John II de Monmouth Lord of Monmouth - Two sons of John FitzGilbert of Montmouth, both named John but by different mothers

Wonderful work; thanks so much.

Pam, thanks for your research, the conflict is that Paul believes that the death date is incorrect for John John II de Monmouth Lord of Monmouth.

Paul has gone to the Gloucestershire council in England where records are held and he has look at documents over the years, Paul he has found conflicting information to what is on Geni.

This is an Email that Paul sent to me this morning.

----------

Shirley

History of our welsh de Monmouth family

Baderon de Monmouth born about 1125 his hereditry son gilbert de Monmouth born about 1176 his hereditry son
john de Monmouth born about 1190 died 1248 married agnes de musgroes, their hereditry son john de Monmouth born about 1225 died 1257.gave barony of Monmouth and its castle in 1256 to prince Edward to pay off debt this john brother of Richard de wyesham.

All other information on the internet is FALSE.

PAUL

----------

I have had a look and have read what you have just put in this discussions.
Over time I have also had a look at what is on the net and I can see that there were definitely two John de Monmouth's as Paul does not think the same.
I have over time shown him that here were two John de Monmouth's who were born to each of John fitz Gilbert de Monmouth, Lord of Monmouth wife's

1/ John (the Elder Brother) de Monmouth, Lord of Monmouth (born of his first wife Cecily de Waleran,

2/ John John II de Monmouth Lord of Monmouth, born to his father's second wife Agnes de Muscegros
This is our de Monmouth, de Wysham family line and he is the one who Paul thinks that the death date is incorrect.

Thanks again Pam
Cheers Shirley

Pam, I went to this site that you have put into your research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth_(died_1257)

And found that this John of Monmouth did married.

"It appears for this that John of Monmouth (who die 1257) may have been the one who married a daughter of David's and it has been suggested that the daughter's name was Margaret. So John may have married three times, his first wife being Margaret of Huntingdon. It is claimed that the couple had a daughter Joan Margaret Monmouth who married Geoffrey de Neville (c. 1195-1242) of Raby, in Lincolnshire"

I think, that this information is proof that this John of Monmouth did marry.

Pam, would you be able to attach his wife and daughter to him, for me please.

Shirley

Shirley

(1) - The death date changed
(2) - The correct ancestry to show john de Monmouth who died in 1248 descended from welsh celtic monk's Brenton Caradoc de la Boussac family
(Bretons not normans).

Is it also possible you could put onto the discussion what you sent me in full for Gwythenoc Withenoc from 1066 it sounds good?

Paul

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

In 1066 Breton Gwythenoc de Monmouth (de la Boussac) and his brother Baderon de Monmouth (de la Boussac) came across to Wales from France with William the conqueror.
Through our family research it has been found that Breton Gwythenoc de Monmouth (de la Boussac) was place in control of Monmouthshire in Wales as he and his brother Baderon could understand and speak the Welsh language as Breton is a welsh ancestry. The language that was spoken in Boussac France was very similar to the Welsh language.
The history of Breton welsh ancestry, though our research the history has shown that the Welsh Monks immigrated cross into France, this was to spread the word of the Church.
While they were living in France, they were very religious family who were Welsh Celtic Monks
With these 2 Boussac boys returning to Wales and being in control of Monmouth Wales for hundreds of years
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The earliest known person the lineage traces back to be a man named Hamo I, Viscount of Alet, France who was born between 963-1023 AD. The following is a pedigree from him:
'Caradoc (or Caragod) de la Boussac (born in Boussac, Ille-et-Vilaine, Bretagne, France in 1035 AD)'
* Baderon Lord of Monmouth (born in Dol, Bretagne, France in 1060 AD)
* William FitzBaderon, Baron of Monmouth (born in Monmouthshire, Wales around 1087 AD)
* Fitzwilliam Baron of Monmouth Baderon (born in Monmouthshire, Wales in 1100 AD)
* Gilbert FitzBaderon, Lord of Monmouth (born between 1105-1163 AD)
* John FitzGilbert, Baron of Monmouth (born in Monmouthshire, around 1182 AD)
* Richard, Lord of Wyesham (born in Monmouth Castle, Wales around 1223 AD)
* Sir Ralph de Wysham (born in Wyesham Village, England in 1260 AD)
* Sir John de Wysham (born in 1288 AD)
* John de Wysham, Baron of Clifton (born in Woodmanton in 1320 AD)
* Sir Richard de Wysham (born in 1350 AD).
His son, Richard Holt, also known as Wysham Holt was born in Holt, Worcestershire, England in 1370. He married Cristine Coldrey and had a son with her named Richard. This son Richard was born around 1420. He married Joan Collingbourne (Darrell) and had two issue: Christian (Berkeley) and Elizabeth (Pownde).

