Selected quad for the lemma: son_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A51514
|
An admonition to the reader of Sir Peter Leicester's books. Written by Sir T. M.
|
Mainwaring, Thomas, Sir, 1623-1689.
|
1676
(1676)
|
Wing M297; ESTC R218644
|
8,189
|
26
|
AN ADMONITION To the Reader of Sir Peter Leicester's Books Written by Sir T. M. Printed in the Year 1676. An Admonition to the Reader of Sir Peter Leicester's Books Courteous Reader THat you may know Hercules by his Foot and not with some few persons confidently believe every thing which Sir Peter Leicester doth write I here give you an account of the Partiality Omissions Uncertainties and Mistakes of the said Sir Peter in those two Sheets of his Historical Antiquities in which he writes of the Township of Over Peover And I cannot but wonder that they are so numerous considering he always had liberty to peruse any Deeds or Copies of Records which I had in my custody and that I also was ever willing to give him any other assistance concerning my Family which did lie in my power First in his 330 page he calls Ranulphus who as he confesseth in the Conqueror's time held this Township of Peover or the greatest part thereof the supposed Ancestor of the Mainwarings as he also usually doth in other Townships where he hath occasion to name the said Randle and yet as you may see page 208. he calls Odard the undoubted Ancestor of the Duttons Now what reason he can have to call Odard the undoubted Ancestor of the Duttons and Ranulphus but the supposed Ancestor of the Mainwarings except his partiality I cannot imagine For first the Sirname of Mainwaring was a fixed name whereas the Sirname of Dutton was taken from that place and if another Family had bought it of the Posterity of Odard within few Generations after the Conquest they possibly might have stiled themselves after that place that being the manner of those Ages as Sir Peter tells us in his 250 page and accordingly he not onely gives us examples there of three Branches of the Duttons viz. Warburton Chedill and Ashley who did all call themselves after the Places where they lived but he gives us many other like instances in many other places of his said Book Secondly Sir Peter doth not add the Sirname of de Dutton in his said 250 page to the said Odard or Hugh Son of the said Odard but onely to Hugh de Dutton Son of Hugh who was the Third of that Family Whereas the Sirname of Mesnilwaren or Mainwaring was used as you may see in the 111 page of the said Book in King William Rufus his days by Richard Mesnilwaren which except the said Ranulphus is the first Mainwaring that we do find Thirdly the principal reason as I conceive why Sir Peter says Odard was the undoubted Ancestor of the Duttons is because the Duttons enjoyed those Lands which the said Odard held in the Conqueror's time which were if I mistake not part of Dutton which the said Odard held of the Earl of Chester and Aston and part of Weston and part of Halton which the said Odard held under William Fitz-Nigel Baron of Halton But as the aforesaid Lands of the aforesaid Odard were enjoyed by the Duttons so the Lands of the said Ranulphus in Blaken Wenitone Tatton Pever Warford Little-Pever Cepmundewiche Ollerton Senelestune Cocheshalle Hoiloch Tadetune which is the same with Warmincham Norwardine Sundreland and Bageley in Cheshire and the Lordship of Waburne in Norfolk being all the Lands which the said Ranulphus held in the Conqueror's time were certainly enjoyed by the Mainwarings But this I say not to take off any thing from the Family of Duttons for I am fully satisfied that Odard was their Ancestor but to shew the Partiality of Sir Peter in doubting of Ranulphus more than of the said Odard 2. He tells us in his said 330 page That by antient Deeds there were antiently two Places or Hamlets in Over-Peover one called Cepmundewich the other Fodon whereas there were Seven such Places there viz. Cepmundewich Fodon Hongrill Hethalis Brydenbrugge Twyford and Radbroc And it is very strange how Sir Peter could omit the last of these seeing in the very same page he speaks of Radbrook-house in Over-Peover and mentions a Deed by which William Mainwaring then Lord of Over-Peover gave illam terram quae vocatur Radbroc integram unto Thomas Mainwaring his younger Son 3. In the Pedigree of the Mainwarings page 331 he leaves out Ranulphus who is nominated in Doomsday-Book Richard de Mesnilwarin mentioned in his Hist Antiq. page 