Joan de la Launde (25461903)

Joan de la Launde

early 1250s - after 1281

Father	William de la Launde
Mother	Lucy de Okeover
1st Husband	Michael de Hockley
2nd Husband	Richard de Morley
Children	Lucy

Joan was probably born around the early 1250s ⁽¹⁾, the daughter of William de la Launde and Lucy de Okeover his wife ⁽²⁾⁽³⁾. She had younger brothers William and John, and a sister Matilda ⁽⁴⁾.

Her father died in 1269 ⁽⁴⁾, and it was probably somewhere around this date that she married Michael de Hockley ⁽⁵⁾, after whose death soon afterwards, she came into possession of his lands in Taddington and Priestcliffe ⁽⁶⁾⁽⁷⁾⁽⁸⁾. She married again, this time to Richard de Morley ⁽⁷⁾⁽⁸⁾⁽⁹⁾, and they had a daughter Lucy ⁽²⁾⁽³⁾⁽¹⁰⁾.

In 1281, Richard and Joan were involved in a dispute with Letitia, the widow of Alexander le Mercer of Ashbourne, over her dower lands in Alsop ⁽¹¹⁾⁽¹²⁾⁽¹³⁾. Its not clear whether there was any family relaionship between Richard or Joan and Letitia, but its certainly possible as Joan's mother Lucy and her stepfather Alan de Waldschef were named as vouching warranty for half of the disputed claim ⁽¹¹⁾⁽¹⁴⁾⁽¹⁵⁾.

No later mention is found of her. Her husband lived until after 1310 ⁽¹⁶⁾, but theres no idication as to whether she died before or after him.

Brief details of her children:

Lucy has her own page.

Sources:

Her date of birth is simply an estimate. It is based on the fact that she was already widowed before marrying Richard in or before 1275 ⁽⁷⁾. It is of course possible that she was was younger than this if she was a child bride at both of her marriages, but its unlikely she was any older because her brothers were both known to be born in the 1260s ⁽⁴⁾.
"Collections for a History of Staffordshire", Vol 13, 1892. p184 (Extracts from the pleas rolls):
DE BANCO. MICH, 7 Ric II
Derb. The record of an assize was returned into Court which had been taken at Derby on the Monday after the Feast of St. James the Apostle, 7 Ric. II [July 1383], in which Philip de Okoiire (Okeover), Chivaler, claimed the manor of Caldelowe against Goditha, formerly wife of Ralph de Stathum, and others. Goditha answered as tenant, and stated that one Elizabeth, daughter and heir of John de la Launde, "was formerly seised of the tenements and had married one Richard, son of Richard Foljaumpe, and afterwards a Fine was levied in 3 E. III between Joan, formerly wife of John de la Launde, complainant, and the said Richard, son of Richard Foljaumpe, and Elizabeth, deforciants of the manor of Caldelowe and of other lands and tenements, by which Joan acknowledged the said tenements to be the right of Elizabeth, for which the said Richard and Elizabeth granted them to Joan for her life, with reversion to the said Richard and Elizabeth and to the heirs of Elizabeth. And she produced the Fine in Court, and she stated that the said Richard and Elizabeth continued in seisin of the tenements for a long time after the date of the Fine, and at length Richard died, and after his death Elizabeth continued in seisin of them, and died leaving no issue, and after her death the said Goditha and one Peter Peyntour entered as cousins and heirs of Elizabeth, viz., Goditha as daughter of Lucy, daughter of Lucy, daughter of Joan, sister of John, father of the said Elizabeth, and Peter as son of Joan, son of Matilda, another sister of the said John, father of Elizabeth, and she stated that Philip was kinsman of the said Elizabeth more remotely, viz., as son of Thomas, son of Roger, son of John, son of Hugh, father of Lucy, the mother of John, father of the said Elizabeth. And the said Philip, without admitting that such a Fine had been levied, stated that long before Elizabeth held anything in the manor, one Hugh de Okoure, his ancestor, and whose heir he was, viz., father of John, father of Roger, father of Thomas, father of the said Philip, was seised of the manor in demesne as of fee, and gave it to one William de la Launde, Knight, and to Lucy, his wife, and to the heirs male of their bodies, and from the said William and Lucy the manor descended to one William as son and heir, and from this William, who died leaving no male issue, the manor descended to one John as brother and heir, and from this John, who died leaving no male issue, the right reverted to the said Philip, as kinsman and heir of the said Hugh, and after the death of John, Elizabeth had intruded herself into the manor, and Philip being under age had then entered, and was seised of it until the said Goditha and the other defendants had disseised him.
And Goditha stated she knew nothing of the gift of the manor by the said Hugh, but that the Fine had been levied as above stated, in the third year of King Edward III, and this Fine was a Fine upon surrender, "finis super redditionem," and was levied before the Statute by which the non-claim, of such a Fine was restrained, "per quod non clamewm cujuscunque talis finis restringitur." And at the date of the Fine, Roger, the ancestor of Philip, was of full age, and out pf prison, and within the four seas; and the said Roger had not put in his claim to the manor within a year of the levying of the Fine, and therefore Philip was precluded from the present assize. After some further pleadings a day was given to the parties at Westminster on the Wednesday after a month from Michaelmas,* on which day the suit was adjourned to the Morrow of All Souls, and from that date to the Morrow of St. Martin, and from that date to the Octaves of St. Hillary, in statu quo nuno. A postscript states that on that date Philip did not appear and the suit was dismissed. m. 393.
^* As it involved a question of law, the decision was left to the Judges in Bank
"Collections for a History of Staffordshire", Vol 13, 1892. p188 (Extracts from the pleas rolls):
DE BANCO. EASTER, 7 Ric II
Derb. William de Skypwyth and William de Burgh, Justices of Assize in co Derby, tra=nsmitted the record and process of an assize of novel disseisin taken before them on the Monday the feast of St James the Apostle, 8 Ric II, in these words:-
An assize, etc, if Goditha, formerly wife of Ralph de Stathum, and others named, had unjustly disseised Philip de Okore (Okeover), Chivali, of the manor of Caldelowe, and a messuage and an acre of land in Caldelowe and Snellesron.
In this suit Goditha repeated her plea as in the former assize, claiming by virtue of a Fine levied on the Quindene of St Michael, 3 E III, between Joan, formerly wife of John de Launde, complainant, and Richard, son of Richard Foljambe, and Elizabeth, his wife, daughter and heir of John de la Launde, and claiming to be nearer of blood to the said Elizabeth than Philip, and she gave these pedigrees:-