• Reference
• https://coadb.com/surnames/holt-arms.html

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

* Name: Caradoc de la Boussac
• Birth: 1035 in Boussac near Dol, Ille-et-Vilaine, Bretagne, France
• Death: 1070 (35) Ile de Vilaine, Bretagne, (Britney), France
• Origin: Breton Descent
• Religion: Welsh Celtic Monk
• Occupation: Land owner in Dol Britney France
• Vassals: To this Religious district under Juhel archbishop of dol.
• Meaning: Given land for loyalty,and services by the Church of Dol.
• Wife/Partner: Unknown
• Family:
* 1/ Nobleman, Monk of Breton Origin, Lord of Monmouth Gwythenoc De Monmouth (De La Boussac)
* 2/ Monk Baderon De Monmouth (De La Boussac)

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

John de Monmouth of Monmouth
B: D: 1248
His Ancestry is shown as Norman (this is not correct)

His Ancestry is Celtic Monk = Breton

(Could this please be changed)

----------

John de Monmouth of Monmouth
B: Died: 1281 (on Geni is not correct)

This correct death date is 1257

(Could this please be changed)

* Reference

This information was found this document:

keith kissack book medieval Monmouth" Breton lords of Monmouth" john de Monmouth

----------

John de Monmouth the father died 1248 the son john (Elder) inherited the barony of Monmouth,and its castle in 1248 he held it until 1256 when he handed it over to prince Edward 8 year's after his fathers death this son john died 1 year later in 1257

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

Pam, as both of our John de Monmouth have been locked, we who are decedents of them are no longer are able to up date them with any further information that is found on them.
We feel that as they are our direct decedents, we should be able to have some control of what is shown on them and be able to freely assess.
As family member are still reaching this side of our family decedents with new information turning up from time to time.
Our family would like to be able to add this information into the person that it's for.

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

SHIRLEY

I sent you the document a page from keith kissack book medieval Monmouth" Breton lords of Monmouth" john de Monmouth died 1248 he married Agnes de Musgroes their son john de Monmouth died in 1257 the death date should be changed to 1257 this john handed over the barony of Monmouth,and its castle to prince Edward to pay off debt.

John of Monmouth, his ancestry was not norman he was descended from caradoc de la Boussac who was a welsh Celtic Monk =Breton

Paul

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

Thanks Pam
Cheers Shirley

The Bretons were indeed connected through languages, which were similar, Welsh being descended from Breton, and some aspects of culture. But the Bretons were not Welsh.

It is true that some of the Bretons who were allied with the Norman invasion of England were given authority in the Marches (though not originally; not until about 1075) one theory being that, as they spoke Breton, they could communicate better with the Welsh than the French speaking Norman Marcher Lords, though this is probably not true, since by that time they were speaking French. And allied with the Normans, not the Welsh, whom they were supposed to be keeping in line.

All of which is to say — the two Breton brothers you mention were not Welsh monks. They were Breton monks living in Wales.

John de Monmouth, descended from this Breton family, did have Breton ancestry.

He also had a lot of Norman ancestry. And he was not only allied with the Anglo-Norman royalty, a favorite of both King John and King Henry, he was an extremely powerful Marcher Lord, a scourge to the Welsh, really. He spoke French. His name was French. His Celtic blood was Breton, not Welsh.

He did not (and this was to my surprise, as he is late enough that I expected to see intermarriage) have Welsh ancestry.

I have already written this in general to your cousin Paul whom you quote above.

The reference you cite is Keith Kissack, who was a schoolteacher and historian in Monmouth, and as far as I can tell a respectable source.

What, exactly, is the quote where he says that the Bretons were Welsh? That would be an unusual mistake for him to make.

The de Monmouth family ancestry, is from Caradoc de la Boussac who descended from Welsh Celtic Breton Monk's in Dol Brittany from the 5-6 century and John de Monmouth was the descended product of Caradoc de la Boussac Welsh Celtic blood.

The Celtic blood of Bretons of our history originated in DOL BRITTANY in the 5-6 century they were from Welsh monk's from south east wales they went across to Dol Brittany France to spread the Churches word.
These Welsh monk's from south east wales stayed over there living in Dol Brittany France and it wasn't until these 2 Boussac boys came to wales in 1066 there for John de Monmouth blood is welsh Celtic and not that of Norman.

