norman power. They had subdued the south and east relatively easily, but the north rose in rebellion, headed by Edgar the Atheling, whose forces attacked York in 1069. It was only by the arrival of King William that the City was saved. William Malet was the Sheriff defending York. He had been granted considerable lands in Yorkshire following the building of the first Norman castle there, on the site of Clifford's Tower. Another castle was built on the other side of the river from the original, and the garrison was increased. In September 1069, however, William Malet, his wife Hesilia, and two of their children, were captured, later freed by ransome, by a combined force of Danes and English under Sweyn of Denmark, when York fell to them after a long and bloody fight. When William Malet was relieved of the sheriffdom of York, post 1070, some of his lands in Yorkshire were granted to William de Percy.
William. also held land, principally, in Normandy: 'William Crispin the younger gave the tithe of the mill and of his desmene which he had in Le Mesnil-Hubert, the church and tithe of Druicort, what Robert Malcovernant held of him, one house in Livarot with all its customs, half of the church and tithe of Bournainville.'(1) William also held other land in Yorkshire: in Arnodestorp, Burnby, Clifton, Dunnington, Easthorpe in Londesborough, Elvington, Fyling, Grimston in Dunnington, Hayton, Hinderwell, Ianulfestrop, Kirkleatham, Kipling, Marshe-by-the-Sea, Nafferton, Pockthorpe, Scoreby, Sutton upon Derwent, and Warter.(2)
According to Mathieu - Reserches Sur Les Premiers Comtes De Dammartin, 19, 60, 1996. - a probable wife of William Crispin was Agnes Mauvoisin, who was the daughter of Eustachia Dammartin. She was the daughter of Manasser, Count of Dammartin, (b.1000, d.1037), and Constance Capetien, (b.1010, d.1067), daughter of Robert II., (b. 972, d.1031), King of France. She married Raoul Mauvoisin, Seigneur of Rosny, and Viscount of Mantes. He was a part of the Hastings invasion force, before becoming a monk at Gassicourt, dying in 1074. An act of Agnes, daughter of Eustachia, daughter of Count Manasser, granted tithes at Rosny 'for the souls of her mother and husband, William.' The association of Rosny and the name Manasser strongly suggests a connection with the Mauvoisins of Rosny. The Mauvoisins were the most powerful family in the marches of Francia, between Vernon and Mantes.
King William's original intention had been to run England by giving a prominant role to the Anglo-Saxon nobility. Indeed, immediately after the Conquest, there had not been a mass confiscation of land. William's charters of 1068/1069 show there to have been many English landowners, churchmen and royal officials. This policy was thwarted by the actions of those William had tried to help. The English nobility allied themselves with Irish, Welsh, Scots; assortments of Scandinavians, disaffected Normans and French, in a series of revolts, as in the above mentioned assault on York.
The Norman response was the The Harrying of the North, which supposedly had a devastating effect upon the inhabitants north of the Humber. Simon of Durham wrote: 'It was shocking to see the houses, the streets, and highways, human carcases swarming with worms, disolving in putridity and emitting a most horrid stench; nor were there any left alive to cover them with earth, all having perished by sword or famine, or stimulated by hunger had abandoned their native land. During the space of nine years the country lay totally uncultivated. Between York and Durham not a home was inhabited, all was a lonely wilderness, the retreat of wild beasts and robbers and the terror of travelers.'
That the Domesday Book -1086 - described much of the land north of the Humber as waste is to do with large areas of that region not being under secure Norman control. Norman scribes simply gave an account more pallatable to their masters by describing the north as waste as a result of Norman power. English chroniclers, for their part, describing events after 1066, naturally sought to vilify the Normans. These northern regions had been settled by Scandinavian invaders for centuries, who had escaped the tyrannies of their former homelands and were not easily subjected to any new ones imposed on them. That the Norman invaders were fiercely resisted is shown by the imposition of the Murdrum tax, which levied a fine on an entire community if a Norman was found murdered within their boundary. We can know little of the personality of William Crispin II., other than it must have been to some degree as harsh as the world he lived in. He was, as his father and grandfather before him, a defender of Norman frontier lands, and would of necessity have been accomplished in warfare and maintaining stern discipline among his vassals.
William I. finally abandoned his policy of including the English aristocracy in government in 1075. He had given the earldom of Northumbria to Waltheof in 1072, but, three years later, Waltheof plotted with two of William's barons to overthrow him. William was so disappointed that he had Waltheof executed. This was a painful decision, for William, despite what propagandists of later years said, was opposed in principle to capital punishment.
It would be idle, however, to pretend that the English folk were happy under the regime of William the Conqueror. He caused great misery by turning large tracts of cultivated land into hunting forests. His code of punishments were barbarously cruel. Yet it would be equally false to say that the plight of the ordinary Saxon was any worse than what they had been used to. William did not introduce what has been called feudalism to England, a term which was invented by historians to describe a hierarchy of land ownership and associated obligations, and which did not appear in print until 1614. Under this system, the king was at the head as the owner of all the land. He granted large estates to nobles and barons, who were called tenants-in-chief, who were bound by these grants to fight for the king. The tenants-in-chief in their turn granted part of their estates to their followers, who were then called mesne-tenants, i.e. intermediate tenants, who were bound in their turn to obey the tenants-in-chief. Mesne-tenants could regrant part of their estates. And below these classes of free tenants were vast numbers of serfs, who had very small holdings, and had in return for this to work upon the lord's land. In simplest idea it was regular; in practice and working it was confused and disorderly, for men owed all sorts of duties to many different persons. For example, the same man might hold some land from the king, some from the church, and some from a baron.
English society, pre-1066, was also based on a sort of pyramid; from king to slave. Life at the very bottom of the Anglo-Saxon pyramid suggests that the pre-Conquest period was not some golden age of liberty, for, unlike the Normans, the English ruling class engaged in the slave trade. One example of this was them selling their female servants, when pregnant by them, either to public prostitution or to foreign slavery.
William invaded England at the head of a European army, which, with Pope Hildebrand's blessing, sought to reimpose the tax paid to his church - called Peter's Pence. He fought under a papal banner, and carried into battle a string of papal relics round his neck. However, when becoming King, he refused to give the Pope fealty.