Lucy = William de la Launde ________________________________|_______________________________ | | | John de la Launde Joan Matilda | | | Elizabeth = Richard Foljambe Lucy Joan | | Lucy Peter Peyntour | Goditha Hugh de Okeover _____________________|____________________ | | John Lucy = Wiliam de la Launde | ___________|____________ | | | Roger William John | ob sp | Thomas Elizabeth | Philip, the plaintiff
Philip repeated his plea as in the former trial, but added that at the time the said Goditha stated that the Fine was levied, and for all the rest of his lifetime, Roger his ancestor was in Scotland, and not within the four seas of Enland, and that he died in Scotland. Goditha replied that at the time the Fine was levied Roger was within the four seas, becuase he wasat Mynsterton in co. Leicester, which she was prepared to prove. Philip repeated that on the date of the Fine and for a year and a day afterwards, the said Roger was in Scotland, and died there, which he was prepared to prove^*. A day was therefore given to the parties in Banco on the Tuesday after three weeks from St Michael, on which day both Goditha and Philip appeared in person, and because the plea could not be determined in co. Derby a day was given to the parties on the Thursday at a month from St Michael, on which day Goditha and Philip appeared in person, and stated that they were prepared to maintain their pleas as given above, and prayed that a jury might be summoned from co Leicester; and the Sheriff was ordered to summon a jury for the Octaves of St Hillary. A postscript shows that no jury had been empanelled up to the morrow of the Ascension. m334.
^* Philip was certainly wrong in his date, for Roger had Letters of Protection whilst in Scotland in 9 E III. It may be assumed, however, that he died or was killed in Scotland (Scotch Roll of 9 Ed III)
See her father's page
No direct evidence of a marriage bewteen Joan de la Launde and Michale de Hockley has come to light. However it can be shown that Joan, daughter of William de la Launde ⁽²⁾⁽³⁾ married Richard de Morley and they had a daughter Lucy ⁽¹⁰⁾. It can also be shown that Richard de Morley's wife was the widow of Micheal de Hockley ⁽⁶⁾⁽⁷⁾⁽⁸⁾⁽⁹⁾
"Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other analogous documents preserved in the Public Record Office, Vol II, Edward I", entry no. 318, includes, amongst other details :
MICHAEL DE HOCKELE.
Writ to Thomas de Normanville, the king's steward, 16 Feb 7 Edw I.
[DERBY; bailiwick of the PEAK (PECK)]. Extent, Saturday before St Gregory, 7 Edw I.
Tadinton and Prestclive. 38 a land with two small tofts, and 2d rent.
Writ on the complaint of Joan, late wife of the said Michael, that a messuage and land in Tatindon and Presteclyve in which she was jointly enfeoffed with him had been taken into the king's hand, 16 Feb. 7 Edw I.
[DERBY]. Inq. The eve of St Gregory.
Tadinton and Prestclive. The said Joan was jointly enfeoffed with the said Michael of a messuage and 2 bovates land there by Nicholas Herigaut and Margery his wife, and continued seizin until the death of the said Michael, and they pertain to her.

