Sir Randall Mainwaring and Elizabeth Brereton
Sir Randall Mainwaring was born about 1495 and was of Over Peover, Cheshire, England, the son of Sir John Mainwaring and Katherine Honford. Sir Randall married first Elizabeth Brereton. Elizabeth was the daughter of Sir Randle Brereton and Eleanor Dutton. Elizabeth had married first Richard Cholmondeley (also called Cholmley, son of Richard Cholmondley and probably Alianor Dutton, of Cholmondeley in the parish of Malpas, Cheshire, England, may have married first Elizabeth Corbet, d. 1518). Sir Randall married second Elizabeth Leycester (dau. of Sir Raufe and Ellin (Leigh) Leycester of Toft, Cheshire, England, m. 2) Sir Edmund Trafford) in 1552 (6 Edward VI). Sir Randall died 6 September 1557.
Sir Randall and Elizabeth’s children are:
- Margaret Mainwaring, born about 1521, married Sir Arthur Mainwaring (b. abt. 1520 in Ightfield, Shropshire, England to Sir Richard Mainwaring and Dorothy Corbet, educated at Gray's Inn 1542, knighted at Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England in October 1547, took part in the Siege of Leith in May 1560, member of Parliament for Shropshire 1558, Commissioner of the Peace 1561/2, Sheriff in 1562-3 and 1576-7, member of the Royal Commission of Musters in 1577, d. 2 Sep 1590 (will written the same day, bur. 4 Sep 1590 in Ightfield, Shropshire, England, will proved 21 Jun 1591).
- Elizabeth Mainwaring, married 1) Peter Shakerley (of Houlme in Allostock, Cheshire, England) and 2) Christopher Holford, Esq. (of Holford) in 1561.
- Katharine Mainwaring, married John Davenport, Esq. (son of Thomas and Elizabeth (Fitton) Davenport, of Henbury, Cheshire, England, will dated 15 Dec 1556, d. Apr 1557) marriage settlement 1 Sep 1535 or 1545.
Richard and Elizabeth’s known child is:
- Richard Cholmondley, married Elizabeth --, mentioned in his grandfather Sir Randle Brereton's will, died without issue.
Richard and Elizabeth's probable children are:
- Sir Hugh Cholmondley, born about 1513, soldier, of Cholmondeley, Cheshire, England, married 1) Amy Dorman (dau. of George and Joanne (Hill) Dorman of Malpas, Cheshire, England) and 2) Mary Griffeth (dau. of Sir William Griffeth of Angles, widow of Sir Randall Brereton), knighted in 1542 for service in Scotland, served against the Scots in 1557, Vice-Warden of the Welsh Marches, high sheriff of Cheshire ("six times Sheriff"), died in 1596, buried with Mary at St. Oswald's, Malpas, Cheshire, England.
- Randell Cholmondley, died without issue.
- Randoll Cholmondley, recorder of London, serjeant at law.
- George Cholmondley, died without issue.
- Agnes Cholmondley, married Randall Manwaring. Note that she is called either Agnes or Ann in varying sources but that Agnes and Ann were interchangeable names in that era, so this is not an indication that one of the sources is less reliable as claimed in the discussion below.
- Catherine Cholmondley, married Richard Prestland.
- Ursula Cholmondley, married Thomas Stanley.
- Ralph Cholmondeley, married Elizabeth Pickering (widow of Robert Redman, d. 1562), mentioned in The History of Parliament but not in the 1580 or 1613 Visitations of Cheshire or in Ormerod or Collins.
Note: There is considerable confusion about the children of Richard and Elizabeth. A great deal of this is due to there having been four generations of Richard Cholmondleys in the 16th century and the last two generations seems to have both married woman named Elizabeth. According to Ormerod, our Richard and Elizabeth had no male issue and some of the children listed as our Richard and Elizabeth's in the 1580 Visitation are listed as Richard's siblings (Hugh, Randall (the recorder of London), Agnes, Catherine, and Ursula). However, Boyer states that Sir Randle Brereton's will mentions his daughter Elizabeth Mainwaring, deceased son-in-law Richard Cholmondley, and grandson Richard Cholmondley. If that is the case, Ormerod may have mistaken Elizabeth Brereton's husband Richard for her son Richard.
Sources:
Records related to Sir Randall and Elizabeth (Brereton) Mainwaring but not copied below due to copyright considerations:
- Glover, Robert, The visitation of Cheshire in the year 1580, London: The Harleian Society, 1882, pgs. 64, 141.
- Lancashire and Cheshire Wills and Inventories, Manchester: Chetham Society, 1884, pgs. 16-7.
- Ormerod, George, The History of the County Palatine and City of Chester, Vol. 2, London: Nichols, Son, and Bentley, 1819, p. 356.
- Armytage, George J., and Rylands, John Paul (ed.), Pedigrees Made at the Visitation of Cheshire, 1613, London: Record Society for the Publication of Original Documents relating to Lancashire and Cheshire, 1909, p. 62.
- Collins, Arthur and Brydges, Sir Egerton, Collins's Peerage of England, London: Otridge and Son, 1812, pgs. 23-6. This book can be found online at https://archive.org/stream/collinsspeerageo04coll#page/22/mode/2up
- "Re: More Stanley confusion ?" thread, GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives, http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2013-04/1366927260, retrieved 2 July 2017.
- Tomb of Sir Hugh Cholmondeley (possible son of Elizabeth Brereton) and his wife, Mary Griffeth, St. Oswald's, Malpas, Cheshire, England.
- Stephen, Sir Leslie, ed., Dictionary of National Biography, 1921–1922, Vol. 22, London: Oxford University Press, 1921–1922., p. 236.
- Boyer, Carl, Medieval English Ancestors of Robert Abell, Santa Clarita, CA: C. Boyer, 2001.
- Entry for MAINWARING, Sir Arthur (c.1525-90), of Ightfield, Salop., The History of Parliament, http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/mainwaring-sir-arthur-1525-90, retrieved 24 Jun 2017, originally published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603, ed. P.W. Hasler, 1981.
- Entry for CHOLMLEY (CHOLMONDELEY), Sir Hugh (by 1513-97), of Cholmondeley, Cheshire., The History of Parliament, http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1509-1558/member/cholmley-%28cholmondeley%29-sir-hugh-1513-97#footnoteref2_uql1ysi, retrieved 24 Jun 2017, originally published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1509-1558, ed. S.T. Bindoff, 1982.
- Entry for CHOLMLEY, Ralph (by 1517-63), of St. Dunstan-in-the-West, London., The History of Parliament, http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/cholmley-ralph-1517-63, retrieved 24 Jun 2017, originally published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603, ed. P.W. Hasler, 1981.
- Will of Sir Randall Breerton, Chamberlain of Chester of Malpasse, Cheshire, The National Archives of the UK (TNA): PROB 11/23/338.
