The Brimhall Line
This page is dedicated to the Brimhall line.
The motto "Sanguine Christe tuo" is translated to mean "By Thy Blood O' Christ."
Links and Downloads of Brimhall or Bramhall Histories:
1. The following link is to a very large pdf file that can be viewed online or downloaded or printed. It is a very massive compilation of early Brimhall or Bramhall history of England and America. This compilation give detailed information of the ownership of Bramhall Hall from Matthew de Bromale to Geoffrey de Bromale. Early accounts of Brimhalls in America from George Brimhall to Sylvanus Brimhall II are also given. This 244 page pdf document can be found here: http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/FH9&CISOPTR=119046&REC=15
2. The following link is to the Brimhall Family Organization website. Although there is a great need of maintenance and updates to this site, this site has lots of online histories, journals, articles, and photos of many Brimhalls. This includes excerpts from Noah Brimhall's Journal. It well worth a visit at: http://b13family.com/
2. The following link is to the Brimhall Family Organization website. Although there is a great need of maintenance and updates to this site, this site has lots of online histories, journals, articles, and photos of many Brimhalls. This includes excerpts from Noah Brimhall's Journal. It well worth a visit at: http://b13family.com/
3. The following is to a link that gives the history of Sylvanus Brimhall II and his wife Lydia de Guitteau. It can be found
at: http://gostewarts.wordpress.com/genealogy/sylvanus-brimhall/
4. The following is to a link is of some Mormon conversion stories which include Noah Brimhall, James Lake Jr., and Philomelia Smith Lake. These can be found
at: http://www.hawsedc.com/tom/biogskg.htm
5. The following is to a link is of the the conversion of Morgan Jones, and the migration Morgan and his daugther Lovina Jones. Besides Morgan and Lovina, there are writings concerning Joanna Morgan, Noah Brimhall, James Lake, Philomelia Lake, and Bailey Lake. This can be found
at: http://www.welshmormonhistory.org/index.php?/resources/view/2440
6. The following doc is a complied story of Samantha Lake Brimhall. She is the wife of Noah Brimhall. Besides Noah, Bailey W. Lake, Lovina Jones Brimhall, and some of Brimhall children are mentioned. This doc was extracted from the website: http://newmexicoalhn.net/AllFamilyHistory/family_history.htm but can be downloaded here: Samantha Lake Brimhall.
7. Here is the Frank Bramhall genealogy. The is titled: "The Genealogy of the Bramhall Family". This has some account of the history of the family and Bramhall Hall in East Cheshire, England. It was compiled by Frank J. Bramhall in Oakland, California in 1903 and can be found in the Library of Congress, call number: CS 71 .B8165 1903 Copy 1. The histories of Bramhalls in England and early America is particularly interesting. The photographs of Bramhall Hall, especially it's interior, is a rare treat. This can be viewed in its entirety here: http://www.bramhill.net/Resources/Frank%20Bramhall%20Genealogy.pdf
8. "A Brief Genealogical Research With References
Relating to Hamo De Masci First Baron of Dunham Massey (Circ. 1047-1100)
Cheshire" By G. Messey, 1908: http://www.bramhill.net/BramhillInfo/Resources/Hamo%20de%20Masci.pdf
9. At this website you can find lots of information on the Brimhall and Brimhall family histories. The link is found here: http://www.bramhill.net/index.html
10. There is a mention of Wm de Carington with evidence of a connection between the Bramhills and Carringtons. Many of whom are DNA cousins. This can be found here: http://bramhill.net/rootsite/dna.html
11. Here is a zipped pack that I put together. It contains 3 files showing a newspaper article on Clayborn Brimhall titled "Brimhall Rides," a document titled "Charlotta" by Paul Leon Black, a document titled "Charlotte" by an unknown author, a document titled "Lovina Jones Brimhall" by Florence Brimhall Brinkerhoff (granddaughter), an image of the Bramhall family crest, and a image of a photo showing the plaque at Oxford, Idaho were Noah and family lived. You can download this zipped file here:
brimhall_pack.zip | |
File Size: | 3207 kb |
File Type: | zip |
12. Here is what is called the "big red Brimhall" book by the brimhall relatives. They called it that because it was bound as a red hard covered book and is over 525 pages. It is titled "Brimhall Family Story" and was put together by Logan Brimhall, Elias R. Brimhall, Florence B. Brinkerhoff, and Jean B. Stapley. Logan Brimall being the director of the efforts and the completion of the published work was approximately November 1969. It has been concidered the bible of Brimhall history for years. Take caution because a lot of the group records found in this book are full of errors. You can download this here:
the_brimhall_family_story.pdf | |
File Size: | 156647 kb |
File Type: |
Controlling Powers and Eras of Britain Time Line
A brief time line
A brief time line
3000 BC – New
Stone Age
2100 BC – Bronze
Age
2000 BC – Stonehenge Completed
750 BC – Iron Age
500 BC – 100 BC – Celt Empire
70 BC to AD 61 – Druids gain control of Britain
55 BC to AD 410 – The Roman Empire in Britain
AD 410 to AD 1066 – Early Anglo-Saxon, Jutes, Frisians, and Franks invasion & Control
The Saxons, Frisians, and Franks were German-Dutch. The Angles (Anglos) were Southern Danish. The Jutes were Northern Danish. The Saxon Lords, Brun and Hacun, owned two separate manors before AD 1066 about where Bramhall Manor sits today; which could still be part of the current construction.
AD 500’s to AD 700’s – The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom was divided into seven main kingdoms: Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia, Kent, Essex, Wessex, And Sussex.
AD 793 AD 1066 – The Viking Raids with the Anglo-Saxons and throughout Europe
AD 1066 to AD 1485 – The Normans Rules Britain
About AD 1066, Hamon (or Hamo) de Masi (or Massey), who lived before AD 1056 and died AD 1101 and was the first Baron of Dunham Massey, was given the two manors on the Bramhall estate as well as other manors throughout the land. He was one of the soldiers of fortune who followed William of Normandy (William the Conqueror). William divided the spoils or land amongst his followers which included the Bramhall estate.
AD 1154 – AD 1189 King Henry II, King of England, Ruler of Normandy, reigns over England.
About AD 1100 to About AD 1140 – Hamon de Massey of Dunham II.
About AD 1189, a charter from the second Baron of Dunham Massey, in the reign of Henry II., confirms the manors of Bramhall to Mathew de Bromeall (or Bramhall).
About AD 1118 to about AD 1310 – The Knight of the Templar were active in the Crusades. In AD 1310 to about AD 1400 – From trails to the Knights going into hiding.
AD about 1310 to about AD 1400 – Geoffrey de Bromhall (or Bramhall)
About 1592 Cornelius Bramhall
1614 to ? James Bramhall and Florence Temple
2000 BC – Stonehenge Completed
750 BC – Iron Age
500 BC – 100 BC – Celt Empire
70 BC to AD 61 – Druids gain control of Britain
55 BC to AD 410 – The Roman Empire in Britain
AD 410 to AD 1066 – Early Anglo-Saxon, Jutes, Frisians, and Franks invasion & Control
The Saxons, Frisians, and Franks were German-Dutch. The Angles (Anglos) were Southern Danish. The Jutes were Northern Danish. The Saxon Lords, Brun and Hacun, owned two separate manors before AD 1066 about where Bramhall Manor sits today; which could still be part of the current construction.