Paul has done a lot of research into this over many years and this is what he has found in History book and other documents.
Paul has found that our Boussac family line comes from these Welsh monk's from south east wales as they were very closely related to the Church member who were working in the church's as Monks and Priest in Dol Brittany France.
Their surname is unknown, as they were given land and control of Boussac by the Church in about the 5-6 century.

This family took their surname Boussac, after the area that they had controlled of and we believe that there was a Castle and a Church in Boussac that was built by them.

I hope to get over there sooner then later and go to the Boussac area to see what other information I can find on out Boussac, de Monmouth, de Wysham family.
I am sure that there is a lot of history and information there to be found.

Shirley

Private User

Please go to the profile in question, go up to the right hand corner, click on Actions, and then choose Ancestor Report from the drop down menu. Once you go back a couple of generations, to before the Conquest, everybody is from some place in what is now France. There are indeed a couple of lines from Brittany in there. Everybody else is from Normandy. John de Monmouth had some Breton blood. He was mostly Norman.

By the time he was born, there was no distinction, in England, anyway. He was an Anglo-Norman because that was the group of people he ran with. And his ancestors had been part of the Norman conquest. And as far as we can tell they hadn’t even been speaking Breton at the time of the Conquest, but French.

He was an Anglo-Norman Marcher lord of partly Breton stock. And he was a major power in the Anglo-Norman attempt to subjugate Wales. He did not think of himself as Welsh. The Welsh were his enemy.

You are now also saying that the de Boussacs (who were Bretons who went to Wales and became monks) were descended from Welsh monks who went to Britain. I can find no evidence for the family specifically before the brothers’ father, Caradoc de Broussac. So maybe they were descended from Welsh monks and maybe they were not; what is you evidence for this, or indeed for the Welsh monks going to Brittany in the 6th or 7th century?

I am wondering if part of the confusion comes from the fact that the Welsh church in Monmouth, which the Broussac family took over (this was part of the Norman attempt to bring the Welsh into line) was dedicated to St. Caradoc.

That was simply a happy accident. Caradoc was both a Breton and a Welsh name. But it didn’t get introduced into Brittany by the Welsh. The Welsh language came second.

To ask that we relabel John de Monmouth Welsh is to defy history as we know it.

So we would need some actual evidence.

Just out of interest, would our family DNA count?
My daughter has 68% England, Wales & North-western Europe, this is France (YES)
My son has 68% England, Wales & North-western Europe, this is France 1% Great Britain
This make 67% for his DNA Wales & North-western Europe, this is France (YES Anne)
Their father’s male line is Welsh all the way back up to William FitzBaderon de Monmouth who was born in Monmouth Wales.
Then we go back over to FRANCE!!!!! = Normandy Norman 😊

The same for Paul, as he is also from our de Wysham, de Monmouth, and de la Boussac male line. On Paul's female line he has found it to be Welsh as well.

This DNA shows that our male line are/were descendants from the Welsh/French.

"everybody is from some place in what is now France"
Yes that is true Anne and my children's DNA also is saying this with their Welsh/French DNA match.

I do have to say, my son has been told that he has stronger North-western Europe DNA to what they are finding from the French people DNA who are living in France today.

"Welsh monks going to Brittany in the 6th or 7th century?"
Paul has read this, I guess in a book about Welsh history.

Perhaps we could call this Welsh/Norman Ancestry.

Anne, if we are saying that
"The reference you cite is Keith Kissack, who was a schoolteacher and historian in Monmouth, and as far as I can tell a respectable source".

Does this mean that the incorrect death date will be changed from 1248 to 1257?

John de Monmouth of Monmouth
B: Died: 1281 (on Geni is not correct)

This correct death date is 1257 as found int he historian Keith Kissack Book.

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

"It appears for this that John of Monmouth (who die 1257) may have been the one who married a daughter of David's and it has been suggested that the daughter's name was Margaret. So John may have married three times, his first wife being Margaret of Huntingdon. It is claimed that the couple had a daughter Joan Margaret Monmouth who married Geoffrey de Neville (c. 1195-1242) of Raby, in Lincolnshire"

Both John's were locked so that our family couldn't add on there wives as Pam said that neigh of the John's married.

I find that hard to believe as this document said hat he married times.

Is it possible for me to have this John de Monmouth of Monmouth (The Elder) unlocked so that I can add his wife Margaret and their daughter added to him.

Margaret daughter of David, is this a first name then David who?
or is this a surname? Margaret David?