The conquered Anglo-Saxons were not a nation unified against a foreign foe. Archbishop Wulfstan's Sermon of the Wolf, 1014, tells the story of 'wavering loyalties among men.' He said that 'too often a kinsman does not protect a kinsman any more than a stranger'; that there was 'a heedless acceptance of alien modes of conduct.' Wulfstan's comments concerned the Danish occupancy of much of England and the payment of Danegeld to them, £48,000 in 1012, to not encroach any further. 'But all the insults we often suffer we repay with honouring those who insult us; we pay them continually and they humiliate us daily.'
Harold Godwinson did not command the support of the majority of the English nobility. The haste in which Harold acted after the Confessor died in claiming the throne indicates the weakness of his position. Other Ealdormen, apart from his brothers, did not attend his coronation. He married the sister of the two most important absentees, Edwin and Morcar, but this did not influence them enough to fight with him. Like Duke William, the men he led at Senlac were almost all mercenaries.
(1) Regum Anglo-Normannorum, the Acta of William I, 1066-1087- David Bates, ed., 1998
(2) Domesday Book, folio 322v
14VI. THOMAS (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13)
m. MATILDA d'AUBIGNY (b.c.1120, d. 1180)
Thomas de Colleville, the youngest son of this Anglo-Norman family, obtained, by gift of his father,Yearsley, also spelt Everley, Ifferley, and Yresley, a name deriving from Efor's Leigh, meaning field of the wild boar, near York, where he granted lands to Byland Abbey: 'In the reign of Stephen, Thomas de Colvyle gave pasture in the wood of Eversley [Yearsley] to Byland Abbey.'(1) He married Matilda d'Aubigny, who was third witness, after two canons, to a charter in which her husband granted lands to Newburgh Pryory, c.1150. She was probably a close relative of Roger de Mowbray, perhaps his cousin or half-sister, a sister of Sampson d'Aubigny.(2) A Pipe Roll, Henry II., c.1170, states that 'Matilda de Colleville renders account of £ .... that her sons may secure the inheritance of their father's lands, She has paid it into the treasury. And she is quit.' The land held by Roger de Mowbray, and his mesne-tenant, Thomas de Colville, centred around Coxwold, was in the centre of a hostile wappentake. Wappentake is the name given to Viking districts. For example, the village of Sadberge, between Stockton and Darlington, was once the capital or Wappentake of the Viking area north of the Tees known as the Earldom of Sadberge, which stretched from Hartlepool to Teesdale. Wappentakes were found in those parts of England settled by Scandinavian settlers, and continued to be important administrative centres in medieval times.Coxwold was situated in the Wappentake of Northallerton, in North Yorkshire. The word wappentake literally means Weapon Taking, and refers to the way in which land was held in return for military service to a chief.
Soon after the Conquest the family of Colville was seated in Coxwold. 'The Colvilles are enumerated among the benefactors to Newburgh Priory, and also to Byland Abbey; and from them was descended the Fifeshire family of the same name. We are not aware either how or when their connection with Coxwold was severed, but their old hall remains, though vastly changed since they left it.' (3)
'Lord Thomas de Colvyle gave to God and the monks all the land which is between the pool of their mill and Thorpe. He gave also all Bersclyve and Bertoft, and the appertenances of the vill of Cuckwald [Coxwold], lying to the north toward Whitaker, to do there with whatsoever they would for ever.'(4) The man to whom he was mesne-tenant, Roger de Mowbray, (b. 1119, d.1188), was a great aristocrat, and a man of huge wealth. His descendants were later made Dukes of Norfolk. He had vast numbers of gowns for every occasion, and was particularly keen on a bright scarlet cape that he wore, becoming known as The Scarlet Lord as a result. On a more serious note, he was renowned for his charity. Whenever he went, his retainers handed out money to the poor, for he hated to see poverty around him. Roger de Mowbray was, as were William and Alan de Percy, a kinsman of the Crispins, certainly by the wider standards of what then constituted kinship. They shared the same Norwegian ancestry. In this regard, they did not consider themselves to be members of seperate families. They were members of the same kinship group, whose interests were best served by their combined economic and political power.
Thomas de Colville, as his father, lived in a harsh world. William the Conqueror's son, Henry I, died in 1135 without legitimate male issue, his only legitimate son drowned in 1120. With the death of Henry I, a civil war erupted over the question of who would succeed to the throne. Their were two claimants: Firstly, Matilda, daughter of Henry I., and designated heiress; her husband was Geoffrey Plantagenet, count of Anjou; their son was Henry Plantagenet, destined to become Henry II. This Geoffrey is the direct descendant, as said, of Eve de Montfort's niece, Bertrade de Montfort. She was assisted in her campaign by Robert of Gloucester, her half-brother, eldest bastard son of Henry I., and her uncle, David of Scotland. Secondly, Stephen of Blois, Count of Boulogne and Mortain, and son of William the Conqueror's daughter, Adela. Stephen was a direct descendant of Theobald 1., Count of Blois, brother of the aforementioned Gerlotte de Blois. The result was supposed anarchy between 1139 and 1153. The disputants bid for the loyalty of the barons, and many of the barons shifted allegiance as it suited their family interests.
The Peterborough version of The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle describes a dreadful period of chaos: 'The land was left untilled, and the impliments of husbandry abandoned. Torture, murder, pillage, fire, slavery, were the weapons the fired soldiery fought with, and the castles were the homes of licensed robbers. Abbeys were converted into fortresses, and the soldiery, secure within their moats, set all law and justice aside.'
This was almost certainly a great distortion of events, one which has been taught to generations of schoolchildren, and cited as an example of what happens when government breaks down. Peterborough was one of the few areas where government had ceased to be effective. Somewhat paradoxically, after the description of chaos is a lengthy account of how prosperous Peterborough Abbey was during this period! The fact is that what little fighting took place in the civil war was in Wiltshire and Gloucestershire, in the middle of Stephen's reign. It was not that the English had experienced anarchy, but rather that they had come too close to it for comfort. Future historians engaged in re-writing history to suit the purposes of governments who could cite a dreadful example of an alternative to their rule.
More factually, King David of Scotland's army invaded England in 1138. David's forces were defeated at the Battle of the Standard, in Northalerton, by the levies of Yorkshire, inspired by a wagon that bore on its mast the standards of theYorkshire saints - St. Peter of York, St. Wilfred of Ripon, St. John of Beverley, and St.Cuthbert of Durham. Thomas de Colville and Roger de Mowbray were a part of this victorious army. Roger was noted as having performed with valour. [Aelred of Rievaulx.] Two miles on the road to Darlington a stone obelisk marks the site of the battle.