AD 500’s to AD 700’s – The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom was divided into seven main kingdoms: Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia, Kent, Essex, Wessex, And Sussex.
AD 793 AD 1066 – The Viking Raids with the Anglo-Saxons and throughout Europe
AD 1066 to AD 1485 – The Normans Rules Britain
About AD 1066, Hamon (or Hamo) de Masi (or Massey), who lived before AD 1056 and died AD 1101 and was the first Baron of Dunham Massey, was given the two manors on the Bramhall estate as well as other manors throughout the land. He was one of the soldiers of fortune who followed William of Normandy (William the Conqueror). William divided the spoils or land amongst his followers which included the Bramhall estate.
AD 1154 – AD 1189 King Henry II, King of England, Ruler of Normandy, reigns over England.
About AD 1100 to About AD 1140 – Hamon de Massey of Dunham II.
About AD 1189, a charter from the second Baron of Dunham Massey, in the reign of Henry II., confirms the manors of Bramhall to Mathew de Bromeall (or Bramhall).
About AD 1118 to about AD 1310 – The Knight of the Templar were active in the Crusades. In AD 1310 to about AD 1400 – From trails to the Knights going into hiding.
AD about 1310 to about AD 1400 – Geoffrey de Bromhall (or Bramhall)
About 1592 Cornelius Bramhall
1614 to ? James Bramhall and Florence Temple
Who is Mathew de Bromale?
Possible Identity # 1
In the newsletter “Hollingsworth Heritage”, Volume XVI, Fall 2009, Number 2, an article titled “Pre-Conquest History of the Village of Hollingworth Area in Cheshire, England” was written By Simon Hollingworth. This can be found in its entirety as a PDF file at: http://dvhss.org/hh/hh_fall09.pdf and I have given here the important parts that may give clues to the identity of Mathew de Bromale and the Bramhall name. The following are parts of this article:
Hollingworth, like many of the neighboring manors within the Lordship of Longdendale, appears to be owned by various branches of Chieftain Wulfric's family. Given that Chieftain Wulfric and his son Ranulph, held such extensive landholdings throughout Longdendale and Hollingworth in 1086, it is possible that the lords of Hollingworth may also have originated from this large Saxon family. Further weight is given to this possibility, when we note that the neighboring families of De Bredbury, De Bromall, and De Mainwaring also descend from Chieftain Wulfric's youngest son Ranulph.
The forest offence records for Macclesfield and Longdendale forests record the ongoing relationships between these cousins, with Richard De Mainwaring of Holynwith, Richard De Mainwaring of Whitefield, Richard De Bromhall, and William De Bredbury all being mentioned along with John, lord of Holynworth.
"(1273) Lycok Edyngly of Redych, Chester, one doe, he carried the venison to the house of William de Edyscleye, his brother, Richard de Bromhill, John de Holingworth, Jas de Rekenesfield, and William, son of Roger de Bredbury" "Richard, son of Richard De Bromhall, in Corn, Chester, on the Feast of the Annuncation of the Blessed Mary (1283), took a stag at Langley in Hornes-figreys; and John lord Holynworth, Richard De Maynwaryng of Wythefield, and Willam his son took a stag at Alport (1278). Robert De Charnewood de Tynteythysel, William son of Fravell (dead), and Richard Maynwaring de Holynwith took one stag at Alport (1284) and took it to the house of Robert and there divided it"
Given that the Mainwarings are connected to Hollingworth Manor through Ranulph, the son of Wulfric, it is possible that the Hollingworths descend from Ranulph, or the Mainwaring branch of the same family. Coincidently, when we examine Hollinworth in Lancashire, we find the original owner being another of Chieftain Wulfric's sons, Gamel De Alditheley. Harry Hollingsworth the famous American researcher speculated on the possibility of Hollinworth Lancashire later being owned by a Matthew De Hollinworth, or Matthew De Bromhall in 1235. Given that these two men owned the same lands in 1235, Harry raised the possibility of Matthew de Hollinworth and Matthew de Bramhall being one and the same. In fact, Matthew de Bramhall of Lancashire appears to be Matthew, lord of Bromhall, grandson of Ranulph and great grandson of Cheftain Wulfric. Matthew Bramhall was also given lands in Dokenfeld and Baguely by the second Baron Hamo De Masci, which are neighbouring villages of Hollingworth in Cheshire. Interestingly, Matthew de Hollinworth is again mentioned in relation to a transfer of land by Robert De Mascy of Norwurthin, "who he gave Christiana, daughter of Matthew de Holinwurthe, lands in Norwurthin" (ca. 1300). This is the very same Norman family of De Masci who held lands in Hollingworth in Longdendale from 1086.
Could it be that the lords Hollingworth descend from a pre-Conquest Saxon such as Ranulph, son of Wulfric? Certainly the last proprietor of Hollingworth Hall, Capt. Robert De Hollyngworth in 1832, claimed his personal pedigree dated back to a Saxon line commencing in 1002. It is possible that De Hollyngworthe was referring to the line of Wulfric through Ranulph and not the ejected Saxon freeman residing at Holisurde (Hollingworth) before the Norman Conquest. Chieftain Wulfric's many sons and grandsons appear to have given rise to the most ancient of Cheshire families to own the various manors of Hamestan Hundred in Cheshire. Families such as the Fitz Waltheofs, Bredburys, Stockports, Hattersleys, Eatons, Romileighs, Mainwarings, Davenports, Alditheleys, Bredburys, and Dokinfelds all descend from Wulfric, so why not the Hollingworths?
The ongoing extent of lands owned by these junior lines of Wulfric is best shown using the estates of the late Thomas de Davenport in 1387. Thomas Davenport's widow Eve inherited as her dowry, Thomas' lands within the "manors of Neuton near Dokenfeld, Merton near Gouseworth, Tyngetwysell, Holynworth, Mottrom in Longedale, Romelegh, Hattreslegh, Goddelegh, Dokenfeld, Hyde, Stavele, Wyrnyth, Bredbury, Brenyngton, Chedle, Bromhale, Ponynton, Adlyngton, Bolyn, Pounale, Chorlegh, Mottrom Andrew, Capesthorn, Cholleford, Somerford, Davenport, Withinton, and Swetenham." Many of the villages within the Lordship of owner, the manor of Romiley was held by another of the junior scions of Cheftain Wulfric through Robert, Baron De Stockport. By 1200, a junior member of the house of Stockport is styled as Robert, lord de Romelegh.
Lord of Hollingworth Manor
Cheftain Wulfric and his son Ranulph were recorded as one of the many landowners of Hollingworth Manor in 1086. Wulfric's family appears to have continued in possession of these particular estates using the surname of Mainwaring in 1278. Richard De Mainwaring de (of) Holynwith was descended directly from Chieftain Wulfric through his son Ranulph and was a junior member of the powerful Cheshire family of Mainwaring De Mainwaring. Richard used his family surname and the local name of 'Holynwith' as his personal distinction in order to identify his own personal branch of the Mainwaring family. It is interesting to note that by this date there were various families living within the boundaries of Hollingworth Manor with different surnames. The local lord of the manor is recorded as “John” Lord de (of) Holynworth and was mostly likely descended from Thomas De Holinwurth who was a witness to a Godleigh land deed between 1211 and 1225. There were many other local families residing within Hollingworth Manor around 1200, including the families of De Wolegh de Holenwirth, De Deusnap de Holenwirth, and De Masci de Godley.