111. Roger de Mesnilgarin or Mainwaring and William and Randal his Sons spoken of by him page 341. Roger de Menilgarin or Mainwaring named by him page 362. Sir Ralph Mainwaring and Sir Roger Mainwaring his Son both taken notice of by him page 330. and this upon a pretence that they were Lords of Warmincham Whereas I am confident he will not deny but that the Mainwarings of Warmincham were also Owners of Over-Peover or the most part thereof until Sir Roger Mainwaring gave Peover to his younger Son Sir William Mainwaring presently after which time the Line of the Mainwarings of Warmincham failing the Mainwarings of Peover became Heirs male to those Mainwarings of Warmincham Sir Warine Mainwaring Son of Sir Thomas Mainwaring Son of the said Sir Roger dying without Issue Male. And though he may pretend that he did not mention those Mainwarings of Warmincham who also were Owners of Peover because they as he supposeth then lived at Warmincham in another Hundred yet in his said Book he gives an account of the Descents of some who had Estates in Bucklow Hundred though he then looks upon them as living in other Hundreds 4. He tells us page 332 that Margery Praers one of the Coheirs of William Praers of Baddeley and Sister to Joan the other Coheir who was Wife to William Mainwaring married John Honford of Honford and afterwards that she married Hugh Holt 33 Edw. 3. but had no Issue by Holt and that she had Issue by John Honford a Son named John Honford who was a Bastard But he is mistaken in saying that Holt was her second Husband for Margery had her Bastard John Honford before she had any Husband and she was Wife to Hugh Holt 33 Edw. 3. and she was Wife to John Honford 46 47 and 50 of Edw. 3. 5. In the 332 page he takes no notice that William Leigh of Baggeleigh who married Joan the Daughter of William Mainwaring of Peover in the 33 of Edw. 3. was a Knight and yet as you may see in his 217 page he knew the said William to be a Knight 6. He says in his said 332 page That William Mainwaring the Elder who lived 33 Edw. 3. sealed with three Bars with a Lion passant in Chief whereas the Coat of Arms was Argent two Bars Gules on a Chief of the Second a Lion passant gardant Or and so it is cut in his own Book page 331. 7. He takes notice page 332. that William younger Son of William Son of William Mainwaring had a Daughter named Ellen who was married to Adam Glasebroke But he omits John and Margery Brother and Sister to the said Ellen.
8. He says page 332. that William Son of Roger Mainwaring died about 12 or 13 of Edw. 3. whereas I find him Party to a Deed made on the Eve of S. John Baptist 14 Edw. 3. and how long he lived after I believe no man can tell 9. He says page 332. that William Mainwaring Son of William Mainwaring and Joan Praers did divide the Lands of Baddeley between John Mainwaring his Half-brother and John Honford whereas he gave several thousand Acres of Land which came by his Mother and of the which the Demesn of Baddeley was part solely to his said Brother John and onely divided the remainder of the said Lands and the Will which directs that Division doth also direct the disposal of the other Lands 10. He takes notice page 333. that William Mainwaring's Seal 17 Rich. 2. had the Impression of his Coat and Crest to wit in an Escocheon two Bars onely and corner-ways on the Dexter Angle on an Helmet an Ass-head cooped c. which he says his Heirs have ever since continued to wit Argent two Bars Gules the Crest An Ass-head cooped proper And tells you that the said William died 1399 22 Rich. 2. Whereas all the Mainwarings that I can find who have lived since the said William have either given the Ass-head on a Torce and Halter'd or else the Ass-head Erased or else the Ass-head unhalter'd and within a Crown 11. He says page 333. that William Mainwaring the Husband of Katherine Belgrave and Clementia Cotton setled his Estate upon his departure out of England towards Guien 17 R. 2. 1393. and afterwards made his Will 1394. Whereas the said settlement made 17 R. 2. was also a Will and was but of part of the Estate which he had by his Mother and besides that and the other Will dated 1394. he made a third Will 1399 by which last Will he gave directions to his Feoffees how to dispose of all his Mothers Lands but he disposed not of those Lands he had as Heir to his Father by any of the said Wills 12. He says page 333. that John Mainwaring of Over-Peover married Margaret the Widow of Sir John Warren of Poynton in Cheshire and Daughter and Heir of Sir John Stafford of Wigham about 13 Rich. 2. For Sir John Warren died the Tenth of Rich. 2. But how Sir John Warren's dying in the Tenth of Rich. 2. doth prove that the said John Mainwaring married his Widow about the Thirteenth of Rich. 2. I confess I do not understand 13. He says page 333. that John Mainwaring was made Sheriff of Cheshire 4 Hen. 4. and continued Sheriff 5 H. 4. and 6 H. 4. but he omits his being Sheriff 7 H. 4. 