Roger De Lacy: Birth: 0002.
Note: OR "MATHILDE" Maude (or Mathilde) de Clare; m. William de Braose, b. perh aps c 1175, died Corfe or Windsor Castle, 1210, of starvati on by order of King John, son of William de Braose, d. 1211 , Lord of Bramber, Sussex, by his wife Maud de St. Valery . [Magna Charta Sureties line 28a-2] RESEARCH NOTES: sister of the treasurer of York Cathedral [Ref: Watney WALLOP #588, DNB v31388] possibly a sister of William De Rotherfield, married to a de Clere [Ref: John P. Ravilious SGM 9/30/2005-042129] As to the identity of Maud de Clere, wife of Roger de Lacy of Pontefract, Yorkshire (d. 1211), mother of John de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln, Magna Charta Surety, all we certainly know is that she was sister of the treasurer of York Cathedral. Sed et iste Rogerus constabularius duxit in uxorem Matildem de Clere, sororem thesaurarii Eboracensis Ecclesie, de qua genuit Johannem constabularium (Coucher Book of Kirkstall [Thoresby Society 8:241]). [Ref: Paul Reed SGM 2/7/1999-233456] _The Coucher Book of the Cistercian Abbey of Kirkstall_, ed by W. T. Lancaster and W. P. Baildon [Thoresby Society 8 (1904)], states that Roger de Lacy married Matilda/Maud de Clere, sister of the treasurer of the Church of York. W. Pailey Baildon was one of the best scolars of English Medieval documents at that time, so I doubt they misread the original. [Many other] accounts (foundation charters, genealogies of the founders, etc.) were written much later than the event; it is possible that the scribes, though possibly copying from an earlier text, erred and confused Roger's wife with his granddaughter Maud/Matilda, who married Richard de Clare, Earl of Gloucester and Hertford. A. B. Enden, _A Biographical Register of the Uniersity of Oxford to A. D. 1500_ 1:423-4 gives a long and detailed biography of Bogo/Bevis de Clare, who at one time was treasurer of the Church of York. But this source states that he was a "younger son of Rihard (de Clare), earl of Gloucester and Hertford. Studying at Oxford with his brother, Thomas, in 1257 ... presented by his father [to Rotherfield] May 1258." If this is true, Bogo would be sone of Maud de Lacy, not her brother. But as Gilbert de Clare, Maud de Lacy's eldest son, was born 2 September 1243, this would have Bogo being presented to Rotherfield at a very young age in 1258 if younger brother of Gilbert. But even placing Bogo back a generation, we would have that he was brother-in-law of Maud (de Lacy) de Clare not her brother. Bogo/Bevis died at London 26 Oct 1294. William Farrer's _Honours and Knights' Fees_ ... 2:202 reads "Upon Roger [de Lascy]'s death in 1211 his relict Matilda de Clare held West Halton in dower [citing to Bk of Feed, 285]. It would be Farrer who also introduced the "de Clare" into the Lacy pedigree in EYC. But, _The Book of Fees_ 285 does not designate her as "de Clare". Even if the accounts which call Mathilda "de Clere" and "sister of the treasurer" do not date before the fourteenth century, Maud (de Lacy) de Clare, wife of Earl Richard, was still living in 1288, Bogo de Clare until 1294. And Bogo de Clare held an extraordinary number of beneficies and positions, as well as being Papal chaplain by 1282 and King's clerk by 1285. If it were a slip of this Bogo de Clare, why call him treasurer? From Dugdale's Mon. Angl. 6:315: Iste Rogerus moriebatur in festo sancti Remigii, anno gratiae MCCXI. et cum domina Matilda unore sua septultus est in choro monachorum de locl benedicto de Stanlowe. So it appears Maud/Matilda was buried at Stanlow, Cheshire, which had been funded by the family of William fitzNigel. And from 5:534 Historia Laceiorum, from the account of the Abbey of Kirkstall, Iste Rogerus de Lacy duxit in uxorem Matildam de Clare sororem thesaurarii Eborum ecclesiae, de qua geuit Johanem, secundum constabularium, et comitem Lincolniae. Now this comes from an edition, though much expanded beyong the original, that sill contains numerous mistakes in transcription. I would certainly trust Pailey Baildon over the edotors of Mon. Angl. any day. But note: this would be the origin of John de Lacy's wife being called Maud "de Clare". It's appearance in CP, William Farrer's Honors and Knights' Feed, and EYC would all trace to this obviously well known public source. Taken with the problems of consanguinity, when her granddaughter married the Earl of Gloucester, I still believe that the rendering of "de Clere" is preferable, and that at least in any case we should believe that Maud was at least sister of the treasurer of the church of York, who would at that time also have been the