Home-life was also troublesome. In this period, the centre of life in castles and manors was the great hall, a large chamber safely built upon the second floor. These halls were poorly lit, due to the need for massive walls with small windows for defense from attack. There were no chimneys, and the fireplace was in the middle of the hall. Smoke escaped by the way of louvres in the roof.
There were compensations. The upper class enjoyed a varied diet. Meat, fish, pastries, and all manner of vegetables were common, as well as fresh bread, cheese, and fruit. Spitted boar, roast swan, or peacock might be added at a feast. Weak ale was the most common drink, as water was often the source of disease, and was drunk soon after brewing. Meat was cut with daggers, and all eating was done with the fingers from trenchers, or hollowed out husks of bread. One trencher was used by two people, and one drinking cup. Scraps were thrown on the floor for the dogs to finish.
Wives of noble status supervised officials who, in turn, directed the rest of the staff. In this period, however, the influence of the Church and its teaching led to women being considered more or less explicitly the source of physical temptation. The relevailles ceremony - a religious ceremony in which a priest blesses a woman after childbirth - is very revealing in this respect, as it shows that the woman alone was considered to be tainted.
By contrast to the nobleman and his lady, peasant families lived in rough huts on dirt floors, with no chimneys or windows. Often, one end of the hut was given over to storing livestock. Furnishings were sparse; three legged stools, a trestle table, beds on the floor softened with straw or leaves. The peasant diet was mainly porridge, cheese, black bread, and a few home-grown vegetables.
(1) The Yorkshire Archeological Journal, vol. xiv. See also Burton, Mon. Ebor., 72
(2) Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, 1036-1300- Institute of Historical Research- vol. vi., pp. 87-89, 1999
(3) Bulmers Directory, 1890
(4) Foundations of Bylands Abbey, Gentleman's Magazine, 1843
15II. RICHARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14)
m. EMMA de LONGVILLIERS (b.c.1152, d. 1220), d. of Eudo de Longvillier and Agnes de Neville, Seneschal to the de Lacy family
Richard de Ifferley is mentioned in the Boldon Book of 1183 as holding lands in Stanhope, Durham: 'Richard de Ifferley holds 48 acres, and renders 8s. for his life, and his heir after him shall render 10s.' Richard de Ifferley held lands at Stanhope from the See of Durham, with the office of Seneschal.
16I. BERNARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15)
m. MARGARET de CHAWORTH (b.c.1198, d. 1260)
E. A. Freeman, for whom genealogy was a distraction from his academic work, identified Richard de Ifferley's son as Bernard de Ifferley, who may well have been the Bernardus Magistratus often mentioned as witness to charters concerning land grants in Durham, c.1220. He married Margaret de Chaworth, the sister of Ellen de Chaworth, who was married to Bernard's cousin, John de Longvilliers I.
Professor Freeman used court evidence - Rot. Orig. Cur. Scac. i. 86 - to identify that a son of Bernard de Ifferley was called William de Stanhope. He made the assumption that Bernard's grandson, Richard de Stanhope, was the son of this William. This does not agree with the lineage given by 5th. Earl Stanhope, better known as Lord Mahon, also an eminent historian, who, in 1835, was under secretary for foreign affairs. He was interested in antiquities, being a trustee of the British Museum, and in 1869 founded the Historical Manuscripts Commission. His works continue to be of great importance on account of his unique access to antiquarian manuscripts. He worked closely with his friend, the eminent academic and antiquary, Sir Henry Ellis.
This lineage is also documented thus: 'The first recorded ancestor of this knightly and noble family is Walter de Stanhope, whose son Richard died in 1338, or the following year.' (1)
The combined detection of Freeman and Mahon suggests that Bernard had two sons, Walter de Stanhope, and William de Stanhope.
(1) Patronymica Britannica- Mark Anthony Lower- p. 327. 1860
17I. WALTER (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16)
m. MARGARET de LONGVILLIERS (b.c.1228, d. 1310)
That Walter de Stanhope was the progenitor of those decribed hereafter is affirmed in a letter from Charles, Lord Stanhope, to his sister, Lady Tollemache, dated 12/10/1608. This letter was accompanied by an emblazoned pedigree of the Stanhopes, from Walter de Stanhope, father of Richard, who died in 1338, to James, first Lord Stanhope of Elvaston.(1) Issue-
(1) Harl. MSS- No. 1555
18I. RICHARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17)
m. ELLOTA de LONGVILLIERS
5th. Earl Stanhope(1) quotes from The History of Durham by William Hutchinson, 1794, vol. iii. p. 295, to state that:
'The first of the name Stanhope we find holding lands in Stanhope was Richard de Stanhope, the son of Walter de Stanhope, who died seised of a messuage of 22 acres of land in the fifth year of Bishop Bury, 1338-1339, charged with a mark yearly to Peter de Stanford. In the ninth year of Bishop Hatfield, 1354, one of this family, William, died seised of 24 acres of land and 15 acres he had acquired of Robert Featherstonhalgh, and left a daughter, Margaret de Stanhope, his heir, after which period we do not find any of the Stanhopes named in the records.'
The Stanhopes and their descendants continued to bear the arms of Colville, viz. a cross, until the 15th.Century, when the present modification was adopted.
These Stanhopes were obviously not large landowners. 'The conjecture of Stanhope being the possession of that family is not supported by any evidence come to our knowledge, save only the small portions of property after mentioned to be held by those of the name Stanhope.'(2) Thomas de Colville, the aforementioned constable of Dumfries, gave land, in Galloway, to Vaudey Abbey, to pray for the souls of dead Scottish Kings.The fact that a Lincolnshire Abbey received land in Galloway for the souls of Scottish Kings is only explicable because of the existence of an aristocratic family with members in both kingdoms.(3) The network of relations was vitally important, providing support in times of need, and promotion when influence permitted. The family of de Colville, although geographically dispersed, was a powerful political entity.
