Individual

Go to List of Family Names Go to List of People    < Previous Next >

Birth:          1138 Costow, Wiltshire, England

Notes
http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=jweber&id=I08154
Maud [mother of Geoffrey Fitz Peter (or Piers), wife of Piers de Lutegareshale], Lady of 
Costow, co. Wilts. [Ancestral Roots]

Maud de Mandeville [daughter of Geoffrey de Mandeville by Rohese de Vere]; married 
(1) Piers de Lutegareshale; married (2) Hugh de Boclande, living 1176. [Magna Charta 
Sureties]

Note: I have reversed the order of marriage which MCS has, because it certainly 
makes more sense according to the birthdates of the children. Both of Maud's 
husbands lived to be fairly old, making it very difficult, even doubtful, if she married 
both. I note that Ancestral Roots did not name her Maud de Mandeville (I think that 
the citation implies a prior marriage to someone from Costow, Wiltshire (possibly Hugh 
de Boclande?)), and that, according to Burke's Peerage, Geoffrey Fitz Piers did not 
use his mother's relationship to claim the Earldom of Essex. He used his wife, Beatrice 
de Say's descendancy from Beatrice de Mandeville sister of Geoffrey de Mandeville, 
1st Earl of Essex. Thus, even though MCS clearly states her as Maud de Mandeville, 
daughter of Geoffrey de Mandeville, I have my doubts.

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

The following post-em by Curt Hofemann, curt_hofemann AT yahoo.com clears up the 
reason why Maud was mistaken for a daughter of Geoffrey de Mandeville by MCS:

Maud. Widow of Piers de Lutegareshale. Mother of Geoffrey fitz Piers earl of Essex 
[Ref: CP V:116 Table]

Maud was not a de Mandeville. This error has been discussed several times on Gen-
Medieval:

Maud was not intended by this to be represented as Geoffrey's daughter, but this 
appears to be the genesis of this mistaken affiliation. As has been pointed out, it is 
clear that Geoffrey Fitz Piers came to hold Mandeville land, as well as the Earldom of 
Essex, through his wife, who was granddaughter of Geoffrey de Mandeville's sister. 
This is best seen by the fact that the land and titles descended to Bohun, to the 
exclusion of Geoffrey's son and male heir, John Fitz Geoffrey, son by a second wife. 
So, no Mandeville land can be shown to have been held by Piers, or by Geoffrey prior 
to his marriage; no Mandeville land descended to Geoffrey's (and hence Maud's) heir 
male; no document has been brought forward which claims Maud, wife of Piers, was a 
Mandeville; no daughter or sister of an Earl of Essex would have been allowed to 
marry such a lowly knight as Piers. No, Maud was not a Mandeville. [Ref: TAF 3 Apr 
1998]

Maud de Mandeville was not daughter of Geoffrey and Rohese. This comes from a 
misreading of the chart of Essex in CP. She is placed at the same level as Geoffrey's 
children, but there is no line connecting her with Geoffrey. Likewise, Piers was a local 
forester, and never would have been given the daughter of someone of Geoffrey's 
status. Even if it were true, her children would have been immediately elevated in 
status, but instead, Geoffrey Fitz Piers had to work his way up through the king's 
household service. He was a "new man", and not the grandson of an Earl. [Ref: TAF 
19 Apr 1998]

TAF = Todd A. Farmerie

Also, Bill Marshall , someone I respect as a very thorough reseacher, lists on 
WorldConnect at:
http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=SRCH&db=wtm& 
surname=A

The mother of Geoffrey Fitz Piers was Maud, wife of Piers de Lutegareshale. As far as 
I have been able to determine, there was never any Maud de Mandeville at this point 
in the Mandeville pedigree until someone misread CP. I followed back the references 
cited by Weis/Sheppard Magna Carta Sureties (later repeated in AR7) and they all 
either say nothing of the sort, or else lead right to the CP Essex article. Nowhere in 
the text does it mention a Maud other than simply as wife of Piers, and there it does 
not call her Maud de Mandeville nor provide any evidence of a connection. In the 
associated chart, (and here's the rub) Piers, Maud, and her second husband are 
placed under the horizontal line which unites the children of Geoffrey de Mandeville. 
This would, at first glance, appear to show Maud as Geoffrey's daughter (this applies 
to Maud, but not Piers or his successor, because Maud is not given a surname). 
However, a closer look reveals that there is no vertical line dropping down from the 
horizontal to connect her with Geoffrey: Geoffrey de Mandeville.

Regards,
Curt

Note: I have now seen the chart on CP V:116, and it certainly looks at first glance as 
if Maud is implied to be daughter of Geofrey de Mandeville, but on closer inspection 
there is no vertical line.


Marriage To DE BOCLANDE Hugh (ABT 1130 - AFT 1176)
    m.  

Notes

Parents
DE BOCLANDE William (ABT 1110 - BEF 1158)
----- ----- ()

Children by DE BOCLANDE Hugh ABT 1130 - AFT 1176
DE BOCLANDE William (ABT 1155 - 1216)

Produced by Fzip 1.7 6/20/2017