Archdeacon of the East Riding. The various treasurers of York, taken from a detailed article by Charles Travis Clay in the Yorkshire Archaelogical Journal (v35, 1943, p7-35) This is the list we would have to choose from if Maud were actually sister of one of the trasurers of York. As Maud's son John was born ca 1192, we would expect Maud to have been at least 15, more likely older, therefore born before about 1177 or earlier. William FitzHerbert, later Archbishop York (St. Wm of York), 1127-1143 Hugh de Puiset, son of Hugh de Puiset Vicount of Chartres, 1143-1154 John of Canterbury, later Bishop of Poitiers, 1154-1162 Ralph de Warneville, later Bishop of Lisieux, 1167-1181 Geoffrey son of the King, 1182-89 (but then Maud would certainly been called daughter of the king, or at least of royal blood) Bouchard du Puiset, nephew of Hugh, BIshop of Durham, 1189-1196 Master Eustace, surname unknown, later Bishop of Ely, 1196-1198 Hamo, precentor of York, later Dean of York, 1199-1216 William 'the treasurer' surname unknown, 1218-1221, possibly Maud's brother William de Rotherfield, 1222 William 'the treasurer' without surname de Rotherfield, named in 1221, 22, 25, 26, 27, 30, and 37. Same or different? unknown Mag. Robert Haget 1241-1253 Mag. John le Romeyn, 1253-1255 [Ref: Paul Reed SGM 2/9/1999-042321] the list we would have to choose from if Maud were actually sister of one of the treasurers of York. As Maud's son John de Lacy was born ca. 1192, we would expect Maud to have then been at least fifteen--more likely older--therefore born before about 1177 or earlier. We'll start with some chronologically unlikely candidates just to be extremely thorough. William FitzHerbert, later Archbishop of York (St. William of York), a younger son of Herbert of Winchester, Chamberlain and treasurer of Henry I, was definitely treasurer by 1127, and possibly as early as 1113-14. He was elected Archbishop of York in June 1141. He was deposed in 1147, restored in 1153, and died on 8 June 1154. He was obviously born too early to be Maud's brother, aside from the fact that since he was made Archbishop, he would not have been referred to as treasurer in the Kirkstall account. Hugh de Puiset, Bishop of Durham from 1153 to his death in 1195, was probably son of Hugh de Puiset, vct.of Chartres, by Agnes, sister of King Stephen. William FitzHerbert continued to hold the treasurership of York and Archdeaconry until his consecration in 1143. Hugh de Puiset is known to have been treasurer by 24 July 1147, when he was described as the king's nephew and treasurer. He too would have been born too early, and attained the rank of Bishop. John of Canterbury, alias John Bellesmains [fair hands], succeeded Hugh as treasurer. He became Bishop of Poitiers in 1162, and held the Archbishopric of Lyons 1182-93, when he retired to Clairvaux Abbey, dying there about 1204. He was a friend of Thomas Becket. He was an Englishman; Walter Map states he was born at Canterbury. William Farrer mistakenly followed the theory that he was a son of William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu [notes to EYC i, no. 29, iii, no. 1830--so Farrer was not without mistakes in his identifications]. It was Paley Baildon who disproved another theory that the John Talvas [son of an Ivo Talvas], rector of Halifax, was identical to the treasurer. There is actually no evidence, Clay eventually concludes, to determine the treasurer's parentage or family. It is likely that John became treasurer in 1154, at about age thirty-two, so he was therefore born about 1122. This was a celebrated man who could not have been Maud's brother. He was still treasurer of York in 1162, but became Bishop of Poitiers, being consecrated 23 Sep. 1162. [Note that there is a possible, if unlikely, gap of about five years here.] Ralph de Warneville is the next known treasurer. He had been treasurer of Rouen, and continued to hold it concurrently with that of York after his appointment. He is described as treasurer of York by 1173, in which year King Henry II appointed him Chancellor. Clay concludes, though, that it is likely he became treasurer of York shortly after John of Canterbury was consecrated Bishop of Poitiers in 1162. Ralph held land in Yorkshire by 1162-6. Clay concludes that he was definitely treasurer by 1167. Ralph was appointed Bishop of Lisieux in 1181, when he was still Chancellor and treasurer. Ralph resigned the treasurership in return for a lands of great value. He died in 1191. Aside from Ralph being much older than Maud, as he became Chancellor, and Bishop of Poitiers, he would certainly not have been described only as 'treasurer' in