Here is a copy of Douglas Richardson's post in soc.genealogy.medieval dated 2nd Jan 2018.
Dear Newsgroup ~
Some years ago I came across the following record of interest in the Patent Rolls:
A license was issued 19 September 1295, for Maud [Fitz Alan], late the wife of Philip Burnel, tenant in chief, to marry Robert de Brus, lord of Annandale [Reference: Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1292-1301 (1895), pg. 147]. A weblink to this record is given below:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015031081154;view=1up;...
At the time, I checked Complete Peerage and found no mention of this marriage either under the Brus, Burnell, or Carrick accounts. Nor was there any mention of this marriage in the account of Robert de Brus, Earl of Carrick [died 1304] in Scots Peerage 2 (1905): 432–435 (sub Carrick).
I subsequently encountered a certain communication dated 13 October 1296 from King Edward I of England to John de Langetone in the published Calendar of Documents relating to Scotland by Bain. This specific record names Maud Fitz Alan's husband in 1296 as Robert de Brus, Earl of Carrick and lord of Annandale. This record is erroneously cited by Scots Peerage as pertaining to Robert de Brus, grandson of the Competitor (afterwards King Robert I), when it actually pertains to his father, Robert de Brus, Senior, who died in 1304.
"On 13 October 1296 at Kirkham. The King to John de Langetone to his
chancellor. Empowers him to appoint some fit person to receive the
attorneys of Robert de Brus Earl of Carrick and lord of Annandale,
and Matill[idis] his`wife, in a plea of dower whereof the said earl's
clerk, the bearer, will acquaint him. Privy Seals (Tower), 24 Edward
I. Bundle 5." [Reference: Joseph Bain, Calendar of Documents relating
to Scotland, 2 (1884): 223, no. 850].
In recent time I've found a Common Pleas lawsuit of similar date which conclusively proves that the marriage between Robert de Brus, Earl of Carrick [father of King Robert I de Brus of Scotland], and Maud, widow of Philip Burnell, took place. Below is an abstract of this lawsuit.
In Hilary term 1298 Robert de Brus and Maud his wife sued Walter de Wilton and Isabel his wife in the Court of Common Pleas regarding the third part of one messuage, one water mill, 160 acres of lands, 10 acres of meadow, and 40 shillings rent in Todber, Dorset, which the said Maud claimed as her dower of the dotation of Philip Burnel her first husband [Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/116, image 98f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E1/CP40no116/aCP40no116fronts/IMG_0098.htm)].
Robert de Brus was definitely in England at the date of this lawsuit, for he was summoned to attend the King of England at Salisbury 26 Jan. 1296/7 [Reference: Complete Peerage, 3 (1913): 56 (sub Carrick)].
The marriage of Robert de Brus and Maud Fitz Alan appears to have ended in divorce sometime before Easter term [6 May–1 June] 1299 when, as “Maud formerly the wife of Philip Burnell,” she sued in a plea of dower regarding a messuage and lands in Gunton, Norfolk [see Rye, Some Rough Materials for a Hist. of the Hundred of North Erpingham 1 (1883): 82–84]. In the same term, she likewise sued Ralph Springehose for a third of a messuage, lands, and £10 of rent in Wolverhampton, Staffordshire and various other tenants in Wolverhampton for a third of their holdings as her dower [see Wrottesley, Staffordshire Suits: Plea Rolls (Colls. Hist. Staffs. 7(1)) (1886): 51–52; Court of Common Pleas, CP40/127, image 65f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E1/CP40no127/aCP40no127fronts/IMG_0065.htm); Court of Common Pleas, CP40/127, image 92f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E1/CP40no127/aCP40no127fronts/IMG_0092.htm)].
The usual cause for divorce in this time period was consanguinity (that is, near kinship between the two parties). In this case, Robert de Brus and Maud Fitz Alan are known to have been related in the 3rd and 4th degrees of kindred respectively, by virtue of their common descent from Sir William Marshal (died 1219), Earl of Pembroke. Robert de Brus was subsequently remarried and was survived by a third wife, Eleanor, and, as will be seen below, Maud Fitz Alan also eventually remarried.
In 1302, as “Maud widow of Philip Burnell,” she petitioned the king and council regarding socages and burgages formerly held in various counties by her late husband, Philip Burnell (see National Archives, SC 8/313/E63; available at http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk). In Hilary term 1309 William de Mortimer sued Maud widow of Philip Burnel in the Court of Common Pleas regarding a debt of £10 [see Court of Common Pleas, CP40/175, image 85d (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no175/bCP40no175dorses/IMG_0085.htm)]. In Michaelmas term 1309 Henry son of Henry de Erdington sued Maud and her son, Edward Burnell, regarding the manor of Wellington, Shropshire [see Wrottesley Staffordshire Suits: Plea Rolls (Colls. Hist. Staffs. 9) (1888): 19]. She presented to the church of Great Cheverell, Wiltshire in 1314 and 1315. In Hilary term 1314 Richard, Abbot of Waltham Holy Cross, sued Edward son of Philip Burnel in the Court of Common Pleas, whom Maud widow of Philip Burnel called to warranty in a Essex plea regarding land [see Court of Common Pleas, CP40/204, image 13f (available at http://aalt.law.uh.edu/E2/CP40no204/aCP40no204fronts/IMG_0013.htm)].
Maud married (3rd) before 19 June 1316 Simon de Criketot (or Criketoft, Kirketoft) [see Descriptive Catalogue of Ancient Deeds 4 (1902): 85–86 (A. 6814); Copinger County of Suffolk 5 (1905): 231; Mélanges de Linguistique et de Litterature offerts á M. Alfred Jeanroy (1928): 204–205]. Maud died shortly before 17 Nov. 1326 [see National Archives, SC 8/52/2570, petition dated c.1330 by John de Haudlo and Maud his wife to the king and council (available at http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk)].
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Problem with this page?
Private UserGeni Pro
Geni Pro
Geni member
Geni member