Peter de Mauley

Discussion:

Peter de Mauley

(too old to reply)

Wjhonson

2012-10-12 15:38:10 UTC

Previously on this list, an error in CP had been discussed whereby two Peter de Mauley's father and son were made into one person. To wit, the Peter who married Margaret de Clifford, and the Peter who married Eleanor Furnival.

I was looking at the CP extract again and noticed something I hadn't thought about before.
The author states that the writs to summon Peter were, from 1311 to 1336 directed to "Petro Malolacu" and from 1336 to 1354 to "Petro Malolacu le Quant" (meaning the Fifth)

I find that very striking. If that is accurate, it turns my mind to think that the death of Peter the 4th was in 1336.

Wjhonson

2012-10-12 15:42:43 UTC

Permalink

recte: "le Quint"

-----Original Message-----
From: Wjhonson <***@aol.com>
To: gen-medieval-l <gen-medieval-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 8:38 am
Subject: Peter de Mauley

Previously on this list, an error in CP had been discussed whereby two Peter de
Mauley's father and son were made into one person. To wit, the Peter who
married Margaret de Clifford, and the Peter who married Eleanor Furnival.

I was looking at the CP extract again and noticed something I hadn't thought
about before.
The author states that the writs to summon Peter were, from 1311 to 1336
directed to "Petro Malolacu" and from 1336 to 1354 to "Petro Malolacu le Quant"
(meaning the Fifth)

I find that very striking. If that is accurate, it turns my mind to think that
the death of Peter the 4th was in 1336.

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message

Ian Goddard

2012-10-12 15:58:04 UTC

Permalink

Post by Wjhonson
Previously on this list, an error in CP had been discussed whereby two Peter de Mauley's father and son were made into one person. To wit, the Peter who married Margaret de Clifford, and the Peter who married Eleanor Furnival.
I was looking at the CP extract again and noticed something I hadn't thought about before.
The author states that the writs to summon Peter were, from 1311 to 1336 directed to "Petro Malolacu" and from 1336 to 1354 to "Petro Malolacu le Quant" (meaning the Fifth)
I find that very striking. If that is accurate, it turns my mind to think that the death of Peter the 4th was in 1336.

IIRC there are two separate numberings of the Peters de Mauley. One is
as Peter, Lord de Mauley & the other as Peter de Mauley and as some of
them outlived their sons who, therefore, failed to succeed to the title,
there were fewer in the former category than in the latter so the
numbering got out of step. But it's a good while since I looked at them
so I may be misremembering.

--
Ian

The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang
at austonley org uk

Wjhonson

2012-10-12 16:11:12 UTC

Permalink

It's the death dates of the two men that interested me.
I think it's much more likely now that the writs from 1336 to 1354 were to the son as Peter the Fifth
and CP (in its footnote) added an extra man in the past who never existed.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Goddard <***@hotmail.co.uk>
To: gen-medieval <gen-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 9:00 am
Subject: Re: Peter de Mauley

Post by Wjhonson
Previously on this list, an error in CP had been discussed whereby two Peter

de Mauley's father and son were made into one person. To wit, the Peter who
married Margaret de Clifford, and the Peter who married Eleanor Furnival.

Post by Wjhonson
I was looking at the CP extract again and noticed something I hadn't thought about before.
The author states that the writs to summon Peter were, from 1311 to 1336

directed to "Petro Malolacu" and from 1336 to 1354 to "Petro Malolacu le Quant"
(meaning the Fifth)

Post by Wjhonson
I find that very striking. If that is accurate, it turns my mind to think

that the death of Peter the 4th was in 1336.

IIRC there are two separate numberings of the Peters de Mauley. One is
as Peter, Lord de Mauley & the other as Peter de Mauley and as some of
them outlived their sons who, therefore, failed to succeed to the title,
there were fewer in the former category than in the latter so the
numbering got out of step. But it's a good while since I looked at them
so I may be misremembering.
--
Ian

The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang
at austonley org uk

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message

TJ Booth

2012-10-12 16:10:37 UTC

Permalink

Perhaps recte back to : "le quart" [4th]. Per CP, he was living in 1340 -
a 1309 debt could not be for Peter V who was b. perhaps 1300 per CP. Have
not checked the sources though.

". . . In March 1331/2 he [Peter IV] had licence to grant the manor and
town of Doncaster and the advowson of Rossington to John de Warenne, Earl of
Surrey, for life, with remainder to Piers le quynt and Margaret his wife in
fee tail, and in November 1332 to grant 60 knights' fees to his son Piers in
fee simple, with the reversion of Hexthorpe and other manors. From about
this time he appears to have retired from public affairs, though he was
summoned to a Council at York on 20 August 1335, and to Parliament in
January following. In 1340 he had a confirmation of his pardon for debts to
the Crown from 1309.
On 23 May 1348, as Piers de Mauley le quart, he had licence to enfeoff
Sir Robert de Mauley of certain manors. He married, before 1309, Eleanor,
daughter of Thomas DE FURNIVAL. He probably died soon after 23 May 1348.
[Complete Peerage VIII:562-5, (transcribed by Dave Utzinger)]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wjhonson" <***@aol.com>
To: <***@aol.com>; <gen-medieval-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Peter de Mauley