It is clear that families living in Hollingworth during this time would never have assumed the name of the village as their surname unless they were related to the current lord of the manor. The surname of Hollingworth and the personal arms of the three holly leaves identified John de Holynworth as the hereditary owner of the manorial lordship by grant of a royal patent. Hereditary ownership of a manor such as Hollingworth was only possible with a legal grant from the Earl of Chester. The use of the surname or the Hollingworth arms by a person not related to the lord of Hollingworth's family would have been unlawful and a serious crime in the County of Cheshire. However, the surname of Hollingworth was not always used exclusively for the male line, as grandsons descended from a daughter of the lord of Hollingworth could also use the surname as their alias. An example of using such an alias was Thomas de Honford of Hollingworth, grandson of John, lord of Hollingworth, and descendent of the famous crusader family De Honford of Handforth. While Thomas was a minor living with his widowed mother at Thorncliffe Hall in Hollingworth, he was styled as Thomas Hollingworth de Hollingworth. Upon coming of age in 1360, Thomas assumed the William of Normandy's burning of all the surrounding manors in the east of Cheshire.
Although Hollingworth was always believed to have been owned by only one Saxon freeman, the reality is that twenty-two people owned lands in Hollingworth after Conquest. The list of Hollingworth landowners gives us a hint as to why Hollingworth was regularly included amongst the eight seemingly disparate manors listed under Henbury Manor. These eight manors were most probably grouped together, as all eight ejected Saxons were replaced by exactly the same landowners sometime before 1086. That is to say that Hamedeberie (Henbury), Warnet (Werneth), Laitone (Leighton in Stockport), Hofinchel/-Hofinghel (Wincel), Copestor (Capesthorne), Tengestuisie (Tintwistle), and Rumelie (Romiley) were all owned by exactly the same twenty landholders.
The Norman Earl of Chester seems to have taken direct control of these eight manors after the ejectment of the original eight Saxon thanes, who owned the manors in return for military service to the Saxon Earl of Chester, Edwin. The term ejectment as used in the Doomsday record, suggests that the original Saxon landowners were not to be found among the list of twenty-two Saxon, Norman, and Church landowners for these eight manors after Conquest.
The Doomsday Owners of Hollingworth
The Saxon landowners recorded for Hollingworth in 1086 were the then deposed Earl Edwin of Chester, Beornwulf, Cheftain Gamel, Chieftain Brun, Dot, Edwin, Chieftain Godwine, Herbert, Leofnoth, Mundret, Restald, and Cheftain Wulfric and his son, Ranulph. The local Norman landowners for Hollingworth included First Baron Hamo de Masci; Robert de Limesy, the Bishop of Chester; Robert fitzHugh; and Regnvald (possibly a Dane). Various Roman Catholic monastic orders also held lands in Hollingworth by 1086, including the Canons of St Werburh, Chester Church, and the Church of St. Chad, Lichfield.
At first glance, the names of the landholders of Hollingworth seem to bear no relationship to the surnames recorded at Hollingworth Manor three hundred years later. Given that surnames didn't become popular until 1200, it's not surprising to find that there was no individual landowner by the name of Hollingworth or Holisurde living within the manor at the time of Conquest. When we examine more closely the eight manors listed under Henbury Manor between the years 1086 to 1300, we find a number of Saxon families having adopted local village names as their surname. These families include the Bostocks, Stockports, Davenports, Eatons, Mainwarings, Alditheleys, Capesthornes, Romileys, Leightons, Bredburys, Bramhalls, and the Hollingworths.
Lord of Werneth Manor
After the ejectment of the original Saxon owner, Werneth was held by Chieftain Wulfric as the principle landowner after 1086. The manor of Werneth appears to have later passed to Wulfric's eldest son, Robert Fitz Waltheof, the lord of Etchells and Bredbury. Werneth then passed to Wulfric's grandson, Robert De Stockport, the Baron of Stockport, by 1200. The Stockports later sold Werneth to another scion of Chieftain Wulfric's family, being the Davenports of Davenport.
Lord of Capesthorne Manor
After the ejectment of the original Saxon, Capesthorne came to be held by Orme, another of Cheftain Wulfric's sons. As lord of Werneth and progenitor to the Davenports De Davenport, Orme de Dauneporte was also related to the De Stockport, De Eaton, De Mainwaring, and De Alditheley, De Bramhall, and De Bredbury families. Thomas De Capesthorne, who held the manor in 1238, appears to have simplified his name from “Thomas De Dauneporte de (of) Capesthorne” to “Thomas, lord of Capesthorne.”
The Hundred of Hamestan
Hollingworth Manor was included among the twenty-three manors of the Hundred of Hamestan in the County of Cestre (Cheshire) during the last reign of the Saxons. Hollingworth Manor was owned in chief by the then Earl of Chester, Prince Edwin, with the manor being sub-leased or sub-infuded to an unidentified Saxon thane or freeman in return for military service. In 1059, Hollingworth was called Holisvrde and valued as 1 virigate being 30 acres of productive land. Note: “vrde” is the Anglican word for “worth.”
The Saxon manors of the Hundred of Hamestan (Macclesfield) were: Holisvrde Hollingworth in Longdendale), Tengestuisie (Tintwhistle in Longdendale), Motre (Mottram in Longdendale), Edvlvintune, Govesvrde (Gawsworth), Mervtvne (Marton), Hvngrewenitvne, Celeford (Chelford), Hameteberie, Copestor (Capesthorn), Hofinchel (Wincle), Warnet (Warneth in Longdendale), Croeneche (Cranage), Bretberie, Aldredelie (Nether Alderly), Boselega (Bosley), Meretone, Cerdingham, Svmreford (Sumerford), Bramale Bramhall), Nordberie, Botelege, and Cedde.
In 1059, the manors of Hamestan were owned by eighteen Saxons, including Chieftain Brun, Chieftain Ulric, Chieftain Godwin, Bernulf, Godric, Hundin, Haccom, Levine, and Ligulf. These Cheshire chieftains and their local thanes or lords, all held their individual manors from Earl Edwin of Chester as the principle owner. In 1059, Hollingworth and Tintwistle appear to be listed amongst a seemingly unrelated group of manors from the Hundred of Hamestan known as the Earl's manors under Henbury. These eight unrelated manors following Henbury Manor were each valued as:
Hamiteberie for half a hide (Henbury)
Copestor for half a hide (Capesthorne)
Hofinchel (Henshall)
Tengestivise for one virgate (Tintwistle)
Holisvrd for one virgate (Hollingworth)
Warnet for one virgate (Wernith)
Rumilie for one virgate (Romiley)
Laitone (Leighton) for one virgate
Possible Identity # 2
It has been explained that de Bromale, de Massey, or de Davenport are titles, not last names. The word “de” is “of” and the word after it is the local. It is more likely that the person receiving large amount of land or manors are usually related to the Lord bestowing it to them. But what makes it difficult in connecting individuals to a blood line is that this same individual can have several titles. Mathew de Bromale could also be called Mathew de Greenhill if he also lived on an estate named “Greenhill”. This doesn’t reveal his identity to a blood line. It was not until the 1200’s that people started to adopt last names. However, Mathew de Bromale could be part of the Massey line.