Images
Effigies on the tomb of Sir Hugh Cholmondeley (possible son of Elizabeth Brereton) and his wife, Mary Griffeth, St. Oswald's, Malpas, Cheshire, England (photo credits: (top three) Peter Cox, findagrave.com and (bottom two) Church Monuments Society)
Translation, from Latin, of the inscription around the rim of the tomb: "Hugh Chalmondeley of Chalmondeley the elder, Knight, Vice-Warden of the Welsh Marches, six times Sheriff died in his 83rd year AD 1596, and in this earth is buried. Also his son and heir Hugh Chalmondeley, Knight attaining the age of 50 departed this life AD 1601 and lies here. Also his wife Mary who after the death of her husband, on account of her very dear affection for him, for love of him had this monument erected in AD 1605" (Translation courtesy: Todd Whitesides, findagrave.com)
Mainwaring Arms:
Probate Records
Source: Lancashire and Cheshire Wills and Inventories, Manchester: Chetham Society, 1884, pgs. 16-7.
Visitation of 1580, Lecester Family
Source: Glover, Robert, The visitation of Cheshire in the year 1580, London: The Harleian Society, 1882, p. 141.
Visitations, Pedigrees, and Peerages for the Cholmondeley Family
Source: Glover, Robert, The visitation of Cheshire in the year 1580, London: The Harleian Society, 1882, p. 64.
Source: Armytage, George J., and Rylands, John Paul (ed.), Pedigrees Made at the Visitation of Cheshire, 1613, London: Record Society for the Publication of Original Documents relating to Lancashire and Cheshire, 1909, p. 62.
Source: Ormerod, George, The History of the County Palatine and City of Chester, Vol. 2, London: Nichols, Son, and Bentley, 1819, p. 356.
Richard de Cholmondley, who married Eleanor, fifth daughter of Sir Thomas Dutton, of Dutton, and sister and coheir to John, her brother, who died before he was of full age.
...
He left issue a son,
Richard Cholmondeley, Esq. one of the Justices ubefore whom fines were levied, from 1/ Henry VIL to 24 Henry VIII, and who, in 30 Henry VIII. departed this life,x seised (as the inquisition shews, taken March 20, the same year), of the manors of Cholmondlcy, Church Minsule, and Aston ; and of divers other manors and lands in Gildon, Sutton, Broughton, Pulton-Lancelyn, Whitley, Hawarden, Copenhurst, Laerton, Chorley, Badcley, Bikerton, Malpas, Hampton, Ebnall, Tushingham, Bradeley, and Kinderton. He repaired the chancel of Cbolmondley in the beginning of the reign of Henry VIII. and on the skreen of it his arms are cut, and this inscription ; " Orate pro bono " statu Richardi Cholmundley et Elizabeth Uxoris ejus, sacelli " factoris, Anno Domini Millesimo quingentestmo quarto decimo." He married, first, Elizabeth, daughter to Sir Roger Corbet, of Morton Corbet, in com. Salop, Knt. by whom he had issue an only daughter, Maud, wedded to Sir Peter Newton, Knt. But by his second wife Elizabeth, daughter to Sir Randle Brereton of Malpas, chamberlain of Chester (who survived him, and was afterwards married to Sir Randle Mainwaring, of Over Pever, Knt.) he had several children 3 whereof these daughters were married, viz. Catherine, to Richard Priestland, of Priestland and Wardhill, in Cheshire, Esq. ; Agnes, to Randle Mainwaring, of Caringtun, Esq. 3 and Ursula, to Thomas Stanley, of Wever, Esq, Hugh Choldmondley was his eldest son and heir; and
Randle Cholmondley, a younger son, being educated in the study of the laws at Lincoln's -Inn, was elected Autumn-reader of that society, in 5 Edward VL but did not read, because of the pestilence.y In 6 Edward Vt. he was Lent-reader of the said society; and in 4 and 5 Philip and Mary, Double reader thereof;z at which time he was Recorder of the city of London. In the last year of King Philip and Queen Mary,a he was elected Serjeant at law : also in the first year of Queen Elizabeth, was Treble-reader of the society, whereof he was a member,b and was then called by that Queen's writ to be scrjeant at law. His learning and knowledge in the laws appear from his being so often Reader of this society; but he died without issue on April 25, 1563.
Hugh Cholmondley, the eldest son,c was 25 years of age at his father's death, in 30 Henry VIII, He was in that expedition made into dScotland under the Duke of Norfolk, 30 Henry VIII. and for his valiant behaviour there, received the honour ot" knighthood at Leith. In the reign of King Philip and Queen Mary, che raised, at his own expense, 100 men, to march under the Earl of Derby, who in September, 1557, was sent to oppose the Scots on their invading England, and threatening to besiege Berwick. He was a person of great honour,f and for his admirable
gifts of wisdom, temperance, continency, liberality, hospitality, and godly departure at his end, left few who were his equals; and his death was lamented by all sorts of people, having for fifty years togetherg been esteemed the father of his country, by the good offices he did to all who applied themselves to him, which appears from many arbitrations on record, that were left to his determination. He was five times Sheriff of Cheshire,h as also Sheriff of Flintshire, for some years, and a long time one of the two only deputy-lieutenants of Cheshire; and for a good space Vice-president of the Marches of Wales, in the absence of the famous Sir Henry Sidney, Knt. Lord-deputy of Ireland. He departed this life in the 83d year of his age, on January 6, 1 596-7, seised (as the inquisition after his death shews),i of the manor of Cholmondeley, and of twenty two messuages, four cottages, two water-mills, and one wind-mill, &:c, in Cholmondeley ; as alfo of the manor or barony of Wich-Malbank, with all the rents, reversions, services, &c. the manor of Barkesford, alias Basford, with the appurtenances, and the several manors of Moldsworth, Bickley, Norbury, with Alhurst, Aston juxta Mondrem, Church-Minsule, two parts of the manor of Copcnhurst, the manors of Newbald and Elderston juxta Wich-Malbank, and the fourth part of the vill of Burvvardsley ; with divers lands and tenements in Henhull, alias Hendle, Barton, Haughton, Horton, Tilston, Rowton, alias Row-Christleton, Wirswall, Bradley Boughton, Haslington, Badington, Chowley, Plumley, two messuages, and two salt-works in North-wich, and lands in Worleston, Wrenbury, Frith, Egerton, Church Shocklach, and Shocklach Oyat, Audlim, Swanbach, Golbourne, Bellow juxta Tattenhall, Church-Copenhall, Monks-Copenhall, Woodbanke alias Rough-Showicke infra Great Saughall, Bebyngton, St. Ann's Heys, in the parish of Plurastall, &:c. Beckford, Newhall ; and of one capital messuage called Cholmondley-house, in the parish of St. John Baptist in the suburbs of the city of Chester ; also of the manors of Hinton and Madford, in Somersetshire j and lands in Shropshire and Flintshire. He lies buried in the chancel of the family in the church of Malpas; and a noble monument is erected there; his effigies, with his lady by him, lying thereon.