14. He says page 333. that John Mainwaring died 11 H. 4. 1410. whereas he was certainly dead in the year 1409. 15. He says page 334. that Margery survived her Husband Randle Mainwaring and erected a Stone-Chappel on the South-side of Over-Peover Church with the two Monuments therein for her self and her Husband 1456. Whereas the said Margery was certainly dead in the year 1449. and died several years before her said Husband as you may see in the 75 76 77 and 78 pages of my Defence of Amicia printed in the year 1673. 16. He says page 334. that Sir John Mainwaring of Over-Peover died about the very end of Edw. 4. Reign but the said King Edward died in the Twenty third year of his Reign and the said Sir John Mainwaring was certainly dead on the 14 day of April in the Twentieth year of the said Kings Reign as appears by a Precept to the Escheator of Cheshire bearing the said date 17. He omits in the 335 page Agnes the Daughter of John Mainwaring of Peover Esq and Wife of Sir Robert Nedham Knight and this although he had been informed of a two-fold undoubted proof thereof as you may see in the 79 and 80 pages of my Defence of Amicia before mentioned 18. He positively says page 335 that Katherine the Daughter of Sir John Mainwaring was married to William Son of Humphrey Newton of Pownall 13 H. 8. 1521. But the Deeds concerning those Lands which she was to have in Joynture at which time she was certainly unmarried were dated the first and second of March in 13 H. 8. which was in the year 1521. according to the account of the Church of England but in the year 1522. according to the Julian account Now the Dominical Letter being that year E. and the Golden Number 3. the second of March would be Shrove-Sunday and Easter-day on the twentieth of April and Lent being a time not usual for Marriage and especially in the time of King Henry the Eighth in all probability the Marriage was not till after Easter and if so it was not until the year 1522. However there is no certainty of what Sir Peter there says 19. He also in the said 335 page tells us how Sir John Mainwaring was Sheriff of Flintshire 6 H. 8. 1514. but takes no notice of his being Sheriff there in the 23 and 24 years of King Hen. 7. and 1 Hen. 8. and 2 Hen. 8. and probably ever from then till the end of 6 Hen. 8. 20. He says page 335. that Sir John Mainwaring died 8 H. 8. 1515. Whereas no part of the eighth year of King Hen. 8. was in any part of the year 1515. neither did the said Sir John die in the eighth year of the said King 21. He says page 335. that Sir Randle Mainwaring after the death of his first Wife married Elizabeth the Daughter of Sir Ralph Leicester of Toft 6 Edw. 6. 1551. but he cannot prove that they were married until the year 1552. 22. He says page 336. that Philip Mainwaring of Over-Peover Esq fifth Son of Sir John Mainwaring and Brother and next Heir-male to Sir Randle married Anne Daughter of Sir Raufe Leicester of Toft and tells us from his Monument the time of the said Philip's death But though the rest of them died young yet Philip was born the seventh and not the fifth Son of the said Sir John as appears by the Monument of the said Sir John which is in the same Chappel that the Monument of the said Philip is in 23. He says in the same page that the Herald in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth made for the Coat of the said Sir Randle the elder Barry of twelve pieces Argent and Gules But the Coat which the said Sir Randle did then usually bear was Argent six Barulets Gules which the said Sir Randle did give because the most antient of the Deeds of the Mainwarings were sealed with six Barulets but the Mainwarings since then have again given two Bars onely according to what they had done of a long time before the two Bars having been also used to Deeds without date Also in the 330 page you may read that Sir Peter knew the antient Coat to be six Barulets and not to be Barry of twelve pieces Argent and Gules 24. He