As found at http://www.reference.com/browse/bramall_hall:
De Bromales
The founder of this family was probably a follower or relative of the first Hamon de Massey. About the time of Henry II the land passed from the second Baron of Dunham Massey to Matthew de Bromale, one of his kinsmen who took his name from the land he had received. Matthew's father is said to have been the kinsman of the first Hamon de Massey and may have held the land at some point. Matthew was succeeded by his grandson Richard, and then two subsequent Richards, the second dying without issue. The latter was succeeded by his younger brother Geoffrey, who had two daughters Alice and Ellen. Alice eventually inherited the land, and married John de Davenport of Wheltrough circa 1370–1380, thus changing the family name to Davenport.
In the first part of the 12th century, the manor passed from the second Baron of Dunham Massey to Matthew de Bromale. According to Dean, Matthew's father is said to have founded the de Bromale family, naming himself after the manor, and he may have been related to or a follower of the de Masseys.
In the newsletter “Hollingsworth Heritage”, Volume XVI, Fall 2009, Number 2, an article titled “Pre-Conquest History of the Village of Hollingworth Area in Cheshire, England” was written By Simon Hollingworth. This can be found in its entirety as a PDF file at: http://dvhss.org/hh/hh_fall09.pdf and I have given here the important parts that may give clues to the identity of Mathew de Bromale and the Bramhall name. The following are parts of this article:
Hollingworth, like many of the neighboring manors within the Lordship of Longdendale, appears to be owned by various branches of Chieftain Wulfric's family. Given that Chieftain Wulfric and his son Ranulph, held such extensive landholdings throughout Longdendale and Hollingworth in 1086, it is possible that the lords of Hollingworth may also have originated from this large Saxon family. Further weight is given to this possibility, when we note that the neighboring families of De Bredbury, De Bromall, and De Mainwaring also descend from Chieftain Wulfric's youngest son Ranulph.
The forest offence records for Macclesfield and Longdendale forests record the ongoing relationships between these cousins, with Richard De Mainwaring of Holynwith, Richard De Mainwaring of Whitefield, Richard De Bromhall, and William De Bredbury all being mentioned along with John, lord of Holynworth.
"(1273) Lycok Edyngly of Redych, Chester, one doe, he carried the venison to the house of William de Edyscleye, his brother, Richard de Bromhill, John de Holingworth, Jas de Rekenesfield, and William, son of Roger de Bredbury" "Richard, son of Richard De Bromhall, in Corn, Chester, on the Feast of the Annuncation of the Blessed Mary (1283), took a stag at Langley in Hornes-figreys; and John lord Holynworth, Richard De Maynwaryng of Wythefield, and Willam his son took a stag at Alport (1278). Robert De Charnewood de Tynteythysel, William son of Fravell (dead), and Richard Maynwaring de Holynwith took one stag at Alport (1284) and took it to the house of Robert and there divided it"
Given that the Mainwarings are connected to Hollingworth Manor through Ranulph, the son of Wulfric, it is possible that the Hollingworths descend from Ranulph, or the Mainwaring branch of the same family. Coincidently, when we examine Hollinworth in Lancashire, we find the original owner being another of Chieftain Wulfric's sons, Gamel De Alditheley. Harry Hollingsworth the famous American researcher speculated on the possibility of Hollinworth Lancashire later being owned by a Matthew De Hollinworth, or Matthew De Bromhall in 1235. Given that these two men owned the same lands in 1235, Harry raised the possibility of Matthew de Hollinworth and Matthew de Bramhall being one and the same. In fact, Matthew de Bramhall of Lancashire appears to be Matthew, lord of Bromhall, grandson of Ranulph and great grandson of Cheftain Wulfric. Matthew Bramhall was also given lands in Dokenfeld and Baguely by the second Baron Hamo De Masci, which are neighbouring villages of Hollingworth in Cheshire. Interestingly, Matthew de Hollinworth is again mentioned in relation to a transfer of land by Robert De Mascy of Norwurthin, "who he gave Christiana, daughter of Matthew de Holinwurthe, lands in Norwurthin" (ca. 1300). This is the very same Norman family of De Masci who held lands in Hollingworth in Longdendale from 1086.
Could it be that the lords Hollingworth descend from a pre-Conquest Saxon such as Ranulph, son of Wulfric? Certainly the last proprietor of Hollingworth Hall, Capt. Robert De Hollyngworth in 1832, claimed his personal pedigree dated back to a Saxon line commencing in 1002. It is possible that De Hollyngworthe was referring to the line of Wulfric through Ranulph and not the ejected Saxon freeman residing at Holisurde (Hollingworth) before the Norman Conquest. Chieftain Wulfric's many sons and grandsons appear to have given rise to the most ancient of Cheshire families to own the various manors of Hamestan Hundred in Cheshire. Families such as the Fitz Waltheofs, Bredburys, Stockports, Hattersleys, Eatons, Romileighs, Mainwarings, Davenports, Alditheleys, Bredburys, and Dokinfelds all descend from Wulfric, so why not the Hollingworths?
The ongoing extent of lands owned by these junior lines of Wulfric is best shown using the estates of the late Thomas de Davenport in 1387. Thomas Davenport's widow Eve inherited as her dowry, Thomas' lands within the "manors of Neuton near Dokenfeld, Merton near Gouseworth, Tyngetwysell, Holynworth, Mottrom in Longedale, Romelegh, Hattreslegh, Goddelegh, Dokenfeld, Hyde, Stavele, Wyrnyth, Bredbury, Brenyngton, Chedle, Bromhale, Ponynton, Adlyngton, Bolyn, Pounale, Chorlegh, Mottrom Andrew, Capesthorn, Cholleford, Somerford, Davenport, Withinton, and Swetenham." Many of the villages within the Lordship of owner, the manor of Romiley was held by another of the junior scions of Cheftain Wulfric through Robert, Baron De Stockport. By 1200, a junior member of the house of Stockport is styled as Robert, lord de Romelegh.
Lord of Hollingworth Manor
Cheftain Wulfric and his son Ranulph were recorded as one of the many landowners of Hollingworth Manor in 1086. Wulfric's family appears to have continued in possession of these particular estates using the surname of Mainwaring in 1278. Richard De Mainwaring de (of) Holynwith was descended directly from Chieftain Wulfric through his son Ranulph and was a junior member of the powerful Cheshire family of Mainwaring De Mainwaring. Richard used his family surname and the local name of 'Holynwith' as his personal distinction in order to identify his own personal branch of the Mainwaring family. It is interesting to note that by this date there were various families living within the boundaries of Hollingworth Manor with different surnames. The local lord of the manor is recorded as “John” Lord de (of) Holynworth and was mostly likely descended from Thomas De Holinwurth who was a witness to a Godleigh land deed between 1211 and 1225. There were many other local families residing within Hollingworth Manor around 1200, including the families of De Wolegh de Holenwirth, De Deusnap de Holenwirth, and De Masci de Godley.
It is clear that families living in Hollingworth during this time would never have assumed the name of the village as their surname unless they were related to the current lord of the manor. The surname of Hollingworth and the personal arms of the three holly leaves identified John de Holynworth as the hereditary owner of the manorial lordship by grant of a royal patent. Hereditary ownership of a manor such as Hollingworth was only possible with a legal grant from the Earl of Chester. The use of the surname or the Hollingworth arms by a person not related to the lord of Hollingworth's family would have been unlawful and a serious crime in the County of Cheshire. However, the surname of Hollingworth was not always used exclusively for the male line, as grandsons descended from a daughter of the lord of Hollingworth could also use the surname as their alias. An example of using such an alias was Thomas de Honford of Hollingworth, grandson of John, lord of Hollingworth, and descendent of the famous crusader family De Honford of Handforth. While Thomas was a minor living with his widowed mother at Thorncliffe Hall in Hollingworth, he was styled as Thomas Hollingworth de Hollingworth. Upon coming of age in 1360, Thomas assumed the William of Normandy's burning of all the surrounding manors in the east of Cheshire.