He married two wives ; but by Mary his last Lady, daughter to Sir William Griffith of Pentrin, relict of Sir Randle Brereton of Malpas, he had no issue. His first lady was Anne, daughter and coheir to George Dorman of Malpas,k by Agnes his wife, daughter and heir of Thomas Hill of Malpas, son of Humphry Hill, and of Anne his wife, daughter and coheir of John Bird of Chorlton, by Catharine his wife, aunt and heir of David de Malpas, of Hampton and Bickerton, in com. Cestr. ; and the said Humphry Hill was lineally descended from Hugh Hill, who in the reign of King Edward IH. married Eleanor, daughter and coheir of Hugh de Wloukeslow, lord of Wloukeslow, in com. Salop; and the coats of arms, of these heiresses, the present Earl of Cholmondeley has a right to quarter. Sir Hugh had issue (by the aforesaid Anne), three sons, and one daughter;
Frances, married to Thomas Wilbraham of Woodhey, in com. Cestr. Esq. father (by her) of Sir Richard Wilbraham, Knt. and Bart, whose male issue terminated in Sir Thomas Wilbraham, who had two daughters, his coheirs; viz. Grace, married to Lionel Tolmache, first Earl of Dysart; and Mary, to Richard Newport, second Earl of Bradford, and father by her of the last two Earls.
Of Sir Hugh's three sons, only the eldest left issue, who was named after his father Hugh.
u Fines in Offic. Prothon. Cestr. de iisd. Ann.
x Esc. 30 Hen. VIII.
y Dugdale's Orig. Jurid. p. 252.
z Ibid.
a Dugdale's Chron. series, p. 91
b Pat. 1 Eliz- p.4.
c Esc. 30 Henry VIII.
d Dugdak's Baronage, Vol. II. p.474.
e Strype's Historkal Memorials, p. 433, 435.
f King's Description of Cheshire, p. 54.
g Fuller's Worthies of Cheshire, p. 187.
h King, ut antea.
i Esc. 39 Eliz. in the Exchequer of Chester.
j Ex Stem, de Famil. Hill, in MS. ptxd, p. 105.
Source: Collins, Arthur and Brydges, Sir Egerton, Collins's Peerage of England, London: Otridge and Son, 1812, pgs. 23-6.
This book can be found online at https://archive.org/stream/collinsspeerageo04coll#page/22/mode/2up
Dictionary of National Biography
Source: Stephen, Sir Leslie, ed., Dictionary of National Biography, 1921–1922, Vol. 22, London: Oxford University Press, 1921–1922., p. 236.
Discussion
From: John Higgins <jhigginsgen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: More Stanley confusion ?
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
References: <A627D92CABC24C97B85B6159A9888349@leoe261f6d62ea><mailman.10.1366851928.25712.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
On Apr 24, 6:03 pm, "TJ Booth" <tjbo...@aol.com> wrote:
> Leo,
>
> There is a fairly contemporary 'Stanley of Weever' pedigree in the 1580
> Visitation of Cheshire @http://www.scfhs.org.uk/scfhs/visitations/BookVC1580/p216.htm. Likely
> Betham may have seen it in preparing his 'Stanleys of Alderley and Cheshire'
> section in Baronetage; Vol 2 pp 84/85 which includes what is in the
> pedigree, but misplaces some of the earlier family. Seehttp://books.google.com/books?id=QS8wAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA84.
>
> Additional information can be found on these generations in Ormerod's
> History of Chester Vol II; London; Lackington Hughes; 1819; page 114 @http://books.google.com/books?id=7kEjAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA114. Ormerod traces the
> descent of Alderley from Margaret Arderne of Alderley, sole heir of her
> father Peter. She m. Richard de Weever, a ward of her father, and the Weever
> and Alderley properties stayed in the family. The couple's gr-gr-granddau
> Elizabeth Weever, m.(1) Sir John Stanley.
>
> Gen 1. Sir John Stanley, of Weever and Aldbery in right of his wife, living
> 12 Edw. IV. m. Elizabeth, d. 1 Sep 1512, daughter and heir of Sir Thomas
> Weever, Knt. [Betham erred in making Sir John the son of John Stanley Esq.
> Sir John was instead the son of Sir Thomas 1st Lord Stanley, and grandson of
> John Esq.] Elizabeth was ward of Henry VI, who in 1445/46 assigned her
> wardship to Sir Thomas Stanley, Sir John's father. Elizabeth m.(2) Sir John
> Done of Utkinton, d. bef 1498.
>
> Gen 2. Thomas Stanley of Weever and Alderley, d. bef 1 Dec 1527, m. a dau of
> Liversege of Wheelock
>
> Gen 3. Thomas Stanley Esq. of Weever and Alderley had livery of his father's
> lands 1 Dec 1527 [thus b. bef 1 Dec 1506], ipm dated 1554/55, m. [Joan]
> Davenport of Henbury
>
> Gen 4. Thomas Stanley Esq. of Weever and Alderley, High Sheriff of
> Cheshire, b. perhaps 1530, his ipm indicates he d. 1 Aug 1591. He m. Ursula
> Cholmondeley, his heir was Randle age 30 and upwards per his ipm.
>
> Gen 5. Randle Stanley Esq. of Weever and Alderley, Capt of the Isle of Man,
> b. bef 1561 and perhaps by 1555, d. 17 Jun 1595, m. perhaps 1575, Margaret
> Maisterson d. 16 Jun 1625, she was dau and heir of John Esq. of Nantwich
>
> Gen 6. Sir Thomas Stanley of Weever and Alderley, Sheriff of Cheshire, b.
> 1576 [age 4 in 1580 visitation of Cheshire], d. 21 Nov 1605, m. Elizabeth
> Warburton of Grafton, Cheshire, dau of Sir Peter. She m.(2) Sir Richard
> Grosvenor. Their son Thomas was named a baronet.
>
> Thomas Stanley (Gen 4) has a memorial in Alderley Church confirming his, his
> father's and his son and heir's generations, as follows : "Here lieth the
> body of Thomas Stanley, Esq. eldest son of Thos. Stanley. Esq. and Joan,
> daughter of Thomas Davenport, of Henbury, Esq. He married Ursula, daughter
> of Richard, and sister of Sir Hugh Cholmondeley, Knt. and had issue Thomas,
> who died young, and Randle, his heir and successor; also Dorothy, who died
> unmarried; Elizabeth married to Roger Downes. Esq. of Shrigley; and Frances
> married to Henry Delves, of Doddington, Esq. He rebuilt the houses of
> Alderley and Wever, and died August 1st. 1591.
>
> Terry Booth
> Chicago IL
>
Leo and I have been having some discussion offline about the Thomas Stanley in gen. 4 above who married Ursula Cholmondeley. All the relevant pedigrees apparently say that Ursula was the daughter of Richard and sister of Sir Hugh Cholmondeley, but this seems difficult chronologically.
Thomas Stanley is said to have been born ca. 1530-2 (depending on thesource) and was married ca. 1558/9. But Richard Cholmondeley d. ca. 1517/8 (9 Henry VIII - his IPM was in the following year). Even ifUrsula was born posthumously, she would be anywhere from 12 to 14 years older than her husband - and not married until she was 40 or more. This seems unlikely on both points.
