Maud de Verdon

  Information about this person:

• Background Information: Wife of John de Grey.
royalancestry AT msn.com (Douglas Richardson) wrote in message news:<5cf47a19.0201151600.4392e754 AT posting.google.com>...
Dear Newsgroup ~

In the wake of the new discovery of Theobald de Verdun's wife, Margery de Bohun, new attention has been turned to the baronial families of Verdun and Bohun. As indicated by Complete Peerage, Theobald de Verdun's step-mother, Eleanor, 2^nd wife of John de Verdun, is thought to have been a Bohun, she having sealed with those arms as reported by Complete Peerage sub Verdun. Chris Philips reported his findings on this matter in a post today.

As it turns out, Eleanor, 2^nd wife of John de Verdun, does in fact appear to have been a Bohun. My research indicates that Eleanor evidently had as her maritagium the manor of Debden, Essex (a Bohun manor), which property she in turn conveyed as a widow in 1275/6 to John de Grey, of Wilton, co. Hereford, and his wife, Maud. The fine conveying this property is found in Essex Feet of Fines, vol. 2, pg. 13. At his death years later, John de Grey is stated to have held the manor of Debden of Eleanor de Verdun by the service of a rose, the standard service for property granted in marriage in this period (see Cal. IPM, vol. 6, pg. 311). As such, it seems rather clear that John de Grey's wife, Maud, was the daughter of John de Verdun, by his 2nd wife, Eleanor de Bohun.

We can be reasonably certain that Maud de Grey was Eleanor de Verdun's daughter, as Eleanor being a Bohun surely had the manor of Debden in marriage, and in turn passed it along to her daughter, Maud. In this time period, a woman's maritagium almost always fell to her descendants, unless she happened to be childless, when she sometimes conveyed it away to strangers. In Eleanor's case, we know that she had several other male children, so the odds that she would convey her maritagium to the Grey family without there being a kinship is virtually slim to none. Also, it appears that John de Grey and his wife, Maud, were small children at the time of Eleanor de Verdun's fine. Complete Peerage indicates that John de Grey was born about 1268 (he being aged 40 at his father's death in 1308). Eleanor de Verdun's other known child, Humphrey, was born in 1267. It would be odd for Eleanor to convey her property to children, unless of course one of the parties was her own child.

Following John de Grey's death, the manor of Debden, Essex was in turn held by John and Maud de Grey's son and heir, Henry de Grey, Lord Grey, of Wilton (see Cal. IPM, vol. 8, pg. 261), as well as by a later Henry Grey, Lord Grey, of Wilton (see Cal. IPM, vol. 17, pg. 253). At the later Henry de Grey's death, he is stated to hold the manor of "Weldebernys" in Debden of the Countess of Hereford (a Bohun descendant). The passage of this manor down to John de Grey's son, Henry, and thence to his heirs gives evidence that Henry was in fact the son of John de Grey's wife, Maud de Verdun.

These new discoveries causes a ripple of corrections for Complete Peerage as well as for the Plantagenet Ancestry manuscript. For starters, it now appears that John de Grey had but one wife, Maud de Verdun, not two as claimed by Complete Peerage. Also, it appears Maud de Verdun was the mother of all of John de Grey's children, presumably including Iseult Saint Pierre, living 1343, whose existence and identity I mentioned in a post this past week.

As for the identity of parentage of Eleanor de Bohun, Complete Peerage indicates that she married before 1267 to John de Verdun, and that they had a son, Humphrey de Verdun, born in 1267. If we assume that Eleanor was around 20 at the time of marriage, say 1265, the chronology would place Eleanor, born say 1245, as a hitherto unknown daughter of Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford (died 1275), by his 2nd wife, Maud de Avenbury. The date of the marriage of Earl Humphrey and Maud de Avenbury is not known, but presumably it was soon after the death of his 1^st wife, Maud of Eu, which took place in 1241. Earl Humphrey and Maud are known to have had children, but no modern descendants have been found for this couple.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

E-mail: royalancestry AT msn.com

-----------------------------------------------------

From: Douglas Richardson (royalancestry AT msn.com)
Subject: Re: Eleanor de Verdun, and her daughter, Maud, wife of John de Grey, of Wilton
View: Complete Thread (6 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 2002-01-17 07:27:30 PST