Although Hollingworth was always believed to have been owned by only one Saxon freeman, the reality is that twenty-two people owned lands in Hollingworth after Conquest. The list of Hollingworth landowners gives us a hint as to why Hollingworth was regularly included amongst the eight seemingly disparate manors listed under Henbury Manor. These eight manors were most probably grouped together, as all eight ejected Saxons were replaced by exactly the same landowners sometime before 1086. That is to say that Hamedeberie (Henbury), Warnet (Werneth), Laitone (Leighton in Stockport), Hofinchel/-Hofinghel (Wincel), Copestor (Capesthorne), Tengestuisie (Tintwistle), and Rumelie (Romiley) were all owned by exactly the same twenty landholders.
The Norman Earl of Chester seems to have taken direct control of these eight manors after the ejectment of the original eight Saxon thanes, who owned the manors in return for military service to the Saxon Earl of Chester, Edwin. The term ejectment as used in the Doomsday record, suggests that the original Saxon landowners were not to be found among the list of twenty-two Saxon, Norman, and Church landowners for these eight manors after Conquest.
The Doomsday Owners of Hollingworth
The Saxon landowners recorded for Hollingworth in 1086 were the then deposed Earl Edwin of Chester, Beornwulf, Cheftain Gamel, Chieftain Brun, Dot, Edwin, Chieftain Godwine, Herbert, Leofnoth, Mundret, Restald, and Cheftain Wulfric and his son, Ranulph. The local Norman landowners for Hollingworth included First Baron Hamo de Masci; Robert de Limesy, the Bishop of Chester; Robert fitzHugh; and Regnvald (possibly a Dane). Various Roman Catholic monastic orders also held lands in Hollingworth by 1086, including the Canons of St Werburh, Chester Church, and the Church of St. Chad, Lichfield.
At first glance, the names of the landholders of Hollingworth seem to bear no relationship to the surnames recorded at Hollingworth Manor three hundred years later. Given that surnames didn't become popular until 1200, it's not surprising to find that there was no individual landowner by the name of Hollingworth or Holisurde living within the manor at the time of Conquest. When we examine more closely the eight manors listed under Henbury Manor between the years 1086 to 1300, we find a number of Saxon families having adopted local village names as their surname. These families include the Bostocks, Stockports, Davenports, Eatons, Mainwarings, Alditheleys, Capesthornes, Romileys, Leightons, Bredburys, Bramhalls, and the Hollingworths.
Lord of Werneth Manor
After the ejectment of the original Saxon owner, Werneth was held by Chieftain Wulfric as the principle landowner after 1086. The manor of Werneth appears to have later passed to Wulfric's eldest son, Robert Fitz Waltheof, the lord of Etchells and Bredbury. Werneth then passed to Wulfric's grandson, Robert De Stockport, the Baron of Stockport, by 1200. The Stockports later sold Werneth to another scion of Chieftain Wulfric's family, being the Davenports of Davenport.
Lord of Capesthorne Manor
After the ejectment of the original Saxon, Capesthorne came to be held by Orme, another of Cheftain Wulfric's sons. As lord of Werneth and progenitor to the Davenports De Davenport, Orme de Dauneporte was also related to the De Stockport, De Eaton, De Mainwaring, and De Alditheley, De Bramhall, and De Bredbury families. Thomas De Capesthorne, who held the manor in 1238, appears to have simplified his name from “Thomas De Dauneporte de (of) Capesthorne” to “Thomas, lord of Capesthorne.”
The Hundred of Hamestan
Hollingworth Manor was included among the twenty-three manors of the Hundred of Hamestan in the County of Cestre (Cheshire) during the last reign of the Saxons. Hollingworth Manor was owned in chief by the then Earl of Chester, Prince Edwin, with the manor being sub-leased or sub-infuded to an unidentified Saxon thane or freeman in return for military service. In 1059, Hollingworth was called Holisvrde and valued as 1 virigate being 30 acres of productive land. Note: “vrde” is the Anglican word for “worth.”
The Saxon manors of the Hundred of Hamestan (Macclesfield) were: Holisvrde Hollingworth in Longdendale), Tengestuisie (Tintwhistle in Longdendale), Motre (Mottram in Longdendale), Edvlvintune, Govesvrde (Gawsworth), Mervtvne (Marton), Hvngrewenitvne, Celeford (Chelford), Hameteberie, Copestor (Capesthorn), Hofinchel (Wincle), Warnet (Warneth in Longdendale), Croeneche (Cranage), Bretberie, Aldredelie (Nether Alderly), Boselega (Bosley), Meretone, Cerdingham, Svmreford (Sumerford), Bramale Bramhall), Nordberie, Botelege, and Cedde.
In 1059, the manors of Hamestan were owned by eighteen Saxons, including Chieftain Brun, Chieftain Ulric, Chieftain Godwin, Bernulf, Godric, Hundin, Haccom, Levine, and Ligulf. These Cheshire chieftains and their local thanes or lords, all held their individual manors from Earl Edwin of Chester as the principle owner. In 1059, Hollingworth and Tintwistle appear to be listed amongst a seemingly unrelated group of manors from the Hundred of Hamestan known as the Earl's manors under Henbury. These eight unrelated manors following Henbury Manor were each valued as:
Hamiteberie for half a hide (Henbury)
Copestor for half a hide (Capesthorne)
Hofinchel (Henshall)
Tengestivise for one virgate (Tintwistle)
Holisvrd for one virgate (Hollingworth)
Warnet for one virgate (Wernith)
Rumilie for one virgate (Romiley)
Laitone (Leighton) for one virgate
Possible Identity # 2
It has been explained that de Bromale, de Massey, or de Davenport are titles, not last names. The word “de” is “of” and the word after it is the local. It is more likely that the person receiving large amount of land or manors are usually related to the Lord bestowing it to them. But what makes it difficult in connecting individuals to a blood line is that this same individual can have several titles. Mathew de Bromale could also be called Mathew de Greenhill if he also lived on an estate named “Greenhill”. This doesn’t reveal his identity to a blood line. It was not until the 1200’s that people started to adopt last names. However, Mathew de Bromale could be part of the Massey line.
As found at http://www.reference.com/browse/bramall_hall:
De Bromales
The founder of this family was probably a follower or relative of the first Hamon de Massey. About the time of Henry II the land passed from the second Baron of Dunham Massey to Matthew de Bromale, one of his kinsmen who took his name from the land he had received. Matthew's father is said to have been the kinsman of the first Hamon de Massey and may have held the land at some point. Matthew was succeeded by his grandson Richard, and then two subsequent Richards, the second dying without issue. The latter was succeeded by his younger brother Geoffrey, who had two daughters Alice and Ellen. Alice eventually inherited the land, and married John de Davenport of Wheltrough circa 1370–1380, thus changing the family name to Davenport.
In the first part of the 12th century, the manor passed from the second Baron of Dunham Massey to Matthew de Bromale. According to Dean, Matthew's father is said to have founded the de Bromale family, naming himself after the manor, and he may have been related to or a follower of the de Masseys.