Thanks Anne and Pam for your input in to this discussion.
I do hope that this matter is now all sorted.

Anne, it was nice working with you again and I am sure it will happen again!!
Thank again
Cheers Shirley

This discussion is now too unwieldy to follow, so I’m going to summarize it.

Private User has asked

1) that we change the death date of the John de Monmouth who died in 1257 to 1281. However, those are two different Johns de Monmouth. This one died in 1281, and since he was hanged and that is in the records, that date is clear: John II de Monmouth Lord of Monmouth

2) that we give the John de Monmouth who died in 1257 a wife, based on the Wikipedia entry, as that constitutes proof that he had one. However, the Wikipedia entry does not state this as fact. It states it as a possibility. The possibility has been put into the Overview. Since whether or not he married he had no issue, this does not affect the genealogical line.

3) that the ancestry of the de Monmouth family show that it descends from the de Broussac family of Breton. It does show that already.

4) that John de Monmouth be shown as being Welsh, not Anglo-Norman.
The reasons given for this are:
a) that the de Monmouths were not Norman but Breton. However,
1)a look at the ancestry shows that though the de Broussac family was not Norman, by the time John de Monmouth the father was born, the family had intermarried with Norman families and was mostly Norman by blood, and also were clearly acting as Anglo-Normans politically.
2) the Bretons were not Welsh.

In response to my having said the above, Shirley counters that the de Broussac family was descended from Welsh monks who went to Brittany in the 5th or 6th century. However,
1) there is no evidence given as to the Welsh monks starting monasteries in Breton
2) if they did, there is no evidence of the direct line between them and Caradoc de Broussac
3) if indeed that evidence shows up, it doesn’t matter, because after 500 years they were Breton, not Welsh, unless they brought with them an entire community and did not intermarry with the locals for 500 years

The last issue is whether or not the current family’s DNA tests would affect what we put on Geni. The answer is no. There are over 20 generations in between John de Monmouth the father and the current descendants. There is no way to tell when and where various strains came into that line.

The de Monmouths, by the time John de Monmouth the father was born, were Anglo-Normans of Breton stock. They were not Welsh.

Thought I found a hint in Medieval Lands that John (the Elder) of Monmouth *had* been married but had had no children - a reference to somebody marrying an Elizabeth(?) who was the widow of "John de Munemuth". Can't find it now, though.

I was looking at this document about John de Monmouth

Marriages and issue
John's first marriage, in 1201, was to Cecily, the daughter of Walter de Waleran (c. 1143-1200), of Shaftesbury, Dorset.
"They had three daughters and a son, William". Cecily died in 1222.[4]

I noticed that there is no mention of a John de Monmouth been born to his first marriage, only a William.

His second marriage, in about 1223/24, was to Agnes, the daughter of Walter de Muscegros.
They had three sons: John, who became lord of Monmouth upon his father's death, Walter and Richard, this Richard de Monmouth became Richard de Wyesham and this is our Wysham family line.

Where did the other John de Monmouth come from?

This is what Paul has also found while doing his research and doesn't understand how there are now 2 John's, when records show and say that there was only on John de Monmouth born and that was for his 2nd marriage.

Reference

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth#Marriages_and_issue

Shirley

I was just thinking, that perhaps the mix up might come from them being referred to as
Father John de Monmouth was known as the elder John
and his son was known as the younger John
Rather then being referred to as John senior and John Junior.

Pam, what are your thought about this?

Where did you find that there were 2 John's being born to each wife?

Shirley

There seems to have been three of them: John the father (John FitzGilbert), d. 1248, John the Elder (d. 1257), and John the Younger (hanged 1281).

John FitzGilbert was married twice, one son John by each wife (NO imagination in naming sons!). John the Elder *may* have been married but had no children; John the Younger *was* married and *did* have children.

That's not the most absurd example of no-imagination: there's the infamous case of Bishop John White and Alderman/Lord Mayor John White, brothers from the *same* pair of parents (I personally suspect they were twins, with the Bishop being the"older").

Marriages and issue
John's first marriage, in 1201, was to Cecily, the daughter of Walter de Waleran (c. 1143-1200), of Shaftesbury, Dorset.
They had three daughters and a son, (William).
This is saying that there was no John de Monmouth who was born to his 1st marriage at all.

His second marriage, in about 1223/24, was to Agnes, the daughter of Walter de Muscegros. They had three sons: John, who became lord of Monmouth upon his father's death, Walter and Richard.
This is our Richard de Wyesham (de Monmouth).