If Ursula was in fact a Cholmondeley, she was more likely from a different branch of the family - although it's interesting that the MI mentioned above by Terry is so specific in indicating her position in the family. Any thoughts on this?
FWIW pedigrees of both the Stanley and Cholmondeley families in Ormerod's Cheshire (Helsby ed.) do place Ursula as indicated in the MI - and document the dates mentioned that make this difficult.
______________
From: "TJ Booth" <tjbooth@aol.com>
Subject: Re: More Stanley confusion ?
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 19:32:12 -0500
References: <A627D92CABC24C97B85B6159A9888349@leoe261f6d62ea><mailman.10.1366851928.25712.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><8a138a3b-c800-43c3-a46d-51ec675b7090@ph9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
On Thursday, April 25, 2013 5:01 PM, "John Higgins" <jhigginsgen@ . . wrote
<Snip>
Leo and I have been having some discussion offline about the Thomas Stanley in gen. 4 above who married Ursula Cholmondeley. All the relevant pedigrees apparently say that Ursula was the daughter of Richard and sister of Sir Hugh Cholmondeley, but this seems difficult chronologically.
Thomas Stanley is said to have been born ca. 1530-2 (depending on the source) and was married ca. 1558/9. But Richard Cholmondeley d. ca. 1517/8 (9 Henry VIII - his IPM was in the following year). Even if Ursula was born posthumously, she would be anywhere from 12 to 14 years older than her husband - and not married until she was 40 or more. This seems unlikely on both points.
If Ursula was in fact a Cholmondeley, she was more likely from a different branch of the family - although it's interesting that the MI mentioned above by Terry is so specific in indicating her position in the family. Any thoughts on this?
FWIW pedigrees of both the Stanley and Cholmondeley families in Ormerod's Cheshire (Helsby ed.) do place Ursula as indicated in the MI - and document the dates mentioned that make this difficult.
<Snip>
Are you absolutely sure the 1518 IPM is for the correct Richard Cholmley - I agree the date doesn't seem right. There was a junior line of Richard Cholmleys in the same time period, and Leo has 2 Richard Cholmleys d. in 1487 and 1488.
Not noted above, it is difficult to quarrel with the 1598 "Cholmondeleigh vulgo Cholmley of Chomley" pedigree in the same Visitation of Chester as cited in my prior post regarding Stanley - See http://www.scfhs.org.uk/scfhs/visitations/BookVC1580/p063.htm . It is clearly contemporary, and is quite thorough in identifying Ursula and her 8 siblings. The respondent was Ursula's nephew, Sir Hugh II Cholmley, living 1598, and the pedigree notes that his father Sir Hugh I d. 1596 [Leo shows it as 6 Jan 1597 - i.e. 1596/97]. Neither Hugh II nor his siblings are shown with children, the pedigree thus giving the appearance that Hugh II's generation were b. in the 1570/75 time period. It is of course possible it was a 1580 pedigree with small incomplete additions in 1598. The pedigree clearly shows Hugh I's sister as "Vrsula mar. to Thos Stanley".
The Cheshire visitation pedigree agrees with Leo's generations :
William Cholmondleigh m. Maud dau of Sir John Cheney by his wife heir of Capenhurst [Leo has this couple @ http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00269518&tree=LEO but does not show Richard as a son]
Richard Cholmley m. Ellin dau of John Damport [Leo's entry for the couple @ http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00525585&tree=LEO]
Richard Cholmley m. Elenor dau & heir of sir Thomas Dutton
Richard Cholmley m. Elizabeth dau of Sir Randall Brereton of Mallpas. Their children :
1. Sir High Cholmley d. 1596 m.(1) Amy dau of George Darman by sister to Sir
Rowland Hill, m.(2) Mary widow of Sir Randall Brereton
2. Richard s.p.
3. Randall s.p.
4. Randall Recorder of London
5. George s.prole
6. Ursula m. Thomas Stanley
7. Agnes m. Randall Mainwaring
8. Katherine m. Richard Prestland
Terry Booth
Chicago IL
______________
From: John Higgins <jhigginsgen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: More Stanley confusion ?
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:07:17 -0700 (PDT)
References: <A627D92CABC24C97B85B6159A9888349@leoe261f6d62ea><mailman.10.1366851928.25712.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><8a138a3b-c800-43c3-a46d-51ec675b7090@ph9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com><mailman.7.1366936312.30090.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
On Apr 25, 5:32 pm, "TJ Booth" <tjbo...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 25, 2013 5:01 PM, "John Higgins" <jhigginsgen@ . . wrote
>
> <Snip>
>
> Leo and I have been having some discussion offline about the Thomas
> Stanley in gen. 4 above who married Ursula Cholmondeley. All the
> relevant pedigrees apparently say that Ursula was the daughter of
> Richard and sister of Sir Hugh Cholmondeley, but this seems difficult
> chronologically.
>
> Thomas Stanley is said to have been born ca. 1530-2 (depending on the
> source) and was married ca. 1558/9. But Richard Cholmondeley d. ca.
> 1517/8 (9 Henry VIII - his IPM was in the following year). Even if
> Ursula was born posthumously, she would be anywhere from 12 to 14
> years older than her husband - and not married until she was 40 or
> more. This seems unlikely on both points.
>
> If Ursula was in fact a Cholmondeley, she was more likely from a
> different branch of the family - although it's interesting that the MI
> mentioned above by Terry is so specific in indicating her position in
> the family. Any thoughts on this?
>
> FWIW pedigrees of both the Stanley and Cholmondeley families in
> Ormerod's Cheshire (Helsby ed.) do place Ursula as indicated in the MI
> - and document the dates mentioned that make this difficult.
>
> <Snip>
>
> Are you absolutely sure the 1518 IPM is for the correct Richard Cholmley - I
> agree the date doesn't seem right. There was a junior line of Richard
> Cholmleys in the same time period, and Leo has 2 Richard Cholmleys d. in
> 1487 and 1488.
>
> Not noted above, it is difficult to quarrel with the 1598 "Cholmondeleigh
> vulgo Cholmley of Chomley" pedigree in the same Visitation of Chester as
> cited in my prior post regarding Stanley - Seehttp://www.scfhs.org.uk/scfhs/visitations/BookVC1580/p063.htm. It is
> clearly contemporary, and is quite thorough in identifying Ursula and her 8
> siblings. The respondent was Ursula's nephew, Sir Hugh II Cholmley, living
> 1598, and the pedigree notes that his father Sir Hugh I d. 1596 [Leo shows
> it as 6 Jan 1597 - i.e. 1596/97]. Neither Hugh II nor his siblings are shown
> with children, the pedigree thus giving the appearance that Hugh II's
> generation were b. in the 1570/75 time period. It is of course possible it
> was a 1580 pedigree with small incomplete additions in 1598. The pedigree
> clearly shows Hugh I's sister as "Vrsula mar. to Thos Stanley".