The Bolden Book was a work commisioned by Bishop Hugh Pudsey, to whom Richard de Ifferley was Senechal. Hugh de Pudsey [Puiset] was a cousin of King Stephen, both being of the aforementioned family of de Blois. King Stephen's sister, Maud, married Richard D'Avranches, 2nd. Earl of Chester, g.g.g. grandson of Rolf Turstain, pointing to earlier associations between these families. The celebrated Domesday Book had stopped short of the Tees, and the Boldon Book gives an invaluable insight into land ownership and life in the Palatinate in the late 12th century. We find cartloads of venison being transported between Stanhope and Durham. 'Moreover, all the villans make at the great hunts a kitchen, and larder, and a kennel, and they find a settle in the hall, and in the chapel and in the chamber, and carry all the Bishops carrody from Wolsingham to the Lodges.' Some of the personal names are fascinating. We find a Richard the ruddy holding 20 acres, and Ralph the crafty holding 12 acres 'for as long as it pleases the Bishop.'
This period of history was characterised by a high volume of serious crime. The justices who visited Lincoln in 1202 found 114 cases of homicide, 89 of robbery, usually with violence, 65 of wounding, 49 of rape, and a great many others. Moreover, most crimes never came before the court, for unwillingness to lay charges.
The place-name Stanhope comes from two Old English elements, stan or stone, and hop or side valley, thus it means the stone-sided valley. The name was originally given to the valley of the Stanhope Burn which enters the river Wear at this point, but then became transferred to the settlement which grew up at the junction. The place-name Stanhope is first mentioned about 1170 in a charter relating to the family of Bishop Hugh de Pudsey. Stanhope Park occurs in many medieval documents as one of the Bishop of Durham's hunting preserves.
(1) Notices of The Stanhopes As Esquires And Knights and Until Their First Peerages In 1605 And 1616, unpublished, 1855
(2) The History of Durham by William Hutchinson, 1794, vol. iii. p. 292
(3) The Anglo-Norman Era in Scottish History- G. Barrow, 1980
19I. RICHARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18)
m. ALICE de HOUGHTON (b.c.1310, d. 1360)
Sir Richard Stanhope, Knight, son of Richard, and grandson of Walter, fixed his residence at Newcastle-upon Tyne. He possessed 'ample' estates in Northern England. He was chosen mayor of that town in 1364. He obtained, in 1350, a grant of the third part of the village and fishery of Paxton on the Tweed, in consideration for services against the Scots. Sir Richard married the heiress Alice de Houghton. Houghton lies between Clumber and East Retford, and formed part of the domain of the Longvilliers, being initially called Houghton Longvilliers, and more recently called Haughton.
20I. JOHN (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19)
m.c.1366 ELIABETH MAULOVEL (b.c.1346, d. 1395)
Sir John was M.P. for Newcastle in 1359, and its mayor in 1366. He was also Escheator for Notts. and Derbyshire in 1365, and Sheriff of Notts. and Derbyshire in 1373. He gained, after 30 May1369, Rampton, Notts. by his marriage to the heiress Elizabeth Maulovel. In 1350, he is mentioned in a list of persons who had the King's permission to travel to Rome: 'Johannes de Stanhope, cum uno garcione et uno equo.' (1)
These Stanhopes lived through one of the most turbulent times of English history. In 1349, a devastating plague called the Black Death arrived in England from the Continent. It began with a swelling in the armpits, high fever, violent spasms, and vomiting of blood. Black spots broke out over the body. Death was almost inevitable. One third of the entire population died. Whole villages stood empty. To say that labour was scarce is far below the mark. In places it was not to be had for love or money. The rate of wages soared. The very existence of the class that Sir Richard Stanhope represented was threatened. They passed a law - the Labourers' Statute - stating that wages must remain at pre-plague rates. They might as well have tried to stop the wind from blowing. England was in a revolutionary condition. Priests in the pulpit took the people's side. One in particular, a priest of Kent, John Ball, preached a theory of a new and startling kind: All men were equal. Society as it stood was rotten. That the rich man should parade in his velvet and his ermine, while the poor man shivered in his frieze, was against the laws nature, justice, and God. The Black Death had followed hard on the heels of what has been called a little ice age. There were great floods between 1315 and 1317. Temperatures plunged. There were sheep and cattle plagues. Crops failed. We are told in the Annals of Bermondsey that in 1348 the poor ate dogs, cats, the dung of doves, and their own children.
In 1377, a poll tax was levied to pay for the costly wars with France. Three years later, this unpopular levy was repeated - a shilling per head from every family in England. A shilling was equivalent to a weeks wages. The people's blood was up, and in a moment they were up in arms. Essex was first; Kent followed, and Canterbury was overrun with revolutionary mobs. Risings in the north and west were slow, but the home counties were soon in a blaze. There was no standing army, no regular police, and the upper classes were forced to take refuge in the woods. Halls were burnt and looted; monasteries attacked. In London, a mob attacked the Savoy Palace, home to John of Gaunt, uncle to the King, and the best hated man in all the land. Prisons were attacked, and prisoners released. The mob surrounded the Tower, where the young King and his court took refuge.That the rebels leader, Wat Tyler, was slain as he addressed the Royal Court the following day at Smithfield Market, and that the rebels were made false promises of reform by the young king, is well known. What is not is that orders were given for a terrible revenge. Peasants were everywhere arrested, tried, hung, quartered, disemboweled by dozens at a time.
(1) Rymer's Foedera, vol. v. p. 683, 1704-1735
21III. RICHARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19, JOHN 20)
m. 1. JOHANNA de STALY (b.1370, d.1410) d. of Robert de Staly
2. Maud, sister and heir to Ralph, Lord Cromwell, of Tattershall Castle, Lincolnshire
d. Easter Monday 1436
Sir Richard on the decease of his elder brother, was Knight of the Bath at the coronation of Henry IV., 1399, and also M P. for Nottingham. He was also Sheriff of that county and of Derbyshire. When he died in 1436 he was seised of the manors of Rampton, Egmanton, Skegby, South Cotham; the third part of the manor of Tuxford, and the manor of Ansty, Warwick.
Sir Richard's wife, Johanna de Staly, was the daughter of Robert de Staly. These Stalys had anciently been important Anglo Saxon thegns, and had regained their lands through a marriage between Adam de Staly and Alice de Percy, daughter of William de Percy of Kildale. Adam de Staly's ancestor, Uctred, was a tenant of Roger de Mowbray, and, as such, would have been well known to Thomas de Colleville. The name of the family is given as Staley or Stalley in the Herald's Visitation of Nottinghamshire, MS. Brit. Mus., 1614.
Inscript. Rampton Chuch, as recorded c.1850.
