any support for this Maud being daughter of Roger de Clifford? [closed]

+7 votes

Lewis has Sir Robert Hilton as marrying the daughter of Roger de Clifford (1333-1389), but I cannot find anything to substantiate that.

It looks like she may have been confused with Maude/Matilda, the daughter of Sir Roger de Lascelles, who married a Sir Robert Hilton in 1288 (see this Google Books entry that was given as a source on Hilton's profile).

If no objection/no sources to support her, I'm going to disconnect her as a daughter of Roger de Clifford & his wife Maud de Beauchamp.


WikiTree profile: Maud Hilton
closed with the note: since Joe is one of the "Questionable Trail" coordinators for the project, his answer is autoritative
in Genealogy Help by Liz Shifflett G2G6 Pilot (463k points)
closed by Liz Shifflett

1 Answer

+7 votes
Best answer
This connection is correct per Complete Peerage in the section on Lord Hylton.

"He married 1stly shortly before 13 April 1398 Maud, d. of Roger (de Clifford), Lord of West Moreland (Lord Clifford), by Maud 1st d. of Thomas (de Beauchamp), Earl of Warwick."

Complete Peerage, vol. VII p. 27-28.
by Joe Cochoit G2G6 Pilot (224k points)
selected by Donna Roberts
alrighty then. she stays (I had found Vol VII, but couldn't find that passage you quote - on pp 27 or 28 or elsewhere).
It's there, I just checked to make sure I had the right page number (27).  CP cites as proof of the marriage this fine:

" Pardon to Robert Hilton kt., son of William de Hilton kt., in that he and Maud, late his wife, da. of Maud, Lady of Clifford, had acquired, Without licence to them and their heirs male, two parts of the manor of Great Usworth and the manor of Bedick [by the enfeolfment of I3 Apr. 21 Ric. II] : and licence for him to hold the premises, in fee. (Durbam C/Jancery Roll, no. 42, m. 17). "

Does the citation in the profile need to change? It seems to me that citation is for Cokayne, Vol VII, p. 27, and that appears to be this book:

Which has four mentions of Hilton - none remotely close to the quoted passage.

nevermind - finally found it. It wasn't Cokayne.

grrr. it WAS Cokayne. Just not the Vol VII of The Peerage that has him listed as "George Edward Cokayne" ... the Vol. VII that has the needed info - published 1929 by The St. Catherine Press - shows him only as "GEC" on the title page (or anywhere else):

BY G.E.C. 







You are looking at the older 1st edition.  Note that the reference is to CP vol. VII: Husee to Lincolnshire, 2nd edition. (London, 1929): 27-28, HYLTON.  From my Complete Peerage site where you can find links to both the old 1st editions and the newer 2nd editions:

Complete Peerage by G.E. Cokayne is a comprehensive and authoritative source for the peerage of England.  Originally published in 8 volumes between 1887 and 1898, the high level of scholarship generally holds up well until today.  Though, like all works of its kind, improvements and corrections to CP are constantly being made.

From 1910 to 1959, 'revised and expanded' versions were published.  This stretched the original 8 volumes to 13.  Finally, in 1998 a 14th volume of 'Additions and Corrections' was published.  Many additional corrections, most of which were first noted on the SGM newsgroup, have been collected by Chris Phillips on his Medieval Genealogy site.

If you haven't, I would recommend downloading these books from the website before the more recent volumes disappear.

Cokayne still gets credit for for the second edition volumes though he was long dead and others were responsible for the revisions, corrections, expansion and editing of these newer volumes.
thanks. I just finished editing my reply & saw yours. <sigh>

Related questions

+8 votes
4 answers
+8 votes
1 answer
+12 votes
3 answers
+2 votes
2 answers

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright