Person:Roger de Montalt (3)

Roger de Montalt
 
  1. Roger de Montalt - 1232
  2. Beatrix de MontaltEst 1185 -
  • HRoger de Montalt - 1232
  • W.  Nichola (add)
m.
  1. Roger de MontaltEst 1195 - 1260
Facts and Events
Name Roger de Montalt
Alt Name Roger de Mohaut
Gender Male
Marriage to Nichola (add)
Death[1] 1232 Cheshire, England

The fact that seneschal Roger de Montalt died in 1232 (assuming it is correct) points to a seneschal in between seneschal Robert de Montalt and the seneschal Roger de Montalt who died in 1260. Ormerod (Parentalia, p. 105) believed that the Roger de Montalt who died in 1260 was the son of Robert, and not the son of one of his younger brothers, although the evidence is slim. Correspondingly, I have assumed that Roger (d. 1232) and Roger (d. 1260) were son and grandson of Robert de Montalt. The proof is almost non-existent, except that they were most likely not the descendants of Robert's brother Roger, whose heir was his granddaughter Agnes de Orreby.

It would appear that this Roger is the Roger de Monhaut (Montealto) who brought a court case against Philip de Orreby, guardian of Agnes de Orreby, in June 1227. In this court case, Roger refers to Ralph de Montalt as his ancestor, or possibly as his "antecessor". The latter term (according to messages at Gen-Medieval forum s2) could be used to mean "blood-related predecessor" - in this case, an uncle, assuming that Roger was the son of Robert.

Note that Magna Charta Sureties, fifth edition (Line 129, note between #2 and #3) states that Roger de Mohaut died in 1232, when his heir was Agnes de Orreby. However, the Roger whose heir was Agnes died before the court case of June 1227 that mentions her wardship and inheritance and specifically states that Roger (her grandfather) was deceased. Therefore, I am assuming that Magna Charta Sureties has simply assigned the recorded death date of one Roger to another Roger by mistake, not that there is another source that backs up this statement. Other than this statement in Magna Charta Sureties (and a similar one in Ancestral Roots, which appears to be updated in parallel), I believe that the arrangement of this family fits all the known facts.

I have assumed that Nichola was the wife of this Roger, not the Roger who died before June 1227, because the source of her name is a retrospective inquisition into "the Ladies of Hawardin", who appear to be women married to the men who inherited both Hawardin and the seneschalships1.

References
  1. Ormerod, George. Parentalia. Genealogical memoirs. (not published, 1851)
    pages 104-5.

    'Roger de Montalt ... was Lord of Hawarden, and husband of Nicholaa, as by [a retrospective inquisition in 1275]. ... And he succeeded to the Seneschalship, as shewn by an entry in the Annales Cestrienses, or Chronicle of St. Werburgh, "1232. Obiit Rogerus de Montealto, Senescallus, de Hawarthin".'

    An earlier author (Dugdale) appears to have confused 3 different Rogers (d. bef. 1227, d. 1232 and d. 1260), apparently treating them all as a single person. Ormerod (based on Glover) treats them as 2 men - separating out the last of the 3, but continuing to confuse uncle (d. bef 1227) and nephew (d. 1232). The first of the Rogers is known to have died before a court case in June 1227, and thus cannot be the seneschal Roger de Montalt who died in 1232.

  2.   messages 1112461407, 1112523922, 1112552274, in GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives (at RootsWeb), Ancestry.com online
    April 2005.

    The first message includes a summary of the 1227 court case, taken from William Salt IV pp 46-7. The other 2 messages discuss the use of the word "antecessor".