The John de Monmouth child of, John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth and Agnes Muscegros, is on our family branch and he is the one who was Lord of Monmouth and he was not the John who was hanged for murder as this document shows.There was no John de Monmouth who was born to John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth and his 1st marriage to Cecily Waleran at all.
Why is there a John de Monmouth attached to his first wife Cecily Waleran, on Geni when this document shows that they never had a son John.

The document refers to “Albretha de Boterell and Joan de Nevil, an aunt on his mother's side, who is (Agnes Muscegros), and the first cousin” who is from his stepmother’s side, his father’s 1st wife Cecily Waleran.

“A recent scholarly source identifies another John of Monmouth, later hanged for murder, to whom this John of Monmouth left property, as a half-brother”.

Where did this John de Monmouth came from as the John de Monmouth on our branch is the 1st and only John de Monmouth who was born to John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth and Agnes Muscegros?
It’s quite possible that he could have been born out of wedlock and he is not the John de Monmouth from John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth’s 2nd marriage to Agnes Muscegros.

After reading this document, may I suggest that the other John that is attached to his first marriage be removed. This document shows that they never had a son named John at all.

If it is not known where this other John de Monmouth has turned up from then he should be shown on Geni as a son of John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth and his mother unknown.
This other John de Monmouth is the John who was hanged for murder, it was not our john de Monmouth who was the 1st born John to John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth as this document has shown.
Reference
References
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth_(died_1257)

Shirley

Marriages and issue
John's first marriage, in 1201, was to Cecily, the daughter of Walter de Waleran (c. 1143-1200), of Shaftesbury, Dorset.
They had three daughters and a son, (William).
This is saying that there was no John de Monmouth who was born to his 1st marriage at all.

Reference
References
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth_(died_1257)

Then we have wikitree who is saying something different altogether.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Monmouth-4#_note-IPMGloucestershireP119
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Biography
• 1.1 Death of John of Monmouth
• 1.2 Death of John son of John of Monmouth
• 1.3 Death of John son of John of Monmouth and Agnes de Muscegros

Where does this confusion with these 2 John de Monmouth’s come from?

There is wikitree saying one thing and Wikipedis saying another.

Is there any documents found anywhere, that are found to be correct?

Pam, where did you found the de Monmouth information, that helped you put the the de Monmouth family onto Geni ?

It seem to be very confusing with conflicting information around about these John de Monmouth's boys.

Is there any authentic document around that can clear this up.

Shirley

I just read the other post and was wondering if these 2 John's were both born to John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth’s 2nd marriage to Agnes Muscegros were twins?

With the them been referred to as John the elder and John the younger.

As found in this document

References
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth_(died_1257)

Marriages and issue
John's first marriage, in 1201, was to Cecily, the daughter of Walter de Waleran (c. 1143-1200), of Shaftesbury, Dorset.

They had three daughters and a son, (William).

This is saying that there was no John de Monmouth who was born to his 1st marriage at all. Why is it now been said that there was?.

If they were twins this would make sense to what twikitree are saying how the younger john de Monmouth was hanged for murder and his mother was Agnes Muscegros.

John the younger held the manors of Lassindon and Bolleye, in co Gloucester, of his mother, Agnes de Muscegros.

If they were twins then their mother would be Agnes Muscegros to both of them.

I would like to quote this, as it was found in wikipedia
reference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth_(died_1257)

"He was the son of John of Monmouth and his second wife Agnes, daughter of Walter de Muscegros"

In this document there is not mention of this John de Monmouth who died 1257 being the younger son who was hanged for murder.

Could it be because this John de Monmouth who died 1257 being the elder son with the other John de Monmouth who was the younger son who was hanged for murder.

It can not be said on one had that there was no son names John born to John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth and his 1st wife Cecily Waleran, then now be saying that there was.

When in this document it does state that there was no son named John who was born to John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth and his 1st wife Cecily Waleran.