'Hic jacet Ric. Stanhop Miles et Johanna uzor ejus quae fuit
filia Rob. de Staly qui obiit primo die Aprilis Anno Domini
MCCCC ....... et predicta Johanna obiit ...... mo die Septembe.
Anno Domini Mccccx, quo .......'
Richard's second wife, Maud, was sister and heir to Ralph, Lord Cromwell, of Tattershall Castle in Lincolnshire, Treasurer of England who had secured his inheritance of the Heriz estates. By her he had one son, Henry, who died young, and two daughters, who, in right of their mother, held great fortunes. The elder, Joan Stanhope, married, Humphrey Bourchier, a cousin of Edward IV.
Issue- First six children by Johanna, last three by Maud.
22I. RICHARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19, JOHN 20, RICHARD 21)
m. ELIZABETH MARKHAM (b.c.1390, d. 1438), d. of Sir John Markham the younger
d. 2 Mar. 1432
bur. Tuxford Church
St. Nicholas Church- Tuxford
Sir Richard Stanhope, who died before his father and married Elizabeth Markham, daughter of Sir John Markham, the younger, (b.1368, d.1409), Chief Justice of the King's Bench, and Margaret Leeke, (b.1374, d.1425), daughter and coheir of Simon Leeke of Cotham, Notts.(1)
The two manors of Markham, anciently written Marcham, both near Tuxford, West and East Markham, were the property of the above Sir John Markham. The Markham family were originally of the family of de Lizours. Roger de Lizours was a mesne-tenant of the great Norman magnate Roger de Busli, holding land in East Markham. He had gained this tenantship by marrying the heiress of a local Saxon thegn called Ulchel. Roger's son was Fulc de Lizours. A charter of 1110 states that Fulc 'gave to the monastery of St. Mary of Blithe and the monks there a toft.' He assumed the name of his place of residence, calling himself Fullc de Marcham. His son was Sir Alexander de Marcham, (b.1145, d.1210), Castellan of Nottingham Castle.
The marriages between the families of Lexington, Markham, Longvilliers, Maulovel, and Stanhope are of a complex nature. A little understanding of them, however, throws much light on the vast network of cousins, in-laws, aunts and uncles, that constituted the medieval extended family, which provided the connections that made advantageous marriages possible.
Sir Alexander de Marcham's son, Sir William Markham, (b.1181, d.1267), who inherited the estates of his father, married the heiress Cecilia de Lexington, (b.1195, d.1230), one of six children of Richard de Lexington, (b.1170, d.1220), and Matilda de Cauz, (b.1180, b.1225). Their son, Robert Markham, (b.1210, d.1289), dates as inquis. post mortem, married Sarah Snitterton, (b.1220, d.1274), heiress of Jordan de Snitterton, in the county of Derby, ancestor of the Shirleys.Their daughter, Bertha Markham, (b.1248, d.1305), married William de Longvilliers, (b.1250, d.1281), Lord of Gargrave, dates as inquis. post mortem. The Longvilliers acquired a third part of Tuxford by this marriage with Bertha Markham, who had inherited it from her grandmother.
William de Longvilliers and Bertha Markham had issue, among which were: Ellota de Longvilliers, who married, as said, Richard de Stanhope, and Thomas de Longvilliers, (b.1279, d.1349), Baron of the Realm, who married Maud de Creting, (b.1290, d.1320). Their daughter was the Longvilliers heiress Petronilla Longvilliers, (b.1307, d.1341). Her name is given as Petronilla, not Elizabeth, in an inquisition of 1341, and also in the Subsidy Roll of 1327. She married Robert Maulovel, (b.1290, d.1335), descendant of Nigelus of Rampton, mesne-tenant of Roger de Busli.(2)
Their son was Stephen Maulovel, (b.1325, d.1363), who married Frances de Mering, (b.1330, d.1360), dates as inquis. post mortem. Stephen Maulovel was cousin and heir of John Longvilliers V., (b.1347, d.1369), who was the son of John Longvilliers IV., (b.1322, d.1361), the brother of Petronilla Longvilliers.
Both Robert and Petronilla died while Stephen Maulovel was a minor, and so the estates were held by the King. Stephen was of age in 1346, and in that year did homage of the lord of Tickhill, paying one knight's fee and one quarter knight's fee. He was the father of Elizabeth Maulovel, wife , as said, of Sir John Stanhope the elder.
What can we know of Elizabeth Markham and the life of the other medieval ladies herein mentioned? Why should we know of them? I repeat what was said by way of introduction: The aim of any history, even a small one as this, should be to stir interest and appreciation, for without that all study of the past is dead and labour lost.
We often picture a medieval woman as young and beautiful, who was charming to men, and waited for her knight to rescue her from the tower. This could not be further from the truth. In medieval society, women gained their status through advantageous marriages. Women from wealthy families were normally engaged to be married by their fathers while they were still in their cradles. A girl was held capable of consenting to marriage at the age of seven, and could have her first child by the age of thirteen.
The girl's father was the sole person who selected a suitable husband. If he died before she was married, he would have made sure to have left her a suitable dowry, to either wed her or put her into a nunnery.
Many girls of wealthy families were educated by being sent to nunneries. Young girls were taught to read and write, tell stories, read romances, and learn of ladies fashion and of manners.
Such girls were also sent to the households of great ladies; this way they could learn the etiquette of refined society. Some fathers thought it was more important for a girl to be better equipped with proper manners than intellect.
Wives had to be able to take their husbands places at all times. This was very hard work. She had to be capable of taking her husband's place during his absences. She had to look after the manor, collect rents, and supervise the farming.
She had to know about law, in case her lord's rights were ever violated. She had to be able to plan expenses wisely. In a very large manor, several small rooms were set up to accommodate the making of consumable goods. Ale was brewed in the brew-house. Bread was baked in the bake house. Butter and cheese were made in the dairy.
The lady of the manor's duties also included governing the house at all times. She monitored daily duties and distributed functions, only going into town herself to buy the finest fish, best wines, and exotic spices from local merchants; thus she also had to know how to bargain. She had to have knowledge of gardening, and be able to hire help to assist her. She could draw up wills and make contracts. She could sue or be sued.