>
> The Cheshire visitation pedigree agrees with Leo's generations :
>
> William Cholmondleigh m. Maud dau of Sir John Cheney by his wife heir of
> Capenhurst [Leo has this couple @http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00269518&tree=LEObut
> does not show Richard as a son]
>
> Richard Cholmley m. Ellin dau of John Damport [Leo's entry for the couple @http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00525585&tree=LEO]
>
> Richard Cholmley m. Elenor dau & heir of sir Thomas Dutton
>
> Richard Cholmley m. Elizabeth dau of Sir Randall Brereton of Mallpas. Their
> children :
>
> 1. Sir High Cholmley d. 1596 m.(1) Amy dau of George Darman by sister to Sir
> Rowland Hill, m.(2) Mary widow of Sir Randall Brereton
> 2. Richard s.p.
> 3. Randall s.p.
> 4. Randall Recorder of London
> 5. George s.prole
> 6. Ursula m. Thomas Stanley
> 7. Agnes m. Randall Mainwaring
> 8. Katherine m. Richard Prestland
>
> Terry Booth
> Chicago IL
I think the pedigree of Cholmondeley in the 1580 Visitation of Cheshire (apparently with additions to 1598) needs to be considered in conjunction with later research on the family – specifically by George Ormerod for the 1st edition of his history of Cheshire (1819) and by Thomas Helsby for his 2nd edition of Ormerod’s work (1882). Both Ormerod and Helsby quote extensively from the IPMs of three Richard Cholmondeleys in the 15th and 16th centuries, as well as other contemporary documents. In doing so they add valuable date information to the visitation pedigree – and also revise some of the relationships shown there.
With respect to the IPMs, I’m relying on what’s reported by Ormerod and Helsby, as I haven’t yet been able to verify (or even locate) the
IPMs in question. So it’s entirely possible that their readings and conclusions were wrong, or that my interpretation of what they wrote is wrong. And Helsby reached slightly different conclusions from the IPMs than Ormerod did. But their work (particularly Helsby’s) is quite detailed and seems to be the basis for the currently accepted pedigree of the Cholmondeley family – at least as published in BP and essentially as shown in Leo’s database – and I think it holds together well.
There are three IPMs for Richard Cholmondeleys of this family in this period:
4 Henry VII – Richard, whose heir was his grandson Richard (son of his son Richard), aged 14 at the IPM
10 Henry VIII – Richard (d. Wed. after the feast of the Assumption, 9 Henry VIII), whose heir was his son Richard, aged 7 at the IPM
30 Henry VIII – Richard (d 9 Feb 30 Henry VIII), whose heir was his brother Hugh, aged 25 and more at the IPM
So there were four Richard Cholmondeleys in a row (not three as in the visitation pedigree), with the last Richard being the brother of the first Sir Hugh Cholmondeley. Based on this, Helsby shows the following pedigree, which is the one shown in BP and (with one exception) in Leo’s data:
Richard Cholmondeley (d. ca. 1488), m. Ellen, dau. of John Davenport
Richard Cholmondeley (d. vp), m. Alianor, dau. of Sir Thoms Dutton
Richard Cholmondeley (b. ca. 1474, d. 1518), m. Elizabeth NN [not Brereton]
Richard Cholmondeley (b. ca. 1511, d. ca. 1539), m. Elizabeth Brereton of Malpas
Sir Hugh Cholmondeley was brother, not son, of the last Richard Cholmondeley. Although Sir Hugh’s mother’s name was Elizabeth, she was not Elizabeth Brereton of Malpas, as in the visitation pedigree, who was his sister-in-law. The placement here of Elizabeth Brereton (who subsequently m. Sir Randle Mainwaring of Over Peover) by Ormerod and Helsby seems to be supported by the chronology of the families of both Brereton and Mainwaring.
So this does seem to support the conclusion that Richard Cholmondeley, the father of Sir Hugh, did die in 1518 – and thus he is unlikely to be the father of Ursula, the wife of Thomas Stanley of Weever and Alderley. One possibility (perhaps remote) is that Ursula was a daughter (not noted by Ormerod or Helsby) of the last Richard (d. 1539) and thus “dau. of Richard and niece [not sister] of Sir Hugh”. But this may be a stretch….
BTW you mention that there was a junior line of Richard Cholmleys in the same time period. I can’t locate them – can you provide further information?
______________
From: "TJ Booth" <tjbooth@aol.com>
Subject: Re: More Stanley confusion ?
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 12:37:14 -0500
References: <A627D92CABC24C97B85B6159A9888349@leoe261f6d62ea><mailman.10.1366851928.25712.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><8a138a3b-c800-43c3-a46d-51ec675b7090@ph9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com><mailman.7.1366936312.30090.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><b01b4473-cc62-45f0-b866-b95b36fc077b@yb1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
John,
Thanks for keeping this thread alive - not my line, but solving the puzzle is interesting. See below.
On Friday, April 26, 2013 7:07 PM, "John Higgins" jhigginsgen@ya . . wrote
<Snip>
So there were four Richard Cholmondeleys in a row (not three as in the visitation pedigree), with the last Richard being the brother of the first Sir Hugh Cholmondeley. Based on this, Helsby shows the following pedigree, which is the one shown in BP and (with one exception) in Leo’s data:
Richard Cholmondeley (d. ca. 1488), m. Ellen, dau. of John Davenport
Richard Cholmondeley (d. vp), m. Alianor, dau. of Sir Thoms Dutton
Richard Cholmondeley (b. ca. 1474, d. 1518), m. Elizabeth NN [not Brereton]
Richard Cholmondeley (b. ca. 1511, d. ca. 1539), m. Elizabeth Brereton of Malpas
<Snip>
So this does seem to support the conclusion that Richard Cholmondeley, the father of Sir Hugh, did die in 1518 – and thus he is unlikely to be the father of Ursula, the wife of Thomas Stanley of Weever and Alderley. One possibility (perhaps remote) is that Ursula was a daughter (not noted by Ormerod or Helsby) of the last Richard (d. 1539) and thus “dau. of Richard and niece [not sister] of Sir Hugh”. But this may be a stretch….
<Snip>
As noted below, a preponderance of the evidence supports your suggestion that Ursula was niece not sister of Sir Hugh - as was her sister Anne and perhaps her other sister also.
If Eliz Brereton 'widow of Richard Cholmley' m.(2) Randal Mainwaring of Over Peover and had several children by him, the ages of Mainwarrings's children by her indicate they were b. bef 1539. So while I agree with you there were 4 Richard Cholmleys, I'd reverse the last 2 wives. Evidence supporting this is found in a 2 Aug 1523 will for Sir Randall Brereton in which he bequeaths Malpas and his other estates to himself and wife Eleanor, then to his sons, then to his brother Bartholomew, and lastly to what are surely 3 of his daughters' families, including "Richard son and heir of Richard Cholmondley". [1] This indicates that Richard d. 1539 was an underage heir of his mother Elizabeth Brereton in 1523, his father then d. The 1518 ipm makes him then age 7 (b. 1511), consistent with a 1521 grant of his estate and marriage to Molyneux, Hassal and Williamson - one suspects his wife Elizabeth NN was from one of these 3 families.[2]
Notwithstanding the pedigrees, [3] I agree with you that Orderod's 1539 ipm transcription should be relied on. That is, it was Richard Esq.'s brother (not son) Hugh who was his heir in 1539. This could only happen if Richard d. 1539 had no issue - or only had surviving daughters.