"The Rolls of the 1281 Derbyshire Eyre" published by the Derbyshire Record Society. Entry 695 reads:
It was presented by the 12 of High Peak that Richard de Morleye and Joan his wife hold 2 bovates of land in Tatindon and Prestclyve which Michael de Ockele formerly used to hold of the king, paying 10s. yearly. This was withdrawn nine years ago.
Richard and Joan have come and readily acknowledge that they hold that land of the king, nor can they deny the arrears. So it is adjudged that the king is to recover the rent as well as the arrears, namely Ł4 10s. Richard and Joan are in mercy.
The Ragman inquiry stated that Michael de Hockeleye holds the entire land that was Wiliam de Horsindene's in the Peak and the land of Henry de Calvore in Taddington and Priestcliffe and one forest that was Ranulph Talebot's in Hope, escheat to the king and that he renders 6 barbed arrows and has it of the gift of king Edward. The jurors and Thomas de Leukenovere, inquisitor for the king, attest that Richard de Morley and Joan, widow of Michael, hold the land in Taddington and Priestcliffe of the king (Rot. Hun. ii, 287b)
The Hundred Roll entry cited in the above note is also given in Yeatman's "Feudal History of Derbyshire", Voll II, Section III, p39, which dates it as "Wednesday next after the Epiphany" in 3 Edw I [9th January 1275]. It differs slightly in the spelling of names, but otherwise agrees:
And they say that Michael de Hochleye holds the whole land which was William de Horsendons in Peak, and the land of Henry de Calnore in Tadington and Prestclive, and one forest which was Ranulf Talbots in Hope, an escheat of the King, and pays six barbed arrows, and he had it of the gift of King Edward, and Richard de Morleye and Johanna, the widow of the said Michael, now hold the land of Tadington and Prestclive.
"The Rolls of the 1281 Derbyshire Eyre" published by the Derbyshire Record Society. Entry 168 from the pleas of Juries and Assizes dated 21 April 1281, reads:
Nicholas Herigaud and Margery his wife claim against Richard de Morley and Joan his wife a messuage and 30 acres of land in Taddington and Prestclive as their right by writ of entry.
Richard and Joan come and they are agreed. Nicholas and Margery give half a mark for leave to concord by surety of Richard and Joan and they have a chirograph. Nicholas and Margery acknowledge that they owe Richard and Joan 16 mark of which they will pay 4 marks down, half of the remainder at the Nativity of St John the Baptist next and the other half at the Annunciation [24 June 1281, 25 March 1282]. If they do not, they grant that the sheriff may levy it of their lands and chattels. Moreover they found this surety, William de Ryther of the county of York, who grants that if Nicholas and Margery do not pay at the aforesaid terms, then the sheriff of that county may levy it of his lands and chattels.
Joan widow of Michael de Hockele was jointly enfeoffed with him of a messuage and 2 bovates in Taddington and Priestcliffe by Nicholas Herigaud and Margery his wife and continued her seisin until the death of Michael and they pertain to her (Cal. Inq. P.M., ii, no 318, 1279)
At Derby, within three weeks of Easter 1281. Grant etc by tenants and heirs of Joan to the plaintiffs and heirs of Margery for ever etc. (DAJ, xii. 36)
"Calendar of the fines for the county of Derby" published in the Derbyshire Archaeological Society Journal Volume 12, a fine on p36 reads:
April 13-May 4. Derby. Within 3 weeks of Easter, 9 Edward I
