no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Rohese (Despenser) de Segrave (abt. 1182 - 1241)

Rohese de Segrave formerly Despenser aka le Despenser
Born about in Leicestershire, Englandmap
Ancestors ancestors
Wife of — married [date unknown] [location unknown]
Descendants descendants
Died at about age 59 in Seagrave, Leicestershire, Englandmap
Problems/Questions Profile manager: John Atkinson private message [send private message]
Profile last modified | Created 28 Apr 2015
This page has been accessed 5,923 times.

Biography

Sources





Is Rohese your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message the profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA
No known carriers of Rohese's DNA have taken a DNA test.

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 6

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
If Stephen de Segrave married Ida de Hastings ‘about 1238’ then presumably Rohese would have died before 1238 vs. 1241 (unless there was a divorce or other reason). What is the source for Rohese’s death date, which is the same year as Stephen’s?

Rohese’s marriage date should be before 1204 based on first son’s birth year.

posted by Andrew Hill
edited by Andrew Hill
I've just proposed a merge between DeVere-56 and Despencer-28 but I did it the wrong way around, please reverse the merge.
posted by John Atkinson
Despencer-28 and DeVere-56 appear to represent the same person because: DeVere-56 seems to be a mix of at least 3 women with the name Rohese and I'm proposing a merge with Despencer-28 as at least the dates they died match. All other details of DeVere-56 should be subsumed in the merge.
posted by John Atkinson
Unknown-235019 and Despencer-28 appear to represent the same person because: same era, spouse, children, death
posted by Darrell Parker
Please make sure during the merges, that the Despencer-28 is the one that is kept intact. Despencer-28 has the proper name and lowest id "28". Thank you Mike
posted by [Living Lechner]
Please make sure during the merges, that the Despencer-28 is the one that is kept intact. Despencer-28 has the proper name and lowest id "28". Thank you Mike
posted by [Living Lechner]