Dear Newsgroup ~

Yesterday I spent further time researching the published literature regarding the topic of the marriages of John de Grey, 2nd Lord Grey of Wilton (died 1323). My research indicates that the original source for John de Grey's two marriages to Anne de Ferrers and Maud Basset is the 1619 Visitation of Leicester, published in 1870, as Harleian Society Publications, vol. 2, pg. 74. As best I can determine, this particular visitation is wildly inaccurate. Out of five marriages reported for various Lord Greys of Wilton in this pedigree, I can only document one of them. Of the other four, evidence exists to prove that one is incorrect, one is unlikely, and two probably never took place. Moreover, the pedigree overlooked John de Grey's marriage to Maud de Verdun, for which marriage I found solid evidence this past week. Needless to say, as a general rule, visitations are usually more accurate than this.

I found all published sources I consulted to have followed the 1619 Visitation of Leicester in lockstep, with one exception. The exception was Thomas Blore's History and Antiquities of the County of Rutland, published 1811, pp. 164-165. Following the 1619 Visitation of Leicester, Blore stated John de Grey married (1^st) Anne de Ferrers, by whom he had his eldest son, Henry (ancestor of the later Lords Grey of Wilton). He varied from the visitation when he stated that John de Grey married (2^nd) "Matilda, daughter of John de Verdun, Constable of Ireland," by whom he had his younger son, Roger (ancestor of the later Lords Grey of Ruthin). Unfortunately, Blore gave no sources for his Grey pedigree, so it is unknown where he found a record of John de Grey's marriage to Maud de Verdun.

Blore withstanding, it appears that Maud de Verdun was the mother of at least three of John de Grey's children, they being both sons, Henry and Roger (who reportedly shared their mother's maritagium at Debden, Essex), and at least one daughter, Joan, wife of Ralph Basset. I find no evidence whatsoever that John de Grey was ever married to an Anne de Ferrers.

Beyond this, William Harvey's History and Antiquities of the Hundred of Willey, p. 318, states that there is a pedigree of the Grey family found in Harl. MS. 110, fo. 31, with a shield of 16 quarters, as follows: 1 Grey, 2 Glanvile, 3 Fitzhugh, 4 Longchamp, 5 De la vach, 6 Grey, 7 Hastings, 8 Cantilupe, 9 Scote, 10 Bruse, 11 Brewer, 12 Valence, 13 Manchany, 14 Marshall, 15 Fitzosbert, 16 Hastings. I have not seen this particular pedigree but it may well worth someone's time to examine. It should be available at the British Library in the London area. This pedigree appears to be different from the 1619 Visitation of Leicester, as the 1619 pedigree provided only eight arms in the Grey quarterings, not sixteen.

Lastly, regarding the terminology, "it is said," the late Dr. David Faris told me that those words are used in Complete Peerage when the sole source for a marriage is a visitation pedigree, for whom no independant verification has been found.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

E-mail: royalancestry AT msn.com

------------------------

From: Douglas Richardson (royalancestry AT msn.com)
Subject: Maud de Verdun, wife of John de Grey, 2nd Lord Grey of Wilton
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 2002-02-13 22:42:27 PST

I should add that when I first posted my discovery of the 1276/7 fine, I was of the impression that John and Maud de Grey were small children when the fine was recorded. I held this view because Complete Peerage stated that John was said to be aged 40 at the time of his father's death in 1308, or born about 1268. However, it now appears that that John was actually closer to age 50 in 1308, which is indicated by John's first appearance as an adult in the records in the late 1270's, as shown by Moor's Knights of Edward I. I have also since located the Grey pedigree in Blore's History of Rutland which states that John de Grey married Maud, daughter of John de Verdun. Since Blore never saw the fine below, it would appear he relied on another source for the marriage of John and Maud de Grey.

best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

E-mail: royalancestry AT msn.com

Maud married John de Grey Baron, son of Sir Reynold de Grey Knight, Barond de Grey and Maud de Longchamp. (John de Grey Baron was born before 1258 in Wilton, Herefordshire, England and died 28 Pct 1323 in Ruthin, Benbighshire, Wales.)