A 1557 marriage record has been found for Ursula's sister, Anne, who m. Randall Brereton of Cuddington as shown in the pedigrees.[4] She - like Ursula - was unlikely to be b. bef 1518, and the marriage date strengthens the case that both her and Ursula's father d. 1539.
Three Cholmley sons were b. bef 1518 - Richard b. 1511, Sir Hugh b. 1513 per his MI, and Randal recorder of London. His name Randal suggests a Brereton ancestry. His bio is on the UK Parliament website @ http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/cholmley-ralph-1517-63 indicating he was b. 1517, so he would be a younger son of Richard d. 1518, not of Richard d. 1539 who was clearly underage in 1523.
Lodge's Peerage of Ireland Vol 5 has several pages on the Cholmley family. A bio of Hugh Cholmley Sr. on page 61 @ http://books.google.com/books?id=tYoUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA61 states that Sir Hugh d. 6 Jan 1596 [/1597] at age 83 (thus b. abt 1513). The 'age 83' comes from an MI in Malpas Church.[5] The bio incorrectly states "he was age 25 at his father's death", which would mean his father d. abt 1538/39. That he was 25
in 1538/39 is valid based on his MI, but he could not be son of Richard d. 1539 who was underage in 1518.
Lodge states that Richard Cholmondley Esq. d. 30 Hen VIII [1538/39] age 43, but if age 7 in the 1518 ipm he could only be age 28. Nor is any source for 'age 43' noted by Lodge. Lodge does cite the Cholmondeley Chapel MI for Richard Cholmley and his wife Elizabeth (no last name) dated 1540, but the MI has no ages. Lodge's description of their children and descendants is lengthier than the visitations and may prove of interest :
[Richard Chomley's] first wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Roger Corbet of Morton-Corbet in Shropshire, by whom he had an only daughter Maud, married to Sir Peter Newton of Beverly by whom she had John, Charles, and Arthurs By his second wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Randal Brereton of Malpas, chamberlain of Chester, who remarried with Sir Randal Manwaring of Over-Pever, he had several children, whereof . . . the sons were, Hugh his [eventual] heir ; and Randal (or Ranulph) Cholmondeley, who being educated in the study of the laws at Lincoln's-Inn, was elected 5 Edw. VI, autumn reader of that society, but did not read because of the pestilence ; the next year he was lent-reader, and in 1553 (1 and 2 Phil, and Mary) being one of the judges of the sheriffs court of London, was made recorder of that city." To this list must be added eldest son Richard d. 1539, who the pedigrees incorrectly show d.s.p. but only because his daughters were misplaced.
Based on the chronology problems you noted and other items noted above, at least 2 of the 3 daughters the pedigrees and Lodge assigned to Richard d. 1518 now seem best assigned to Richard d. 1539. Their description of all 3 are "Catharine was married to Richard Prestland of Prestland and Wardhill in Cheshire, Esq.; Agnes [Ann] to Randal Manwaring of Carington, Esq. by whom she had Henry of Kilingham, living in 1566, ancestor by Eleanor, daughter of George Venables, Esq. to the family of that place ; and Ursula, to Thomas Stanley of Wever, Esq. living 1580,'great-grandson of John Stanley, brother to Thomas, the first Earl of Derby, by Elizabeth, daughter 3nd heir to Thomas Wever of Wever, Esq. and by him had Thomas, who died without issue ; Ralph, who left posterity by Margaret, daughter of John Masterson of Nantwich ; Elizabeth, married to Roger Downes of Shrigley ; Frances, to Henry Delves of Dodington ; and Dorothy."
Terry Booth
Chicago IL
Footnotes
---------
[1] House of Commons Papers; Vol 45; page 29 [sub Welsh Papers for Brereton] @ http://books.google.com/books?id=oEgTAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA29 . The list of heirs in the will matches to the sons and sons-in-law of Sir Randall Brereton of Malpas m. Eleanor Dutton on page 43/44 of Glover's visitation of Cheshire.
[2] On page 69, same source, "1 Jul 1521. Grant to Edward Molyneux clerk, Richard Hassal gentleman, and Richard Williamson clerk of the custody of the manors &c. which were of Richard Cholmondley, during the minority of Richard his son and heir, together with the marriage of the said son."
[3] There are two very similar pedigrees by Glover, the 1580 visitation for Cheshire previously noted with Sir Hugh Cgolmley as likely respondent (see also @ http://books.google.com/books?id=iawKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA64), and a 1583 visitation for Staffordshire with Edward Cholmley of Copenhall the respondent @ http://books.google.com/books?id=ADsRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA61. Quite likely the 1583 visitation borrowed the Cholmley line from the 1580 visitation. It is also quite possible that whoever recorded the Chomley line - since it didn't affect the rights to the family arms - misplaced the daus of Sir Hugh's brother Richard.
[4] UK National Archives; DCH/C/918; 12 Feb 1556/7. MARRIAGE SETTLEMENT between Randle Brereton of Cudynton, gentleman, and Sir Hugh Cholmeley Kt., Thomas Wilbraham of Woodhay esq, Reginald Corbet esq. and Thomas Bulkeley, gentleman --- the said Randle Brereton's messuages, lands etc: in WYLLEY are settled to the use of himself for life, remainder to Anne his wife for life, remainder to his right heirs. Seal: green, a garb. Parchment.
[5] The MI is independently described in Richard Pocock's 'Travels through England' Vol 44 page 11 @ http://books.google.com/books?id=w_gIAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA11 "Hugo Cholmondeley de Cholmondley Senior . . mortem obiit anno aetatis 83 anna domini 1596 . . " An MI dated 1540 for his father (founder of the Cholmondeley chapel), is also there and was noted by Pocock "Orate pro bono statu [Richardi Cholmondeley et Elizabeth Uxoris ejus], Sacelli factores. Anno domini millesimo quingentisimo quarto decimo." No last name for his wife is shown.
______________
From: John Higgins <jhigginsgen@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: More Stanley confusion ?
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 12:12:58 -0700 (PDT)
References: <A627D92CABC24C97B85B6159A9888349@leoe261f6d62ea><mailman.10.1366851928.25712.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><8a138a3b-c800-43c3-a46d-51ec675b7090@ph9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com><mailman.7.1366936312.30090.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><b01b4473-cc62-45f0-b866-b95b36fc077b@yb1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com><mailman.2.1367084242.28086.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
On Apr 27, 10:37 am, "TJ Booth" <tjbo...@aol.com> wrote:
> John,
>
> Thanks for keeping this thread alive - not my line, but solving the puzzle
> is interesting. See below.