Possible Identity # 3
William the Conqueror, became King of England through usurpation. Henry’s mother, Empress Matilda, was angry that her son was not chosen as successor for the King of England. A civil war insured. At the death bed of King Stephen, Stephen signed a treaty designating Henry II as his successor. King Henry II wasted no time in inserting his power. He severely punished those that were found to be un-loyal to the king. He took away land un-loyal Barons and destroyed many castles. The Roman Catholic Church in England at that time had its own authority to enforce its own laws. King Henry did not like this and felt that the church was above the king’s laws. A constitution was made that would make royal laws above church laws but the Archbishop refused to sign it. A dispute continues as this Archbishop went to France for protection; however the bishop eventually made some compromises with the king and returned to England. Although the archbishop and the church was continually making the king upset. King Henry’s Norman knights decided to put an end to it, snuck away, and murdered the archbishop in the church. King Henry II died on Jul 6, 1189.
Many books state that King Henry II was king at the time that Hamo de Masci granted a charter to Matthew de Bromale, so if this king died July 6, 1189, then this charter was granted before this date.
Also, Hamo de Masci was probably involved with the barons’ rebellion against King Henry II in 1173 as suggested on http://forums.civfanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-367261.html:
“Dunham Castle, Greater Manchester, England [The Manor] The castle most likely belonged to Hamo de Mascy who was involved with the barons’ rebellion against Henry II in 1173.”
And
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=41809:
[Hugh, Earl of Chester and Hamon de Masci] “Both tenant-in-demesne and overlord appear to have forfeited their interests in it in consequence of their revolt against Henry II in 1173.”
I don’t know if knowing all this will help in understanding this charter with Matthew de Bromale; however it sets the stage for this event. This charter can be found in the book titled “East Cheshire: past and present: or, A history of the hundred of Macclesfield, in the county palatine of Chester”, page 423, By John Parsons Earwaker, published in 1877. The folowing is my own interpretation of it:
Hamo de Marci writes: To all my friends both clerical and common folk, as well as those present, I send greeting. Know all that I have granted to Matthew de Bromale the lands of Bromale, Dorkenfeld, and two parts of Baguley, which Matthew’s father held as tenant by rent or by military service and have been held by myself and heirs. Know that I and my heirs have total claim to these lands. And as service, which is custom to do, I Hamo used to demand as payment for the use of these lands, such as plowing, fertilizing, harvesting corn or hay, or cutting of lumber, but now will except as payment of having a male offer himself for military service.
The Charter to Matthew de Bromale
In the later part of the 12th century and during the reign of Henry II, as recorded by Earwaker in his History of Cheshire, there was a charter written as confirmation of Matthew de Bromales lands from Hamo de Masci, the second Baron of Dunham Massey and the brother-in-law of William the Conqueror. This charter has been translated as follows:
Hamo de Masci to all his friends both clerical and lay, as well present as to come, send greeting. Know ye all, that I have granted, et cetera, to Matthew De Bromale, Bromale and Dokenfeld and two parts of Baguley, which his father held of me and my heirs in fee, [by service] of a breastplate (in feodo lorica) to him and his heirs, to hold of me and my heirs freely and quietly, et cetera, making to me and my heirs the free service in fee of one breastplate; and know ye that I have quitclaimed the said Matthew and his heirs and the aforesaid lands, to me and my heirs, of the service and custom which I the said Hamo used to demand from them, namely, of ploughing, mucking, and sowing corn (de avatro et hercia et segete ferendis) and of making hay (fenum colligendo) and of doing homage of estovers, pannage, and…..(de averiis et pannagiis et of salicis) and of all other service except the service of the fee of one breastplate. These being witnesses: Roger de Massie, William de Carington, Robert de Massie, and Richard de Fitton, and very many others, both seeing and hearing the same."
TERMS USED ABOVE:
in feodo = in fee.
lorica = body armour
Quitclaim = is a legal instrument by which the owner of a piece of real property, called the grantor, transfers his or her interest to a recipient, called the grantee. The owner/grantor terminates (“quits”) his or her right and claim to the property, thereby allowing claim to transfer to the recipient/grantee. Defined by Wikipedia.org
de = of
et = and
hercia = Harrow; which is an agricultural implement with spikelike teeth or upright disks, drawn chiefly over plowed land to level it, break up clods, root up weeds, etc.
ferendis = Probably means born or carried. But also could mean suffered, endured or reported.
Avatro = ?
Segete = Crop
fenum = Hay
colligendo = Gather or collect
estovers = Law; a right allowed by law to tenants of land to cut timber.
Mucking = has several meaning but it probably means to fertilize with manure or compost.
The service of one breast plate = Military service of one
The following is my own interpretation of this charter. If anyone has another opinion then please let me know. But before I do this I will give a brief understanding of King Henry II.
Henry was born in Le Mans, France in 1133. His cousin Stephen, who was the grandson of King William the Conqueror, became King of England through usurpation. Henry’s mother, Empress Matilda, was angry that her son was not chosen as successor for the King of England. A civil war insured. At the death bed of King Stephen, Stephen signed a treaty designating Henry II as his successor. King Henry II wasted no time in inserting his power. He severely punished those that were found to be un-loyal to the king. He took away land un-loyal Barons and destroyed many castles. The Roman Catholic Church in England at that time had its own authority to enforce its own laws. King Henry did not like this and felt that the church was above the king’s laws. A constitution was made that would make royal laws above church laws but the Archbishop refused to sign it. A dispute continues as this Archbishop went to France for protection; however the bishop eventually made some compromises with the king and returned to England. Although the archbishop and the church was continually making the king upset. King Henry’s Norman knights decided to put an end to it, snuck away, and murdered the archbishop in the church. King Henry II died on Jul 6, 1189.
Many books state that King Henry II was king at the time that Hamo de Masci granted a charter to Matthew de Bromale, so if this king died July 6, 1189, then this charter was granted before this date.
Also, Hamo de Masci was probably involved with the barons’ rebellion against King Henry II in 1173 as suggested in http://forums.civfanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-367261.html:
“Dunham Castle, Greater Manchester, England [The Manor] The castle most likely belonged to Hamo de Mascy who was involved with the barons’ rebellion against Henry II in 1173.”
And
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=41809:
[Hugh, Earl of Chester and Hamon de Masci] “Both tenant-in-demesne and overlord appear to have forfeited their interests in it in consequence of their revolt against Henry II in 1173.”
I don’t know if knowing all this will help in understanding this charter with Matthew de Bromale; however it sets the stage for this event. This charter can be found in the book titled “East Cheshire: past and present: or, A history of the hundred of Macclesfield, in the country palatine of Chester”, page 423, By John Parsons Earwaker, published in 1877. The folowing is my own interpretation of it:
Hamo de Marci writes: To all my friends both clerical and common folk, as well as those present, I send greeting. Know all that I have granted to Matthew de Bromale the lands of Bromale, Dorkenfeld, and two parts of Baguley, which Matthew’s father held as tenant by rent or by military service and have been held by myself and heirs. Know that I and my heirs have total claim to these lands. And as service, which is custom to do, I Hamo used to demand as payment for the use of these lands, such as plowing, fertilizing, harvesting corn or hay, or cutting of lumber, but now will except as payment of having a male offer himself for military service.
Many books state that King Henry II was king at the time that Hamo de Masci granted a charter to Matthew de Bromale, so if this king died July 6, 1189, then this charter was granted before this date.