(1) Thoroton's History of Nottinghamshire- Throsby's edition- vol. iii. pp. 226-233, 1797
(2) Magna Britannia- Rev. Daniel Lysons, vol v. , 1817
23I. JOHN (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19, JOHN 20, RICHARD 21, RICHARD 22)
m. 1. Catherine, d. of Richard Molineaux (m.1. Sir Robert Ratcliffe, d.s.p.) 2. ELIZABETH TALBOT (b.c.1420, d. 1451), d. of Sir Thomas Talbot of Bashall, York d. 1473
Sir John, not to be confused with his cousin so named, was many years M.P. for Notts., and thrice was the Sheriff of Nottingham and Derby. He succeeded his grandfather in 1436. In the civil wars of the time, he took part with the House of Lancaster. John's second wife, Elizabeth Talbot, was daughter of Sir Thomas Talbot, grandson of Sir Gilbert Talbot and Petronella Butler, of Bashall, in the county of York, parish Mitton Magna, and Alice Tempest, daughter of Sir John Tempest of Bracewell. The ancestor of these Talbots first obtained the manor of Bashall in 1256, by grant from Edmund Lacy, Constable of Chester. They became extinct in the male line temp. Charles I.(1)
Earl Stanhope observed that Sir John Stanhope had erected 'a tombstone on the south side of the chancel of Rampton church, to the memory of his wife.' It read: 'Hic Jacet Elizebetha .... filia Thos Talbot Milit de Bashall .... Septemb. Anno Domini mccccli .... Cujus animae propitietur Deus. Amen.' She was of the ancient family of Tailbois, previously mentioned as tenants of William Malet in Normandy. Sir Thomas Talbot and Alice Tempest also had issue: Sir Thomas Talbot, and Edmund Talbot, erroneously implicated in the betrayal of Henry VI.
(1) History of Whalley- Dr. Whitaker- p. 402, 1801
24II. THOMAS- (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19, JOHN 20, RICHARD 21, RICHARD 22, JOHN 23)
m. MARY JERNINGHAM, d. of John Jerningham the younger of Somerleyton, Suffolk (b.c. 1444, d. 1500)
All Saints Church- Rampton
Sir Thomas of Rampton, was in 4 Edward IV., 1475, 'retained by indenture to attend the king in person in his wars with France, with one man-at-arms and ten archers, receiving £20 19s. 6d. in band towards his wages on that account.'(1) It is only too easy to mention that so and so fought in such and such a battle, without pausing to consider what that really meant. The warfare between France and England, engaged in by Sir Thomas Stanhope, witnessed the increasing use of new weapons, which meant that the ruling classes were losing their traditional superiority on the field of battle. Time after time, armoured aristocrats, such as Sir Thomas Stanhope, were slaughtered by peasants and urban militia using longbows, crossbows, pikes and gunpowder.
Sir Thomas married Mary Jerningham, daughter of John Jerningham, (b.1420, d.1503), the younger, of Somerleyton, in Suffolk. It seems to be accepted, through the process of repetition, that the family of Jerningham was of Scandinavian origin, a view that is not supported by any documentary evidence. There is no mention of them in the Domesday Book. The Black Book of the Exchequer, 1167, states that Hugh de Gernegan held one knights fee in the honor of Eye. This Hugh was the son of Jernegan.(2) From him descended the Jerninghams of Somerleyton. The thirteenth in the line of their pedigree, John Jerningham, as above, married Isabella, daughter of Sir Gervase Clifton. Mary Jerningham had two brothers, Sir Edward and Sir Richard; the latter was knighted by Henry VIII. in the wars with Flanders, and was sent by him on a mission to Emperor Charles V.(3)
(1) Rymer's Foedera, vol xi. p. 844, 1704-1735
(2) Pipe Roll, 30 Henry II
(3) Betham's Baronetage, vol. i. p. 233, 1801
25I. EDWARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19, JOHN 20, RICHARD 21, RICHARD 22, JOHN 23, THOMAS 24)
m.1. ADELINA CLIFTON (b. 1474, d. 1496) d. of Sir Gervase Clifton of Rolleston
2. Elizabeth Bourchier, d. of Foulk Bourchier, Lord Fitz-Warren and Anne Plantagenet (m.2. Sir Richard Page of Beechwood, Herfordshire)
d. 6 June 1511
Sir Edward Stanhope, of Rampton and Houghton, was a principal commander of the army that beat Simnel's followers, at Stoke, in 1487. Ten years later, Sir Edward Stanhope fought against the Cornish rebels at Blackheath, and was knighted on the field of battle. In 1502, he was Steward of Wakefield and Constable of Sandale Castle, in the county of York. Like his predecessors, he was also Sheriff of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. On the 4th. October, 1509, he 'imparked 240 acres at Houghton by enclosing them with a paling for the purpose of rearing wild animals.' (1)
(1) Nottingham Enclosures Commission, 1517
26V. MICHAEL (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19, JOHN 20, RICHARD 21, RICHARD 22, JOHN 23, THOMAS 24, EDWARD 25)
m. ANNE RAWSON, d. Nicholas Rawson of Averly, Essex, d. 20 Feb. 1587/8
beheaded 26 Feb. 1552 Tower of London
Sir Michael Stanhope who succeeded to the family estates on the decease of his brother, and was placed on the Commission of Peace for Notts, in 1537. On the dissolution of the monasteries, 1536-1540, that is, the forced taking and redistribution of the vast and valuable lands of the Catholic Church, Michael Stanhope was granted Shelford priory, rectory, and manor; and also the priory of Lenton, together with the rectories of Gedlyng, Burton Jorze, and North Muskham, in the county of Nottingham; Rouceby and Westburgh, in the county of Lincoln, and Elvaston and Okbrook in Derbyshire.