the Kirkstall coucher book, and therefore could not be Maud's brother. Geoffrey son of the King was the next treasurer of York, succeeding after Ralph was appointed to the see of Lisieux. When he resigned the see of Lincoln he was made Chancellor, and received the Archdeaconries of Lincoln and Rouen, with the treasurership of York. He continued as treasurer until 1189, when he received the Archbishopric of York. Geoffrey was most likely made treasurer in 1182. His career 1191-1207 is well known. Geoffrey could not have been Maud's brother, aside from the fact that he became Archbishop, as she would certainly been called daughter of the king or at least of royal blood. I listed the previous chronologically unlikely candidates just to show there was no earlier candidate to whom Maud might have been sister. The following become more acceptable on chronological grounds, given that Maud may have been born about 1165-77. Bouchard du Puiset, nephew of Hugh, Bishop of Durham, was given the treasurership on 16 Sep. 1189 when Geoffrey was given the Archbishopric of York. Bouchard died as treasurer 6 Dec. 1196. He had witnessed charters of his cousin Henry du Puiset (son of the Bishop). Bouchard apparently retained the Archdeaconry of Durham, which position he held when he was appointed treasurer, until his death. It is chronologically possible that this Bouchard was Maud's brother. Master Eustace, the keeper of the king's seal, was given the treasurership of York on Bouchard's death. He was consecrated Bishop of Ely 8 March 1198 and made Chancellor. He died in 1215. Though his surname is unknown [so he could have been a de Clere], as he attained the rank of Bishop, I would doubt the clerics of Kirkstall would have missed that fact. He therefore would not have been Maud's brother. Hamo, precentor of York, who had expectations of becoming treasurer since 1181, attained the position by 1199, within a year after Eustace was consecrated Bishop of Ely. He became Dean of York between 1216 and 1218, but died by 1220. This Hamo had a son named Hamo, who witnessed a charter as 'son of the treasurer' to which the father Hamo was first witness. The son Hamo had letters of safe conduct issued on 12 May 1215. Hamo the father relinquished the treasurership when appointed Dean 1216-18. It is chronologically possible that this Hamo was Maud's brother, but I would tend to doubt it. And I would have expected cleric at Kirkstall to have made reference to the higher office of Dean of York if he were Maud's brother. William 'the treasurer' was the next to succeed as treasurer of York. But he was not Archdeacon of the East Riding, as that office was separated from the treasurership by 1218. William the treasurer also witnessed a charter in 1221. In the 1943 article detailing the biographies of these treasurers, Clay states that witnesses to a charter of Archbishop Gray dated 3 Sep. 1220 included William 'the treasurer,' William 'Archdeacon of the East Riding,' and William 'Archdeacon of Richmond,' and that they were therefore three separate men named William. This agrees with the statement that the Archdeaconry of the East Riding had been separated from the treasurership of York by 1218 [Clay, p. 30, citing _Reg. Gray_, p. 133n; _Cal. Papal Letters, i. 57 (see also VCH Yorks. 3:80)]. He also states that William the Archdeacon of Richmond and William the treasurer were also separate men according to another charter that same year [p. 31, citing _Reg. Gray_, pp. 139n]. THIS WILLIAM THE TREASURER, 1218-1221, COULD HAVE BEEN MAUD'S BROTHER. If older when appointed treasurer, he would still fit chronologically, and we know from other records that Maud was still then alive. The documents pertaining to him simply call him William 'the treasurer,' so his surname is undetermined. BUT [!] Sir Charles Travis Clay, author of that article, also edited _York Minster Fasti_ (YAS 123), published in 1958, reversing his original decision that there was a William 'the treasurer' who was succeeded by a William de Rothersfield as treasurer. He finally concludes that there were two men named William de Rotherield at the same time, one the treasurer, the other the Archdeacon of Richmond. William de Rotherfield was treasurer of York by 19 June 1222, when he received a quitclaim of land in Accomb, Yorkshire, as free alms belonging to the treasurership [_Yorks. Fines, 1218-31, p. 46]. William 'the treasurer' [without the surname de Rotherfield] was named in documents in 1221 as successor of Hamo, in 1222, IN 1225 (KIRKSTALL COUCHER, NO. 368), in 1226, 1227, 1230 and 1237. [Note that It is this Kirkstall Coucher Book