>
>
> As noted below, a preponderance of the evidence supports your suggestion
> that Ursula was niece not sister of Sir Hugh - as was her sister Anne and
> perhaps her other sister also.
>
> If Eliz Brereton 'widow of Richard Cholmley' m.(2) Randal Mainwaring of Over
> Peover and had several children by him, the ages of Mainwarrings's children
> by her indicate they were b. bef 1539. So while I agree with you there were
> 4 Richard Cholmleys, I'd reverse the last 2 wives. Evidence supporting this
> is found in a 2 Aug 1523 will for Sir Randall Brereton in which he bequeaths
> Malpas and his other estates to himself and wife Eleanor, then to his sons,
> then to his brother Bartholomew, and lastly to what are surely 3 of his
> daughters' families, including "Richard son and heir of Richard
> Cholmondley". [1] This indicates that Richard d. 1539 was an underage heir
> of his mother Elizabeth Brereton in 1523, his father then d. The 1518 ipm
> makes him then age 7 (b. 1511), consistent with a 1521 grant of his estate
> and marriage to Molyneux, Hassal and Williamson - one suspects his wife
> Elizabeth NN was from one of these 3 families.[2]
>
> Notwithstanding the pedigrees, [3] I agree with you that Orderod's 1539 ipm
> transcription should be relied on. That is, it was Richard Esq.'s brother
> (not son) Hugh who was his heir in 1539. This could only happen if Richard
> d. 1539 had no issue - or only had surviving daughters.
>
> A 1557 marriage record has been found for Ursula's sister, Anne, who m.
> Randall Brereton of Cuddington as shown in the pedigrees.[4] She - like
> Ursula - was unlikely to be b. bef 1518, and the marriage date strengthens
> the case that both her and Ursula's father d. 1539.
>
> Three Cholmley sons were b. bef 1518 - Richard b. 1511, Sir Hugh b. 1513 per
> his MI, and Randal recorder of London. His name Randal suggests a Brereton
> ancestry. His bio is on the UK Parliament website @http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/chol...
> indicating he was b. 1517, so he would be a younger son of Richard d. 1518,
> not of Richard d. 1539 who was clearly underage in 1523.
>
> Lodge's Peerage of Ireland Vol 5 has several pages on the Cholmley family. A
> bio of Hugh
> Cholmley Sr. on page 61 @http://books.google.com/books?id=tYoUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA61 states that Sir Hugh
> d. 6 Jan 1596 [/1597] at age 83 (thus b. abt 1513). The 'age 83' comes from
> an MI in Malpas Church.[5] The bio incorrectly states "he was age 25 at his
> father's death", which would mean his father d. abt 1538/39. That he was 25
> in 1538/39 is valid based on his MI, but he could not be son of Richard d.
> 1539 who was underage in 1518.
>
> Lodge states that Richard Cholmondley Esq. d. 30 Hen VIII [1538/39] age 43,
> but if age 7 in the 1518 ipm he could only be age 28. Nor is any source for
> 'age 43' noted by Lodge. Lodge does cite the Cholmondeley Chapel MI for
> Richard Cholmley and his wife Elizabeth (no last name) dated 1540, but the
> MI has no ages. Lodge's description of their children and descendants is
> lengthier than the visitations and may prove of interest :
>
> [Richard Chomley's] first wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Roger Corbet
> of Morton-Corbet in Shropshire, by whom he had an only daughter Maud,
> married to Sir Peter Newton of Beverly by whom she had John, Charles, and
> Arthurs By his second wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Randal Brereton of
> Malpas, chamberlain of Chester, who remarried with Sir Randal Manwaring of
> Over-Pever, he had several children, whereof . . . the sons were, Hugh his
> [eventual] heir ; and Randal (or Ranulph) Cholmondeley, who being educated
> in the study of the laws at Lincoln's-Inn, was elected 5 Edw. VI, autumn
> reader of that society, but did not read because of the pestilence ; the
> next year he was lent-reader, and in 1553 (1 and 2 Phil, and Mary) being one
> of the judges of the sheriffs court of London, was made recorder of that
> city." To this list must be added eldest son Richard d. 1539, who the
> pedigrees incorrectly show d.s.p. but only because his daughters were
> misplaced.
>
> Based on the chronology problems you noted and other items noted above, at
> least 2 of the 3 daughters the pedigrees and Lodge assigned to Richard d.
> 1518 now seem best assigned to Richard d. 1539. Their description of all 3
> are "Catharine was married to Richard Prestland of Prestland and Wardhill in
> Cheshire, Esq.; Agnes [Ann] to Randal Manwaring of Carington, Esq. by whom
> she had Henry of Kilingham, living in 1566, ancestor by Eleanor, daughter of
> George Venables, Esq. to the family of that place ; and Ursula, to Thomas
> Stanley of Wever, Esq. living 1580,'great-grandson of John Stanley, brother
> to Thomas, the first Earl of Derby, by Elizabeth, daughter 3nd heir to
> Thomas Wever of Wever, Esq. and by him had Thomas, who died without issue ;
> Ralph, who left posterity by Margaret, daughter of John Masterson of
> Nantwich ; Elizabeth, married to Roger Downes of Shrigley ; Frances, to
> Henry Delves of Dodington ; and Dorothy."
>
> Terry Booth
> Chicago IL
>
> Footnotes
> ---------
> [1] House of Commons Papers; Vol 45; page 29 [sub Welsh Papers for Brereton]
> @http://books.google.com/books?id=oEgTAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA29. The list of heirs
> in the will matches to the sons and sons-in-law of Sir Randall Brereton of
> Malpas m. Eleanor Dutton on page 43/44 of Glover's visitation of Cheshire.
> [2] On page 69, same source, "1 Jul 1521. Grant to Edward Molyneux clerk,
> Richard Hassal gentleman, and Richard Williamson clerk of the custody of the
> manors &c. which were of Richard Cholmondley, during the minority of Richard
> his son and heir, together with the marriage of the said son."
> [3] There are two very similar pedigrees by Glover, the 1580 visitation for
> Cheshire previously noted with Sir Hugh Cgolmley as likely respondent (see
> also @http://books.google.com/books?id=iawKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA64), and a 1583
> visitation for Staffordshire with Edward Cholmley of Copenhall the
> respondent @http://books.google.com/books?id=ADsRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA61. Quite
> likely the 1583 visitation borrowed the Cholmley line from the 1580
> visitation. It is also quite possible that whoever recorded the Chomley
> line - since it didn't affect the rights to the family arms - misplaced the
> daus of Sir Hugh's brother Richard.
> [4] UK National Archives; DCH/C/918; 12 Feb 1556/7. MARRIAGE SETTLEMENT
> between Randle Brereton of Cudynton, gentleman, and Sir Hugh Cholmeley Kt.,
> Thomas Wilbraham of Woodhay esq, Reginald Corbet esq. and Thomas Bulkeley,
> gentleman --- the said Randle Brereton's messuages, lands etc: in WYLLEY are
> settled to the use of himself for life, remainder to Anne his wife for life,
> remainder to his right heirs. Seal: green, a garb. Parchment.