It was no easy gain, however. When heads of monastic houses refused bribes of pensions to give up their estates, they were often imprisoned, tortured, or hung. This was the basis of Sir Michael Stanhope's wealth He was a courtier and parasite of the king, one of those who surrounded him, like vultures, gorging themselves on the fallen carcase of the Catholic Church. The result of such redistribution of wealth was mass poverty and homelessness, for many relied on the monastries for their living. The new land-grabbing Protestant aristocracy were hated. Riots, especially in the North, severely threatened the power of the regime, whose response was drastic. Defeated rioters were hanged and disemboweled, their bodies being left to hang in their villages as a warning to others. The rioters hatred did not abate, for such as Sir Michael Stanhope were the allies of one of the most despotic rulers that ever lived. To merely disagree with Henry VIII. was to invite unpleasant death. Sir Walter Raleigh said: 'If all the patterns of a mercilless tyrant had been lost to the world, they might have been found in this prince.' He was the first King of England that brought women to the block, and caused them to be tortured and burned. He was the only king who sought consolation for the imagined offences of his wives by plundering their relatives of their money. Not content with this, as any true tyrant, he sought to control opinions. He declared that the bible should not be read in public, and could only be read in private by people of noble or gentle birth. It was to this regime that Sir Michael Stanhope owed his ascendency. This is not to pass judgement. There is always the case for saying that people should be judged by the standard of their times, and, in this sense, Sir Michael Stanhope was no different from many of his fellows who believed in a natural order in society: 'In London the rich disdaineth the poor. The courtier the citizen. One occupation disdaineth another. The merchant the retailer. The retailer the craftsman. The better sort of craftsman the baser. The shoemaker the cobler.' (1)
His career had begun in the household of Thomas Manners, Earl of Rutland, and he became, after two years in the royal stables, esquire to Henry VIII. Soon after the accession of Edward VI., Michael Stanhope was knighted, serving in Parliament as one of the knights of the county of Nottingham; appointed Lieutenant of Hull, keeper of the royal parks in Nottinghamshire, Suffolk, and Surrey; chief gentleman of the Privy Chamber, and deputy to his brother-in-law, Edward Seymour, the Protector Somerset, in the guardianship of the king. The young king, Edward VI., was the son of Henry VIII., and his third wife, Jane Seymour, Edward Seymour's sister, and was like a shuttlecock in a game of rival courtiers. Thomas Seymour, Edward's younger brother, cited precedent for dividing power more equally between the leading men of the kingdom when the monarch was not of age to rule alone. For this, and encouraging senior courtiers to intercede on his behalf, he was beheaded. Kindred counted nought. Michael Stanhope was the link between Edward Seymour and the court. He controlled the royal purse. He also controlled access to the king: Michael Stanhope had 'issued a commaundment that if eny man shuld knock at the dore [of the king's chambers] thei shuld call hym up and waken hym before thei did open the dore.' (2) He did this on the command of his brother-in-law. He also, in 1547 and 1548, took items from the king's rooms in Whitehall Palace, and sent them to the chambers and houses of Edward and Anne Seymour.
All such power was lost on the Protector's fall. On the 16th of October, 1551, Somerset was arrested, and on the following day, Sir Michael Stanhope and other adherents were sent to the Tower, on a charge of conspiring against the life of Dudley, Earl of Warwick.
Again, it is important to look behind the official reasons given for this charge. Dispite the acquisition of Church lands, the treasury was empty. The currency had been debased, and all over the country, especially in the Eastern and Midland counties, there was seething discontent on the issue of enclosures. Not content with stealing land, and attracted by the profits to be made by the sale of wool, the aristocracy were turning ploughland into pasture; and as sheep needed less labour than tillage, there was an army of unemployed, some of whom took up the trade of brigandage. Riots followed. The most serious of these was in the Eastern counties, where a squire named Robert Ket took the lead of a mob which pulled down enclosures and tried unpopular landlords. Somerset hesitated to move against them, resulting in the rebellion becoming more dangerous. This made him the enemy of very powerful people. The rebellion was only dispersed through the ruthless action of Dudley, Earl of Warwick, Somerset's chief rival in the Council. An example of how worried the ruling class were at this time is given in a sermon preached in all English Churches in 1547:
'Almighty God hath created and appointed all things in heaven, earth, and waters, in a most excellent and perfect order. In heaven he hath appointed distinct or several orders and slates of archangels and angels. In earth he hath aligned and appointed kings, princes, with other governors under thern, in all good and necessary order. The water above is kept and raineth down in due time an season. The sun, moon, stars, rainbow, thunder, lightning, clouds, and all birds of the air, do keep their order. The earth, trees, seeds, plants, herbs, corn, grass, and all manner of beasts, keep themselves in their order: all the parts of the whole year, as winter, summer, months, nights, and days, continue in their order: all kinds of fish in the sea, rivers, and waters, with all fountains, springs, yea, the seas themselves, keep their comely curfew and order: and man himself also hath all his parts both within and without, as soul, heart, mind, memory, understanding, reason, speech, with all and singular corporal members of his body, in a profiltable, necessary, and pleasant order: every degree of people in their vocation, calling, and office, hath appointed to them their duty and order: some are in high degree, some inlow, some kings and princes, some inferiors and subjectgs, priests and laymen, masters and servants, fathers and children, husands and wives, rich and poor; and every one hath need of other; so that in all things is to be lauded and praised the goodly order of God, without the which no house, no city, no commonwealth can continue and endure, or last. For where there is no right order, there reigneth all abuse, carnal liberty, enormity, sin, and Babylonical confusion. Take away kings, princes, rulers, magistrates, judges and such estates of God's order, no man shall ride or go by the highway unrobbed, no man shall sleap in his own house or bed unkilled, no man shall keep his wife, children, and possessions in quietness, all things shall be common; and there must needs follow all mischief and utter destruction both of souls, bodies, goods, and commonwealth.'(3)
Sir Michael was tried on a charge of felony, condemned at a mock trial, and sentenced to be hanged, and on the commutation of this sentence, he was beheaded on Tower Hill, killed with three other Knights, Sir Thomas Arundel, Sir Miles Partridge, and Sir Ralph Vane. The warrant for his execution was dated February 25, 1552.(4) He was beheaded the next day, strongly protesting his innocence. Both Somerset and Dudley were ruthless and grasping people. Somerset ruled through a group of carefully chosen administrators, of lesser social standing, including his brother-in law, Sir Michael Stanhope. Somerset was 'looked down upon by everybody as a dry, sour, opinionated man.'(5) Dudley's ascendency cost him dearly, and readily condemned Michael Stanhope, his all too enthusiastic supporter, with him.