Post by Wjhonson
recte: "le Quint"
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 8:38 am
Subject: Peter de Mauley
Previously on this list, an error in CP had been discussed whereby two
Peter de
Mauley's father and son were made into one person. To wit, the Peter who
married Margaret de Clifford, and the Peter who married Eleanor Furnival.
I was looking at the CP extract again and noticed something I hadn't
thought
about before.
The author states that the writs to summon Peter were, from 1311 to 1336
directed to "Petro Malolacu" and from 1336 to 1354 to "Petro Malolacu le
Quant"
(meaning the Fifth)
I find that very striking. If that is accurate, it turns my mind to think
that
the death of Peter the 4th was in 1336.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body
of
the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Wjhonson

2012-10-12 16:53:38 UTC

Permalink

That's interesting. Perhaps he had some kind of affliction which made it hard to attend parliament and so his son went from 1336 as "le Quint" even though his father as "le Quart" was yet living until 1348 at least. So I suggest, in line with this thought, that it was the *son* le Quint who "had a command at the battle of Durham in 1346". The father would have been something like 65, but the son perhaps 30 to 45 at this time seems more likely.

-----Original Message-----
From: TJ Booth <***@aol.com>
To: GenMedieval <gen-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 9:11 am
Subject: Re: Peter de Mauley

Perhaps recte back to : "le quart" [4th]. Per CP, he was living in 1340 -
a 1309 debt could not be for Peter V who was b. perhaps 1300 per CP. Have
not checked the sources though.

". . . In March 1331/2 he [Peter IV] had licence to grant the manor and
town of Doncaster and the advowson of Rossington to John de Warenne, Earl of
Surrey, for life, with remainder to Piers le quynt and Margaret his wife in
fee tail, and in November 1332 to grant 60 knights' fees to his son Piers in
fee simple, with the reversion of Hexthorpe and other manors. From about
this time he appears to have retired from public affairs, though he was
summoned to a Council at York on 20 August 1335, and to Parliament in
January following. In 1340 he had a confirmation of his pardon for debts to
the Crown from 1309.
On 23 May 1348, as Piers de Mauley le quart, he had licence to enfeoff
Sir Robert de Mauley of certain manors. He married, before 1309, Eleanor,
daughter of Thomas DE FURNIVAL. He probably died soon after 23 May 1348.
[Complete Peerage VIII:562-5, (transcribed by Dave Utzinger)]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wjhonson" <***@aol.com>
To: <***@aol.com>; <gen-medieval-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Peter de Mauley

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-***@rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message

Matt Tompkins

2012-10-13 07:57:19 UTC

Permalink

Post by Wjhonson

Post by Wjhonson
Sent: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 8:38 am
Subject: Peter de Mauley
Previously on this list, an error in CP had been discussed whereby two
Peter de
Mauley's father and son were made into one person. To wit, the Peter who
married Margaret de Clifford, and the Peter who married Eleanor Furnival.
I was looking at the CP extract again and noticed something I hadn't
thought
about before.
The author states that the writs to summon Peter were, from 1311 to 1336
directed to "Petro Malolacu" and from 1336 to 1354 to "Petro Malolacu le
Quant"
(meaning the Fifth)
I find that very striking. If that is accurate, it turns my mind to think
that
the death of Peter the 4th was in 1336.

Sent: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 9:11 am
Subject: Re: Peter de Mauley
Perhaps recte back to : "le quart" [4th]. Per CP, he was living in 1340 -
a 1309 debt could not be for Peter V who was b. perhaps 1300 per CP. Have
not checked the sources though.
". . . In March 1331/2 he [Peter IV] had licence to grant the manor and
town of Doncaster and the advowson of Rossington to John de Warenne, Earl of
Surrey, for life, with remainder to Piers le quynt and Margaret his wife in
fee tail, and in November 1332 to grant 60 knights' fees to his son Piers in
fee simple, with the reversion of Hexthorpe and other manors. From about
this time he appears to have retired from public affairs, though he was
summoned to a Council at York on 20 August 1335, and to Parliament in
January following. In 1340 he had a confirmation of his pardon for debts to
the Crown from 1309.
On 23 May 1348, as Piers de Mauley le quart, he had licence to enfeoff
Sir Robert de Mauley of certain manors. He married, before 1309, Eleanor,
daughter of Thomas DE FURNIVAL. He probably died soon after 23 May 1348.
[Complete Peerage VIII:562-5, (transcribed by Dave Utzinger)]

On Oct 12, 5:53 pm, Wjhonson <***@aol.com> wrote:
<<That's interesting. Perhaps he had some kind of affliction which
made it hard to attend parliament and so his son went from 1336 as "le
Quint" even though his father as "le Quart" was yet living until 1348
at least. So I suggest, in line with this thought, that it was the
*son* le Quint who "had a command at the battle of Durham in 1346".
The father would have been something like 65, but the son perhaps 30
to 45 at this time seems more likely.>>

Yes, Peter IV retired from public life in 1332 and handed over a large
part of his estate to his son Peter V, who was thereafter summoned to
parliament. Peter IV died in 1348, but it was Peter V who was present
at Neville's Cross in 1346. It was Peter IV who married Eleanor de
Furnival and Peter V who married Margaret de Clifford. For clear
accounts of all the various Peters, see:

C.L. Kingsford, 'The barons de Mauley', English Historical Review, 11
no. 43 (July 1896), pp. 515-20.

C. Given-Wilson, The English Nobility in the Late Middle Ages (London,
1987), pp. 67-8, 137.

Matt Tompkins