that states that Maud was sister of the treasurer of York, and includes a separate mention of William "the treasurer of York" in 1225.] William de Rotherfield is called Archdeacon of Richmond on 13 May 1238 [_Reg. Gray_, p. 81]. But William de Rotherfield was succeeded in that post by 17 Feb. 1238/9. Clay had originally concluded that he was the William who was mentioned [without surname] as Archdeacon of Richmond in the 1217-18 document. There are also references to William Archdeacon of Richmond [no surname] in 1220 and 1224. And the William Archdeacon of Richmond in 1220 was not the William the treasurer. William de Rutherfield, formerly treasurer of York, was mentioned on 18 April 1242 after his death. He was dead by 22 March 1241/2 by which time Robert Haget was appointed treasurer. [Ref: Paul Reed SGM 2/12/1999-121823] William Farrer and J[ohn] Brownbill were editors of the Victoria County History of Lancaster, v. 1 (London, 1906). They go into a detailed study of the heirs of William fitz Nigel, the part of which holds our interest being on pp. 298-305. [p. 304] "Maud, the wife of Roger survived her husband, and was living about 1220-1225, having had assigned to her in dower 28 librates if land in Ingoldmells and Holton le Moor, co. Lincoln, besides the demesne manors which belonged to the honour of Pontefract." [p. 304, n. 11] "The statement, which originated in the _Historia Laceiorum_ (_Mon. Angl._ vi. 315), that Roger de Lacy's wife was Maud, sister of [Bevis] de Clare, treasurer of York, is, of course, a grotesque error, seeing that Bevis de Clare, alias de Fairfax, was treasurer of York from 1285 to about 1291." [Ref: Paul Reed SGM 2/17/1999-045420] The treasurer William de Rotherfield belonged to a family that at the very best could only be considered minor gentry from a very rural area. Again, the only reason I could imagine that would lead Roger de Lacy to marry her (if Maud were a Rotherfield) would be that she was extraordinarily beautiful. If this were the case I would almost think some chronicler would have mentioned it (it makes good story). Remember, Roger did have the highest income in England (aside from the King) at that time [according to Sidney Painter's study, and he made a specialty of the reign of King John]. It would be very believable, on the other hand, if Roger de Lacy married the sister of Bouchard du Puiset, treasurer of York in 1189, which is when Roger de Lacy would have married his wife Maud (1189-91). If Maud's brother were treasurer at the time she married, Bouchard would be our only choice. [Ref: Paul Reed SGM 2/18/1999-090737] likely a member of the Clere family of Sinnington and Shere, co Yorks (later of Bramley, Surrey) [Ref: John P. Ravilious SGM 9/30/2005-042129] RESEARCH NOTES: maritagium was the manor of Buckingham, co Bucks [Ref: Weis AR7 #63A] The Earl's daughter Matilda was married to William de Braose (d.1210), eldest son of the great marcher baron William de Braose (d.1211), lord of Brecknick, Abergavenny, Builth, Radnor, and Gower, who was exiled by King John. In 1210, the younger William and his mothr were starved to death by John, and Painter has suggested that this atrocity may have been the major reaso for the earl of Hertford's opposition t the king. In any event, Matilda returned to her father after the younger William's death. [Ref: Altschul CLARE p29] 1219: she and eldest son John sued Reginal de Braose, second son and heir of the elder William, for the family lands. They only succeeded in recovering Gower and the Sussex barony of Bramber, while the other marcher lordships remained in Reginald's family [Ref: Altschul CLARE p29] ---------- dau of Richard and Amicia, daughter of William, Earl of Gloucester ? dau of Ralph and Beatrice of Turnham? Maud (Matilda) de Clare b. ca. 1184, d. 1213. Married in 1206, Sir William de Braose, son of William de Braose and Maud de St. Valery. (Wikipedia)
Note: Sources for this Information: date: first marriage of Matilda [Ref: Altschul CLARE #2, Weis AR7 #63A], names: [Ref: Weis AR7 #246], child: [Ref: Reitwiesner Joan p83, Weis AR7 #29A, Weis AR7 #63A]
Note: Sources for this Information: names: [Ref: DNB v31p388], child: [Ref: DNB v31p380, Douglas Richardson SGM 10/9/2005-165908, Douglas Richardson SGM 9/26/2005-212851, Holloway WENTWORTH p15, Redlich CharlemagneDesc p129, Watney WALLOP #588, Weis AR7 #54, Weis MC #54]
Note: Sources for this Information: date: [Ref: Altschul CLARE #2, ES III.1 #156]
RootsWeb.com is NOT responsible for the content of the GEDCOMs uploaded through the WorldConnect Program. The creator of each GEDCOM is solely responsible for its content.