Dudley's ascendency was, however, short-lived. He realised his position was insecure. To make it safe, he contrived to have a sovereign under his influence. For that purpose, he chose Lady Jane Grey to be the successor of her cousin, Edward VI. She was, as said, distantly descended from Emma Crispin. He married her to his son, Guildford Dudley. The young king was persuaded to make a will in her favour, and this was scarcely made when Edward died . Lady Jane, a gentle and learned girl of 16, was declared queen on July 10th., 1553. Her father-in-law and other members of the Protestant nobility were, however, shocked to see that Mary, a staunchly Catholic daughter of Henry VIII., had the support of both the old Catholic nobility and that of the new Protestant nobility who feared Dudley. Mary marched to London with an army to claim the throne; Lady Jane was deposed without a struggle, and imprisoned on July 19th.. Dudley and many of his kind renounced Protestantism. This did not save Dudley from the scaffold. Protestant Bishops, such as Hooper, Ridley, Cramner, and Latimer, were burnt at the stake, "lighting that day," as Latimer bravely said, "a candle that would not be put out." Three hundred humbler victims also lost their life in the fires of Smithfield. The story of these people was enshrined in Foxe's Book of Martyrs, 1563. It became a common possession of the English people, and made 'Bloody Mary' an unforgettable name.
Lady Jane was also killed. About 10 o'clock on the morning of February 12th., 1554, Jane watched from her window in the Tower as her husband was led on his way to Tower Hill. She was still watching when his body was brought back into the Tower, his head wrapped in bandage at his side. Those in her company reported later that she wept openly at the sight, and was heard to utter his name.
Jane then made her way to the scaffold. Yeoman of the Guard surrounded the wooden structure that had been built the day before. At the scaffold, Jane was joined by several Tower chaplains. She said to one of them: "God grant you all your desires and accept my own hearty thanks for all your attention to me. Although indeed, those attentions have tried me more than death can now terrify me." She then climbed the stairs, 'nothing at all abashed .... neither her eyes moistened with tears, although her two gentlewomen .... wonderfully wept.'
She recited the fifty-first psalm in English. She then gave her gloves and handkerchief to her lady-in-waiting, Mrs Ellen. Mrs Ellen helped her to remove her headdress and neckerchief, and dispense with her heavy outer garment. The executioner then knelt and asked for Jane's forgiveness, which she gave "most willingly." There followed a five minute silence, whereby officials awaited a last-minute reprieve from Mary.
The executioner then told Jane where to stand. She replied, "I pray you despatch me quickly." She began to kneel, then hesitated and said, "Will you take it off before I lay me down?" The executioner answered, "No madame." Jane then tied the handkerchief around her eyes. Unable to locate the block, she became anxious, asking in a faltering voice "Where is it? What shall I do? Where is it?" Those who stood upon the scaffold seemed unsure of what to do. Someone climbed the scaffold and helped her to the block. Her last words were, "Lord, into thy hands I commend my spirit."
According to tradition, her head was then held aloft with the words, "So perish all the Queen's enemies. Behold, the head of a traitor."
Michael Stanhope's half-sister, Anne, Duchess of Somerset, was kept a prisoner in the tower until July, 1553, not being released until the accession of Queen Mary, her great friend. She died Easter-day, April 16, 1587. Earl Stanhope, in his 'Notices', wrote: 'Anne of Somerset is said by some writers to have had much pride and arrogance of temper; which may the rather be believed, since it appears that, during the Protectorate of the Duke, she was engaged in some dispute for precedence with the Queen Dowager, Katherine Parr. Something of the same spirit might be imputed to the first line of her epitaph: 'A Princess descended of noble lignage.' She married, secondly, Francis Newdigate of Hanworth, steward of her late husband.(6)
Anne Stanhope was allowed to retain the priory of Shelford, during her life, for the judicial murder of her husband was not personal but business. She was buried in Shelford Church. 'Lady Anne Stanhope lived widow 35 years, in which time she brought up all her younger children in virtue and learning, In her life-time she kept continually a worshipful house, relieved the poor daily, spent the most time of her latter days in prayer and using the church where God's word was preached. She died in the faith of Christ, in hope of a joyful resurrection.' (7)
(1) Thomas Nashe, 16th. Century poet
(2) Cecil Papers. Hatfield House Library
(3) An Exhortation Concerning Good Order, and Obedience to Rulers and Magistrates
(4) Rymer's Collection, vol. xv., 1704-1735
(5) Van der Delft, Dutch Embassador, 1547
(6) Hampton Court Rolls, 1583
(7) Inscription on the monument of Sir Michael Stanhope, elder of the name, in Shelford Church, as existing in 1841
27 V. EDWARD (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8, GUILLAUME 9, CRISPIN 10, GILBERT 11, WILLIAM 12, WILLIAM 13, THOMAS 14, RICHARD 15, BERNARD 16, WALTER 17, RICHARD 18, RICHARD 19, JOHN 20, RICHARD 21, RICHARD 22, JOHN 23, THOMAS 24, EDWARD 25, MICHAEL 26)
m. 1578 SUSAN COLESHILL, d. of Thomas Choleshill of Chigwell, Lincolnshire
d. 24 Apr. 1603
bur. Kirkby Wharfe, Yorkshire
Church of St. John the Baptist- Kirkby Wharfe, Yorkshire
Sir Edward Stanhope, the elder, represented successively Notts. and Yorkshire in Parliament, where his seats were Edlington and Grimston. He was treasurer of Gray's Inn, recorder of Doncaster, and a member of the Council of the North.
In the Chigwell parish church of St. Mary is the monument of Thomas Coleshill:
Against the south wall of the chancel is a monument of alabaster and veined marble, (with the effigies of the deceased in kneeling attitudes,) to the memory of Thomas Coleshill, Esq. (fn. 53) , servant to King Edward IV., Queen Mary, and Queen Elizabeth, and inspector of the customs for the city of London, ob. 1595. Mary, his wife, daughter of George Crayford, Esq. died in 1599: they were married fifty years. The monument was put up by Sufanna, wife of Sir Edward Stanhope, and Anne, wife of Jasper Leeke, Esq. daughters and coheirs of the deceased. (1) Issue-
(1) 'Chigwell', The Environs of London: volume 4: Counties of Herts, Essex & Kent (1796), pp. 111-129. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=45468
29I. ANSLECH de BASTEMBOURG (HALFDAN 1, EYSTEIN 2, HALFDAN 3, IVAR 4, EYSTEIN 5, RAGNVALD 6, HROLLAGER 7, HROLF 8)
m. GILLETTE de BEAUMONT (b.c. 922, d. 960)
Gillette brought with her as her marriage dowry estates in Flanders and Liseux. The senior branch of the family held the extensive barony of Bricquebac in Normandy for eight successive generations."
Stanhope Family Origins. com- Michael Stanhope