@paul wysom the nationality of john de Monmouth who died in 1248 was not Anglo-Norman,but most definatley welsh as he was born in Monmouth south east wales,lived in south east wales,and died in south east wales,but also he had celtic welsh Breton ancestry. which is traced right back to caradoc de la boussac born in dol Brittany in 1005 brittany is a very strong celtic part of france with their own language very close to old welsh,own Breton flag,own customs, and costumes

paul wysom

@paul wysom- john de Monmouth,and his wife agnes de musgroes had a son also named john de Monmouth he inherited lord of Monmouth when his father died in 1248
8 year's later after his father died he handed the barony of Monmouth,and its castle over to prince Edward to pay off debt this john died 1-year later in 1257( that is agnes de musgroes son ) the source I give for this is

MONMOUTH HISTORIAN KIETH KISSACK BOOK MEDIEVAL MONMOUTH
BRETON LORDS OF MONMOUTH -PRINTED IN 1974

PAUL WYSOM

This is the document that is being referred to:

MEDIEVAL MONMOUTH THE BRETON LORDS OF MONMOUTH 1066- 1256- PAGE 27- BY KEITH KISSACK

John Fitz Gilbert de Monmouth was succeeded by his elder son, also called john of Monmouth. He held the Lordship for little more then 8 years and then surrendered it to the Kink in exchange for some land in Wiltshire and Dorset. He died in the following year, and “whatever belongs to the King of the castle, town and honour of Monmouth” was granted to Lord Edward. The reason for surrender of the Lordship, similar in some way to the retirement of the first Breton Lord are obscure. It may have been ill-heath since John (father) died a year later. More probably it was debt. Th Castle eventually passed from Edward to his young brother Edmund and in 1270, just before the latter left the Holy Land, he was pardoned a debt to the Exchequer of over 1,777, pounds for divers debt wherein John of Monmouth who sometimes held the honour (of Monmouth) was bond at the exchequer on the day of his death, The size of the debt may have been due to the devastation of the lordship at the time of the rebellion of the earl marshal, though it was not uncommon for Henry lll to involve his baron in debt which they could never hope to repay.
If this was the explanation, it was sad quietus for a family who had been generous to the town to consistently loyal to the crown.

Reference

Kissack, Keith (1974). Mediaeval Monmouth. The Monmouth Historical and Educational Trust. pp. 21.

As shown in wikipeadia the only 1st born John was the child of Agnes Muscegros
Therefore, this John is the elder son then Walter and Richard de Monmouth

References
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Monmouth_(died_1257)

Dear Shirley, you have not yet provided one single primary document to prove your case. Wikipedia is highly problematical as a source, because anyone can post anything, and anyone can change anything posted - and they do. Its best use is as a guide to further sources.

Medieval Lands cites three consecutive Johns of Monmouth but doesn't clarify how they are related - and clues are shown from primary documents (contemporary charters).

1. JOHN de Monmouth (-after [Jan] 1224). Henry III King of England appointed "Johanni de Monumuta" as "forestarium Nove Foreste" together with rights which came from "Cecilie uxoris sue" dated 23 Mar 1217[925]. Henry III King of England noted the serious illness of "Johannes de Moemue" and his surrender of "castrum nostrum de Sancto Briavello cum baillia foreste nostre de Dene" dated [Jan] 1224[926]. m CECILIA, daughter of ---. Henry III King of England appointed "Johanni de Monumuta" as "forestarium Nove Foreste" together with rights which came from "Cecilie uxoris sue" dated 23 Mar 1217[927]. (all references from Patent Rolls Henry III 1215-1225 (1901) - Will note here, and it applies across the board, that Cawley, site owner-manager, has a bad habit of over-abbreviating his quotes.)

2. JOHN de Monmouth (-before 12 Apr 1257). A writ dated 12 Apr "41 Hen III", after the death of "John de Munemuth alias de Munemur" names "Lady Albretha de Boterell alias de Botereaus aged more than 60 and Lady Joan de Nevil alias de Novilla aged more than 40 are his heirs" and "Langeford and Grimstede towns [Wiltshire]…Pidele Bardolfeston town [Dorset]"[Inquisitions Post Mortem, Vol. I, Henry III, 371, p. 101]. (Date given above is that of the I.P.M. Figuring out how the two ladies were related to him is a challenge, but see below.)

3. JOHN de Monmouth . “Johannes dominus de Monemuta” confirmed the donation of "meum dominicum de Hodenac et heremitagium meum de Garthe…et totam terram…de Vinea" to Monmouth Priory by undated charter, witnessed by "domino Johanne de Monemuta filio meo, domino Waltero de Monemuta filio meo…"[929]. m ---. The name of John´s wife is not known. John & his wife had two children:
a) JOHN de Monmouth (-after 1399). “Johannes dominus de Monemuta” confirmed the donation of "meum dominicum de Hodenac et heremitagium meum de Garthe…et totam terram…de Vinea" to Monmouth Priory by undated charter, witnessed by "domino Johanne de Monemuta filio meo, domino Waltero de Monemuta filio meo…"[930]. “Johannes dominus de Monemuta, filius et hæres domini Johannis de Monemuta” confirmed his father´s donation "in bosco suo de Bokholt" to Monmouth Priory by undated charter, confirmed by Henry IV King of England so dated to [1399/1413][931].
b) WALTER de Monmouth . “Johannes dominus de Monemuta” confirmed the donation of "meum dominicum de Hodenac et heremitagium meum de Garthe…et totam terram…de Vinea" to Monmouth Priory by undated charter, witnessed by "domino Johanne de Monemuta filio meo, domino Waltero de Monemuta filio meo…"[932].
(All references here are clearly to a much later John, and are from Dugdale, Monasticon IV, Monmouth Priory, IX, p. 598 - quoting contemporary charters.)