> [5] The MI is independently described in Richard Pocock's 'Travels through
> England' Vol 44 page 11 @http://books.google.com/books?id=w_gIAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA11"Hugo Cholmondeley de
> Cholmondley Senior . . mortem obiit anno aetatis 83 anna domini 1596 . . "
> An MI dated 1540 for his father (founder of the Cholmondeley chapel), is
> also there and was noted by Pocock "Orate pro bono statu [Richardi
> Cholmondeley et Elizabeth Uxoris ejus], Sacelli factores. Anno domini
> millesimo quingentisimo quarto decimo." No last name for his wife is shown.
Thanks, Terry, for this additional information and analysis - it is indeed an interesting puzzle.
You note that the Cholmondeley article in Lodge's Peerage of Ireland says that the last Richard Cholmondeley (d. 1539) had two wives (Elizabeth Corbet and Elizabeth Brereton) and that the daughter by the 1st marriage, Maud, married Sir Peter Newton. The 1st edition of Ormerod's Cheshire agrees with this, but Helsby in the 2nd edition points out that it is chronologically impossible for Maud the wife of Sir Peter Newton to be a daughter of this Richard - because Sir Peter Newton was Sheriff of Shropshire several times between 1503 and 1523, when the 4th Richard was not yet born or just an infant. Helsby assigns the Corbet marriage and the daughter Maud to the 2nd Richard Cholmondeley (who d. vp), probably as his 1st marriage. This makes much better sense chronologically. (For the sake of clarity and simplicity, I had omitted the other marriage of the 2nd Richard in my earlier post)
I agree now that Elizabeth Brereton of Malpas is more likely to be the wife of the 3rd Richard rather than the 4th one. This however leaves us with no identified wife for the 4th Richard (after Elizabeth Corbet is moved to the 2nd Richard). This doesn't mean that he couldn't have had a wife and children unknown to us, but it is a definite gap.
With respect to the supposed sisters of Ursula, wife of Thomas Stanley, it may be premature to move them from the 3rd to the 4th Richard. Helsby describes a land transaction of 5 Henry VIII involving the 3rd Richard in which he referes to marriage portions "for each of his unmarried daughters Ann and Katherine" (note no mention of Ursula). Katherine is presumably the daughter who married Richard Prestland. I don't see a pedigree reference to an Anne who married Randle Brereton of Cuddington as you mentioned, but Helsby suggests that there is confusion between Anen and the Agnes who married Randle Mainwaring of Carington [or Carrincham). It's not clear to me whether there were two or three daughters other than Ursula, but at least two of them seem to belong to the 3rd Richard rather than the 4th.
______________
From: "TJ Booth" <tjbooth@aol.com>
Subject: Re: More Stanley confusion ?
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 12:54:27 -0500
References: <A627D92CABC24C97B85B6159A9888349@leoe261f6d62ea><mailman.10.1366851928.25712.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><8a138a3b-c800-43c3-a46d-51ec675b7090@ph9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com><mailman.7.1366936312.30090.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><b01b4473-cc62-45f0-b866-b95b36fc077b@yb1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com><mailman.2.1367084242.28086.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><4936f78f-1518-4976-915b-e078d4993e07@j5g2000pby.googlegroups.com>
On Saturday, April 27, 2013 2:12 PM, "John Higgins" jhigginsgen@ya . . wrote
I agree now that Elizabeth Brereton of Malpas is more likely to be the wife of the 3rd Richard rather than the 4th one. This however leaves us with no identified wife for the 4th Richard (after Elizabeth Corbet is moved to the 2nd Richard). This doesn't mean that he couldn't have had a wife and children unknown to us, but it is a definite gap.
[Response}. The 1540 MI previoiusly cited for Richard in Malpas Church is for him and his wife 'Elizabeth'. While we don't know her last name, Richard d. 1539 was clearly married. That her name was Elizabeth has no doubt contributed to some conflating her with her mother-in-law]
With respect to the supposed sisters of Ursula, wife of Thomas Stanley, it may be premature to move them from the 3rd to the 4th Richard. Helsby describes a land transaction of 5 Henry VIII involving the 3rd Richard in which he referes to marriage portions "for each of his unmarried daughters Ann and Katherine" (note no mention of Ursula). Katherine is presumably the daughter who married Richard Prestland. I don't see a pedigree reference to an Anne who married Randle Brereton of Cuddington as you mentioned, but Helsby suggests that there is confusion between Anen and the Agnes who married Randle Mainwaring of Carington [or Carrincham). It's not clear to me whether there were two or three daughters other than Ursula, but at least two of them seem to belong to the 3rd Richard rather than the 4th.
[Response. The pedigree calls her Agnes, while the 1557 marriage settlement calls her Ann. The fact that the pedigree misnames her is evidence that the identity (as well as placement) of the daughters in the pedigree is not totally reliable, and as you noted in your early comments about her sister Margaret, the chronology is otherwise awkward if she had to be b. bef 1519.
Had Helsby been aware of this marriage record, noted last time, I don't think he would have said what he said : UK National Archives; DCH/C/918; 12 Feb 1556/7. MARRIAGE SETTLEMENT between Randle Brereton of Cudynton, gentleman, and Sir Hugh Cholmeley Kt., Thomas Wilbraham of Woodhay esq, Reginald Corbet esq. and Thomas Bulkeley, gentleman --- the said Randle Brereton's messuages, lands etc: in WYLLEY are settled to the use of himself for life, remainder to Anne his wife for life, remainder to his right heirs. Seal: green, a garb. Parchment.
Have found a 1580 will for Ann Brereton 'widow' of Stretley in Lancashire and Cheshire Wills, page 35 @ http://books.google.com/books?id=Ol1VAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA35. Sir Hugh Chomondley - likely once her guardian since he was involved in her 1557 marriage settlement - is the first Chomley mentioned, but is not called father or brother. She mentions her cousins including Richard Chomley (likely Hugh's son) and Frances Wilbramson, (surely Hugh's daughter), both identified in the 1580/96 Cheshire visitation pedigree. If Anne was Hugh's sister, she would call his children nephews/nieces. No doubt more relations can be identified in the will]
I continue to believe that the preponderance of the evidence - some unknown to Orderod and Helsby - makes at least Margaret m. Thomas Stanley and Ann m. Randle Brereton the nieces of Sir Hugh Cholmley., daus of Richard Cholmley d. 1539 m. Eliz NN, and granddaus of Richard Cholmley m. Elizabeth Brereton.
Genealogically, whether Margaret and Ann are grand-daus or daus of Richard Cholmley m. Elizabeth Brereton, either way they possess that couple's ancestry. It would be a shame not to accord them that ancestry because of an awkward visitation pedigree. Since it was you who brought up the chronological problem with Leo, I leave it to you to advise him on the best placement. I have no problem if you think it should be Orderod and Helsby's placement.
Off on vacation now.
Terry Booth
Chicago IL
Source: "Re: More Stanley confusion ?" thread, GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives, http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2013-04/1366927260, retrieved 2 July 2017.