Also, Hamo de Masci was probably involved with the barons’ rebellion against King Henry II in 1173 as suggested on http://forums.civfanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-367261.html:
“Dunham Castle, Greater Manchester, England [The Manor] The castle most likely belonged to Hamo de Mascy who was involved with the barons’ rebellion against Henry II in 1173.”
And
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=41809:
[Hugh, Earl of Chester and Hamon de Masci] “Both tenant-in-demesne and overlord appear to have forfeited their interests in it in consequence of their revolt against Henry II in 1173.”
I don’t know if knowing all this will help in understanding this charter with Matthew de Bromale; however it sets the stage for this event. This charter can be found in the book titled “East Cheshire: past and present: or, A history of the hundred of Macclesfield, in the county palatine of Chester”, page 423, By John Parsons Earwaker, published in 1877. The folowing is my own interpretation of it:
Hamo de Marci writes: To all my friends both clerical and common folk, as well as those present, I send greeting. Know all that I have granted to Matthew de Bromale the lands of Bromale, Dorkenfeld, and two parts of Baguley, which Matthew’s father held as tenant by rent or by military service and have been held by myself and heirs. Know that I and my heirs have total claim to these lands. And as service, which is custom to do, I Hamo used to demand as payment for the use of these lands, such as plowing, fertilizing, harvesting corn or hay, or cutting of lumber, but now will except as payment of having a male offer himself for military service.
The Charter to Matthew de Bromale
In the later part of the 12th century and during the reign of Henry II, as recorded by Earwaker in his History of Cheshire, there was a charter written as confirmation of Matthew de Bromales lands from Hamo de Masci, the second Baron of Dunham Massey and the brother-in-law of William the Conqueror. This charter has been translated as follows:
Hamo de Masci to all his friends both clerical and lay, as well present as to come, send greeting. Know ye all, that I have granted, et cetera, to Matthew De Bromale, Bromale and Dokenfeld and two parts of Baguley, which his father held of me and my heirs in fee, [by service] of a breastplate (in feodo lorica) to him and his heirs, to hold of me and my heirs freely and quietly, et cetera, making to me and my heirs the free service in fee of one breastplate; and know ye that I have quitclaimed the said Matthew and his heirs and the aforesaid lands, to me and my heirs, of the service and custom which I the said Hamo used to demand from them, namely, of ploughing, mucking, and sowing corn (de avatro et hercia et segete ferendis) and of making hay (fenum colligendo) and of doing homage of estovers, pannage, and…..(de averiis et pannagiis et of salicis) and of all other service except the service of the fee of one breastplate. These being witnesses: Roger de Massie, William de Carington, Robert de Massie, and Richard de Fitton, and very many others, both seeing and hearing the same."
TERMS USED ABOVE:
in feodo = in fee.
lorica = body armour
Quitclaim = is a legal instrument by which the owner of a piece of real property, called the grantor, transfers his or her interest to a recipient, called the grantee. The owner/grantor terminates (“quits”) his or her right and claim to the property, thereby allowing claim to transfer to the recipient/grantee. Defined by Wikipedia.org
de = of
et = and
hercia = Harrow; which is an agricultural implement with spikelike teeth or upright disks, drawn chiefly over plowed land to level it, break up clods, root up weeds, etc.
ferendis = Probably means born or carried. But also could mean suffered, endured or reported.
Avatro = ?
Segete = Crop
fenum = Hay
colligendo = Gather or collect
estovers = Law; a right allowed by law to tenants of land to cut timber.
Mucking = has several meaning but it probably means to fertilize with manure or compost.
The service of one breast plate = Military service of one
The following is my own interpretation of this charter. If anyone has another opinion then please let me know. But before I do this I will give a brief understanding of King Henry II.
Henry was born in Le Mans, France in 1133. His cousin Stephen, who was the grandson of King William the Conqueror, became King of England through usurpation. Henry’s mother, Empress Matilda, was angry that her son was not chosen as successor for the King of England. A civil war insured. At the death bed of King Stephen, Stephen signed a treaty designating Henry II as his successor. King Henry II wasted no time in inserting his power. He severely punished those that were found to be un-loyal to the king. He took away land un-loyal Barons and destroyed many castles. The Roman Catholic Church in England at that time had its own authority to enforce its own laws. King Henry did not like this and felt that the church was above the king’s laws. A constitution was made that would make royal laws above church laws but the Archbishop refused to sign it. A dispute continues as this Archbishop went to France for protection; however the bishop eventually made some compromises with the king and returned to England. Although the archbishop and the church was continually making the king upset. King Henry’s Norman knights decided to put an end to it, snuck away, and murdered the archbishop in the church. King Henry II died on Jul 6, 1189.
Many books state that King Henry II was king at the time that Hamo de Masci granted a charter to Matthew de Bromale, so if this king died July 6, 1189, then this charter was granted before this date.
Also, Hamo de Masci was probably involved with the barons’ rebellion against King Henry II in 1173 as suggested in http://forums.civfanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-367261.html:
“Dunham Castle, Greater Manchester, England [The Manor] The castle most likely belonged to Hamo de Mascy who was involved with the barons’ rebellion against Henry II in 1173.”
And
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=41809:
[Hugh, Earl of Chester and Hamon de Masci] “Both tenant-in-demesne and overlord appear to have forfeited their interests in it in consequence of their revolt against Henry II in 1173.”
I don’t know if knowing all this will help in understanding this charter with Matthew de Bromale; however it sets the stage for this event. This charter can be found in the book titled “East Cheshire: past and present: or, A history of the hundred of Macclesfield, in the country palatine of Chester”, page 423, By John Parsons Earwaker, published in 1877. The folowing is my own interpretation of it:
Hamo de Marci writes: To all my friends both clerical and common folk, as well as those present, I send greeting. Know all that I have granted to Matthew de Bromale the lands of Bromale, Dorkenfeld, and two parts of Baguley, which Matthew’s father held as tenant by rent or by military service and have been held by myself and heirs. Know that I and my heirs have total claim to these lands. And as service, which is custom to do, I Hamo used to demand as payment for the use of these lands, such as plowing, fertilizing, harvesting corn or hay, or cutting of lumber, but now will except as payment of having a male offer himself for military service.
The Bramhall Mystery
Richard Logan and Ivy LaPriel Burnett Brimhall have provided an interesting mystery on the Bramhalls. This might explain why the Bramhall family of Bramhall, England and their holding had disappeared in history. In fact, the family name of Bramhall seemed to have disappeared in every town for hundres of years. What is still beening explained on several websites is that Geoffery de Bromale, who was the last holder of the Bramhall manor, had no living son, only two daughter. That one daughter, Alice, married John de Davenport in 1350 and that is how the Davenports inherited the Bramhall estate. The theory goes, that the Bramhalls or a Bramhall participated in the Crusades as the Templar Knights (1096- 1291). The King of France, Phillippe IV, in the early 1300’s began a campaign with the help of the Roman Catholic Church, to get rid of the Knights. This was called the Inquisition. Many of the Knights were rounded up, found guilty by trial, tortured, and executed. All the knights went into hiding. Many would liquidate their assets and destroy documents that identified who they were.
Some explanations are given that make the theory plausible. They are:
1. The Bromales (Bramhalls) did indeed participate in the Crusades where they became Templar Knights.
2. As members of this organization in the early 1300s, they were threatened with extinction by the Papal Inquisition and were forced underground by 1350.