Cawley seems not to have picked up on the John who was hanged in 1281 - he got dug out of the Victoria County History of Wiltshire, parish of Steeple Langford. The rather obscure reference is given ina footnote as "Rot. Parl. i. 185."

Relevant section: Manor and other estate.
Osulf held Steeple Langford in 1066; Wale ran the hunts— man held it as 10 hides in 1086. (fn. 57) The manor of STEEPLE LANGFORD descended to Waleran's heirs, possibly in the direct male line and presumably to William son of Waleran, Waleran (fl. 1131) son of William, Walter Waleran (fl. 1166), and Walter Waleran (d. 1200–1). (fn. 58) The second Walter's heirs were his daughters Cecily, Aubrey, and Isabel; Cecily married John of Monmouth, Aubrey Sir John de Ingham (d. c. 1203) and William de Botreaux (d. c. 1209), and Isabel William de Neville. The husbands held the manor jointly in the early 13 th century, (fn. 59) and John of Monmouth, Aubrey de Botreaux, and Isabel's daughter Joan de Neville (d. c. 1263), who married Jordan de St. Martin (d. c. 1223), held it jointly and in chief in 1242–3. (fn. 60) John of Monmouth (d. c. 1248) and Cecily were succeeded by their son John (d. 1257) who settled the manor or his right in it on his brother, evidently half-brother, John of Monmouth. (fn. 61) The brother was hanged for murder in 1281. (fn. 62) Aubrey (d. c. 1270) had a son Walter de Ingham (d. c. 1253) and a grandson and heir Oliver de Ingham (d. 1282), (fn. 63) and Joan had a son William de St. Martin (d. c. 1291). (fn. 64) Oliver and William claimed the manor but Edward I took it as an escheat, asserting that John of Monmouth (d. 1281) held it in chief, (fn. 65) and in 1299 settled it as dower on Queen Margaret. (fn. 66) In 1304 Oliver's son Sir John de Ingham and William's son Reynold de St. Martin petitioned parliament for the manor, acknowledging the king's right to have held, it for a year and a day but claiming it as their escheat on the grounds that John of Monmouth (d. 1281) held it not in chief but of the heirs of his brother John as coparceners. (fn. 67) In 1306 they recovered seisin, (fn. 68) and by 1310 had partitioned the manor, (fn. 69) which thereafter descended in moieties until 1588.

At least that explains Aubrey and Joan.

Wikitree https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Monmouth-4 has some more references, and an intriguing bit of armorial from the Glover Roll - basically Clare with a blue fess across it. This may be a hint as to John of Monmouth's (c1184-1248) more remote ancestors.

Feh - sorry to have repeated Pam's work. But there are clearly two separate Inquisitiones Post Mortem for two separate Johns of Monmouth, one in 1257 (no son mentioned, two older ladies are his heirs) and one in 1281 (explicit mention that this one was hanged for "felony" and names a mother and two sisters).

Now, why John-1281 wasn't the direct heir of John-1257 is a bit of a riddle with several possible answers.

@paul wysom- I will give Maven B Helms a Quick simple answer why this so called john de Monmouth who is said died in 1281,if he existed was not the heir to john de Monmouth
who died in 1257( agnes de musgroes son) because the simple answer is the de Monmouth family were not the lords of Monmouth in 1257 PRINCE EDWARD was the owner of the Barony of Monmouth,and its castle prince Edward was lord of Monmouth in 1256 when agnes de musgroes son john de Monmouth gave the lordship of Monmouth to prince Edward in 1256 to pay off debt,

coclusion. - the DE MONMOUTH family were no longer lords of Monmouth, no longer owned Monmouth town,or its castle after 1256 they became ordinary people. SOURCE. BELOW.