Between Nicholas Herygo and Margaret, his wife, Plaintiffs, and Richard de Morleye and Joan his wife, Tenants.
Grant, in consideration of 16 marls of silver, by the Tenants and the heirs of the same Joan to Plaintiffs and the heirs of the same Margery, for ever, of one messuage and 30 acres of land, with appurtenances in Tadington and Prestclyve.
"Pedigrees from the plea rolls collected from the pleadings in the various courts of law AD 1200 to 1500", Wrottesley, p268, reads :
De Banco. Easter, 11 Hen 4 [1410], m 337
Derb:- Goditha, late wife of Ralph de Stathum, sued Henry Coton, Clerk, to give up to her a pyx containing deeds which she claimed as heir of Hugh de Morley.
Hugh de Morley of Morley | Richard | Lucy | Lucy | Goditha
The pyx had com into Henry Coton's hands after the death of one Katrine Verdon, 20 Rich 2.
"The Rolls of the 1281 Derbyshire Eyre" published by the Derbyshire Record Society. Entry 169 from the pleas of Juries and Assizes dated 21 April 1281, reads:
Letitia wife of Alexander le Mercer of Esseburn claims against Richard de Morleye and Joan his wife a messuage, 50 acres of land and an acre of meadow in Alsop as her right and marriage portion by writ of entry.
Richard and Joan come and concerning one half, vouch Alan de Waldechef and Lucy his wife to warranty. Concerning the other they vouch John de la Plaunche and Ellen his wife. They are to have them at Lincoln at the quindene of Trinity [22 June 1281]. Alan and Lucy are to be summoned in this county and John and Ellen in the county of Lincoln.
"The Rolls of the 1281 Derbyshire Eyre" published by the Derbyshire Record Society. Entry 303 from the roll of attorneys and pledges, reads:
Letitia widow of Alexander le Mercer attorns Robert son of Alexander or Hugh Payn against Sewall le Foun in a plea of land; and against Richard de Morley and Joan his wife in a plea of land.
"The Rolls of the 1281 Derbyshire Eyre" published by the Derbyshire Record Society. Entry 308 from the roll of attorneys and pledges, reads:
Joan wife of Richard de Morley attorns Richard her husband or Walter de Morley or John de Oulgreve against Letitia de Esseburn in a plea of land; and against Nicholas de Herigaud and Margery his wife in a plea of land and a plea of trespass.
"The Rolls of the 1281 Derbyshire Eyre" published by the Derbyshire Record Society. Entry 366 from the roll of attorneys and pledges, reads:
Lucy wife of Alan de Wadteshef attorns Richard de Morley or Richard Rohole against Letitia widow of Alexander le Mercer in a plea of warranty.
"The Rolls of the 1281 Derbyshire Eyre" published by the Derbyshire Record Society. Entry A10 from the Lincolshire Eyre of 1281, reads:
Quindene of Trinity. Alan de Waldschef and Lucy, warrantors of Richard de Morley and Joan, defaulted. Sheriff had done nothing nor sent the writ. Ordered to summon them for quindene of Michaelmas and be present to hear judgement on himself. John de la Plaunche and Elena did not come. Same day given to all parties.
Essoins for Richard de Morley and Joan's attorneys against Letitia and for John de la Plaunche and Elena. Alan de Waldeschelf and Lucy, John and Elena, warrantors, to be exacted. To quindene of Michaelmas. It did not lie because no summons was attested.
Essoins for attorneys of Letitia against Alan and Lucy.
Octave of St John the Baptist. Essoins for Richard de Morley and Joan against Letitia in a plea of dower.
See her second husband Richard's page

Notes:

Home