3. It may not be coincidence that Geoffery de Bromale, who's daughter (Alice) married into the Davenport family at the time of the persecution of the Templar Knights, had the same first name (Geoffery) as many of the leaders of the Templar Knights from its founding in Jerusalem (1118) until its demise in the 1300s.
4. The Bramhalls continued on through the Davenport family name in a variety of possible arrangements, some of which could have been changing their name, titles and holdings to the Davenport name, linking entrance into the Davenport family by marriage and falsifying records putting an end of the Bramhall line because of no male heirs. There are many other possibilities. How would you have done it?
5. It is interesting that the Davenport coat-of-arms (three crosses on a field) changed at this time to include the crescent, rampant lion of the Bromale (Bramhall) family.
6. It may be important to note that even with many other females marring into the Davenport family thereafter for generation after generation, the Davenport coat of arms did not change, as it had in 1350 with Alice de Bromale's marriage.
7. It is interesting as one visits Bramhall Manor to note the Bramhall coat-of-arms is present in the wood carvings, in the stain glass work, in the tapestries, and in the wedding paintings of generation after generation of Davenports.
8. It is also worthy of note that after being in the hands of the Davenport family for more than six centuries, the building and estate is called Bramhall Hall/Manor instead of Davenport Hall/Manor.
9. The Bramhall name and title is officially recognized once again in 1628 in the person of John Bramhall. This recognition takes places within several months after the two century old, clandestine organization of the old Templar Knights, known as the Masons Guild during this time, comes out in the open as the Freemasons.
10. The town of Bramhall, after a thousand years of history, after 600 years of the Davenport name dominating its affairs, is still to this day called Bramhall.
The above theory is explained in more detail on these two sites:
http://www.bramhill.net/BramhillInfo/the-bramhall-mys.html
And
http://www.b13family.com/html/articlesbramhall.htm
Some explanations are given that make the theory plausible. They are:
1. The Bromales (Bramhalls) did indeed participate in the Crusades where they became Templar Knights.
2. As members of this organization in the early 1300s, they were threatened with extinction by the Papal Inquisition and were forced underground by 1350.
3. It may not be coincidence that Geoffery de Bromale, who's daughter (Alice) married into the Davenport family at the time of the persecution of the Templar Knights, had the same first name (Geoffery) as many of the leaders of the Templar Knights from its founding in Jerusalem (1118) until its demise in the 1300s.
4. The Bramhalls continued on through the Davenport family name in a variety of possible arrangements, some of which could have been changing their name, titles and holdings to the Davenport name, linking entrance into the Davenport family by marriage and falsifying records putting an end of the Bramhall line because of no male heirs. There are many other possibilities. How would you have done it?
5. It is interesting that the Davenport coat-of-arms (three crosses on a field) changed at this time to include the crescent, rampant lion of the Bromale (Bramhall) family.
6. It may be important to note that even with many other females marring into the Davenport family thereafter for generation after generation, the Davenport coat of arms did not change, as it had in 1350 with Alice de Bromale's marriage.
7. It is interesting as one visits Bramhall Manor to note the Bramhall coat-of-arms is present in the wood carvings, in the stain glass work, in the tapestries, and in the wedding paintings of generation after generation of Davenports.
8. It is also worthy of note that after being in the hands of the Davenport family for more than six centuries, the building and estate is called Bramhall Hall/Manor instead of Davenport Hall/Manor.
9. The Bramhall name and title is officially recognized once again in 1628 in the person of John Bramhall. This recognition takes places within several months after the two century old, clandestine organization of the old Templar Knights, known as the Masons Guild during this time, comes out in the open as the Freemasons.
10. The town of Bramhall, after a thousand years of history, after 600 years of the Davenport name dominating its affairs, is still to this day called Bramhall.
The above theory is explained in more detail on these two sites:
http://www.bramhill.net/BramhillInfo/the-bramhall-mys.html
And
http://www.b13family.com/html/articlesbramhall.htm
The Guiteau Line
The three photos above are of Lydia de Guiteau was the mother of Noah Brimhall and the wife of Sylvanus Brimhall II. This is a very interesting line with a lot of history. I will try to write a brief history concerning this line. I will also give some good links so that if anyone interested can find out more about the Guiteau line.
The above two illustrations are what the Guiteau coat of arms may have looked like. These are my own interpretation based on Kay Moons description and may be in error.
The spelling of Guiteau is sometimes found with two “t’s” as in Guitteau and is pronounced with a short “i” as “Guĭ-toe”.
Two coats of arms of the Guiteau families of France are described by Kay Moon and can be found at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~guiteau/images_Guiteau/Guiteau Translation by H Kay Moon .pdf. This author describes the two coats of arms as follows:
N. Guittear, citizen of Exoudun (d.-s.) Was inscribed at the office of the Armorial of Poitout, in 1701, with the following blazon: Four quarters in gold and sinople with four stars one over the other. (Edit. Passier T.I., p. 290). The widow of Froncois Guitteau (2e deg.) received on the same date four quarters of sable and gold with four crescents one over the other.
Two coats of arms of the Guiteau families of France are described by Kay Moon and can be found at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~guiteau/images_Guiteau/Guiteau Translation by H Kay Moon .pdf. This author describes the two coats of arms as follows:
N. Guittear, citizen of Exoudun (d.-s.) Was inscribed at the office of the Armorial of Poitout, in 1701, with the following blazon: Four quarters in gold and sinople with four stars one over the other. (Edit. Passier T.I., p. 290). The widow of Froncois Guitteau (2e deg.) received on the same date four quarters of sable and gold with four crescents one over the other.
The Sources
This is what I used in writing about the Guiteau Line
This is what I used in writing about the Guiteau Line
“The American Genealogist,” whole number 319, vol. 80, no. 3, July 2005, page 161 to 176, “The European Origin of Francis Guiteau of Wallingford, Connecticut” by Peter Ray. Web link: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~guiteau/TAG1.htm
The Descendants of Francis Guiteau, Hosted by rootsweb. Web link: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~guiteau/
The Descendants of Francis Guiteau, Hosted by rootsweb. Web link: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~guiteau/pafn04.htm
Many contributor on Ancestry.com. Link: http://ancestry.com
The Descendants of Francis Guiteau, Hosted by rootsweb. Web link: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~guiteau/
The Descendants of Francis Guiteau, Hosted by rootsweb. Web link: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~guiteau/pafn04.htm
Many contributor on Ancestry.com. Link: http://ancestry.com
“Guiteau Translation,” by Kay Moon.See file below:
guiteau_translation_by_h_kay_moon_.pdf | |
File Size: | 15 kb |
File Type: |
“A History of The Families of Edward Tinsley Ray and Isabel Douglas Curtis” in three volumes, vol. 2, compiled by Peter Ray. See file below:
public_202010_20vol._202.pdf | |
File Size: | 10065 kb |
File Type: |
Other interesting sources:
This is a very large story found in a New York newspaper that was printed in 1879 on the Guiteau Family. See file below:
rome_ny_roman_citizen_1879_-_1882_grayscale_-_0309.pdf | |
File Size: | 2417 kb |
File Type: |
An 1881 New York Times newspaper article written by John Wilson Guiteau, the brother of Charles Julius Guiteau; which gives the life sketch of his brother Charles Juilus Guiteau. See file below:
charles_guiteau_newspaper_clip.pdf | |
File Size: | 158 kb |
File Type: |