I REFER TO MONMOUTH HISTORIAN KEITH KISSACK BOOK MEDIEVAL MONMOUTH BRETON LORDS OF MONMOUTH PRINTED 1974

After john de Monmouth died in 1257 ( john father and his 2nd wife agnes son) the de Monmouth family became the de wysham family .

paul wysom

Thanks Maven, for the interesting information, you have provided us with on the de Monmouth situation, that we are trying to sort through.
I guess if historians may have often confused the two Johns, then it’s any wonder that we are confused with what we are able to find on the net, as there is conflicting information on different sites.

@ paul wysom - John de Monmouth gave lordship of Monmouth to prince Edward./king henry III in 1256 john de Monmouth died in 1257 no male descendants,the de Monmouth family held the manor of wyesham south wales,and became the de wysham family.

SOURCE.- WELSH JOURNAL -OLD MONMOUTH (PART II) BY JOHN HOBSON MATHEWS 1909 HOUSED IN -NATIONAL LIBRARY OF WALES,ABERYSTWYTH,NORTH WALES.

paul wysom

@ paul wysom- what the curators anne,and pam are doing is relying a lot on
WIKIPEDIA (anybody can change the story on Wikipedia just click onto edit) to asses the history of the de Monmouth family. I live 40-miles from Monmouth town I have researched the de Monmouth,de wysham family for 34-year's since 1984 many ,many times I have walked around Monmouth town,and visited its library,many ,many times I have walked around wyesham,and the forest of dean connected to de Monmouth history, which is adjacent to Monmouth town

over many year's I have visited Gloucester records office. I rely on welsh journals,and book's written by keith kissack who lived in Monmouth town,and other part.s of my family from cross key's in gwent south wales who have researched the history who have visited Monmouth/wyesham/Gloucester records office extensively since
1984

paul wysom

We are not relying on Wikipedia. Please read the argumentation as given at the beginning of this thread.

Believe what you like, Paul, but you are flatly ignoring any evidence that doesn't suit your theory.

Fine Roll C 60/45, 32 HENRY III (1247–1248)

565
26 Sept. Windsor. For John of Monmouth. The king has taken the homage of John of Monmouth, son and heir of John of Monmouth, for all lands and tenements formerly of his same father. Order to H. of Wingham and his co-escheator in Herefordshire to cause the same John to have full seisin of all the lands and tenements formerly of his same father in that county. 1
1. This entry and its two supplementary entries that follow are written by a different hand to those surrounding it. However, the third entry, no. 567, is written by the hand that had written the entries above it on this membrane.

566a
Order, in the same manner, to the sheriff of Gloucestershire, concerning the lands and tenements formerly of his same father in his bailiwick.
a. This entry is not in the originalia roll.

566b
Order, in the same manner, to the constable of St. Briavels, concerning the woods 1 of Hewelsfield and Hudnalls, formerly of his same father in his bailiwick.
1. Corrected from ‘chases’.
a. This entry is not in the originalia roll.

567
For John of Monmouth. The same John owes £100 to the king for his relief.

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

This is primary evidence that there WAS a John son of John de Monmouth who DID inherit in 1248.

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

41 HENRY III (28 October 1256–27 October 1257)

1022 [about 26 October 1257]
For the executors of John de Monmouth. Because John Mansel treasurer of York and Robert Walerand have mainprised before the king for 200 m. to be paid to king, namely one moiety at next Christmas and the other moiety at Easter [next] following, by which the same and their co-executors of the testament of John of Monmouth, deceased, had made fine with the king for having free administration of the goods and moveable chattels [...] of the same deceased, so that the said 200 m. are to be allowed in the debts which the same deceased owed to the king. And concerning the remainder of the debts which the same deceased owed to the king, the king has taken [...]. Order to the queen to permit the said executors to have free administration of the goods and moveable chattels formerly of the same deceased and formerly in the hand of the same queen.
a. In the originalia roll E 371/21, m.7, the marginalia also have 'Herefordshire'.

1023
For the executors of John de Monmouth. It is ordered to Edward the king’s son in the same manner.
[in the Roll]
a. In the originalia roll E 371/21, m.7, the marginalia also have 'Herefordshire'.

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

This is primary evidence that John son of John de Monmouth died in 1257 and is NOT the same person as John de Monemuth who was hanged in 1281. For the actual IPM see Inquisitions Post Mortem, Vol. I, Henry III, 371, p. 101. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/inquis-post-mortem/vol1/pp100-104 provides relevant citations.

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

For persons of major significance (like holders of Monmouth), you CANNOT rely merely on local records, but MUST also check the Crown records as well.

(Deleted, corrected and reposted.)