Powys-Lybbe Forbears - Person Sheet
Powys-Lybbe Forbears - Person Sheet
NameEdith de Barton 
[42, Lancaster, vol 5, Breightmet township, pp. 266-8], [42, Lancashire, Vol 4, Barton township, pp. 363-376]
[42, Lancaster, vol 5, Breightmet township, pp. 266-8], [42, Lancashire, Vol 4, Barton township, pp. 363-376]Death1220
GeneralCo-heir of Barton which she held in chief.
FatherMatthew de Barton
Notes for Edith de Barton
m. (1) Augustine de Breightmet, (one s. and one dau. his heir) (2) Gilbert de Notton (no children). Gilbert’s son Wm by his previous marriage m. Cecily the eventual sole heir of Edith de Barton.
____________________
The edited version of “Final Concords for Lancashire” edited by Wm Farrer, pub in 1899, part I: 1189-1307, has this account of Edith in footnote 32 to Deed No 93 on pp. 74-93:
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband, whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter. Her second husband—by whom she had no issue—was Gilbert de Notton, probably a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert had three sons, William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton." That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close Roll,—"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors, and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster, 16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset [Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213, when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p. 521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery, who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son, John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m. 8). The early references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Late in the volume, Farrer added this correction for the above:
p. 89; note, line 32, cancel the sentence which begins "His first wife." Margery de Elland was Gilbert de Notton's first wife, and therefore Gilbert de Barton's grandmother.
_____________
The following is from VCH for Lancashire, Vol 4, pp. 363-376, By W Farrar and J Brownbill, for the Township of Barton:
MANORS
Under the lords of Manchester the great manor or fee of BARTON was held by a family using the local surname. In its full extent the fee extended over the greater part of the parishes of Eccles and Deane, and as the family held also the manor of Worsley with Hulton of the king in thegnage, the only townships exempt from their lordship were Pendlebury, Pendleton, and Clifton in the east, and Rumworth and Horwich in the north. (fn. 20) Originally the Barton fee appears to have been accounted as that of two knights, but, probably by division among co-heirs, a knight's fee and a half only was held in 1212 by Gilbert de Notton in right of his wife, Edith daughter of Matthew son of Leysing de Barton. (fn. 21) Of Edith's father and grandfather nothing is certainly known. (fn. 22) She was one of four daughters and co-heirs, and by her first husband, known as Augustine de Barton, (fn. 23) she had a son John, who died young, and a daughter Cecily, who married William, a son of Gilbert de Notton by a former wife, (fn. 24) and carried to him the manor of Barton, and also in right of her father that of Breightmet.
Gilbert, the eldest son of William and Cecily, was a minor in 1220 at the death of his grandmother Edith, but had livery of his lands two years later; (fn. 25) he adopted Barton as a surname, and was made a knight. He fell into the hands of Aaron, the Jew of York, (fn. 26) and parted with large portions of his lands, (fn. 27) and finally sold his great lordship to Robert Grelley his feudal superior. (fn. 28) This sale was confirmed by his son John. (fn. 29) Gilbert retained or regained the manor of Barton, but this was given to his daughter Agnes, (fn. 30) perhaps in view of her marriage with a Grelley, (fn. 31) and her daughter and heir Loretta by marriage with John del Booth, about 1292, carried it into a family which, as Booth of Barton, retained it for 300 years.
John de Barton, the son of Gilbert, retained lands in the township which his descendants enjoyed for some generations; occasionally they laid a claim to the manor. (fn. 32)
________________
____________________
The edited version of “Final Concords for Lancashire” edited by Wm Farrer, pub in 1899, part I: 1189-1307, has this account of Edith in footnote 32 to Deed No 93 on pp. 74-93:
Some account of Edith de Barton, who possessed Barton cum membris in her own right, has been given in a note to the concord No. 41 (antea, p. 26). The printed pedigrees of "de Notton" or Barton contain a serious mistake in giving Edith de Barton three sons by her husband, Gilbert de Notton. The correct descent is as follows: Edith de Barton had issue by a first husband, whose name has not been preserved, a son, John de Barton, and one daughter. Her second husband—by whom she had no issue—was Gilbert de Notton, probably a Lincolnshire man. By a former wife, however, Gilbert had three sons, William, Roger, and John called "de Bromyhurst." The eldest son, William de Notton married the daughter and heiress of Edith de Barton, by her first husband, and had issue Gilbert and Matthew, possibly also another son. The last-named Gilbert, was found to be heir to his grandmother Edith, and had livery of thirty-two oxgangs of land in Barton cum membris, and Worsley, by writ dated 26th January, 1222 (Fine Roll, 6 Henry III. m. 7). In the original entry he is styled "Gilbertus nepos et hæres Edithæ de Barton." That nepos here means grandson is proved by the following entry in the Close Roll,—"The King to the Sheriff of Lancaster, greeting. Our beloved and faithful Robert Gresle has shewn unto us, that whereas Edith, formerly wife of Gilebert de Noctun held of him the fee of one Knight and a half in Bartun, whereof the ancestors of Robert always used and ought to have wardship with the heirs being under age after the death of their ancestors, and whereas he who is now heir, being under age, to wit son of the daughter of the said Edith, ought to be in ward to him with his inheritance, and for that reason he (Robert) had seised that inheritance into his hands, as that which ought to be held of him in chief by military service, now you without authority of our precept have disseised Robert of the said fee of one Knight and a half, causing him loss to the amount of forty marks of the chattels which you have there seised." The Sheriff was accordingly ordered to immediately put him in seisin and to restore his chattels. If he did not do so, he was to come to Westminster on the morrow of St. Martin to show cause why he did not execute this precept. This writ bears date at Westminster, 16th October, 1220 (Close Roll, 4 Henry III., m. 1, in dorso). Additional proof of this corrected descent is found in a charter, by which Edith de Barton, with the approval of her husband Sir Gilbert de Notton, and for the health of their souls, and of the soul of her son, John de Barton, and of her daughter, to wit the wife of William de Notton, gave to the monks of the blessed place of Stanlaw in frankalmoign, the land of Cadewalisset [Cadishead, in the township of Barton]. The date lies before 5th July, 1213, when Henry de Longchamps was dead. Jordan, Dean of Manchester, under the style of "Jordanus de sancta Maria" was also a witness (Whalley Coucher, p. 521). Sir Gilbert de Notton assumed the name of Barton upon inheriting his grandmother's estates. His first wife is said to have been Margery, daughter of Hugh de Eland, of Eland, county York. If so, the Henry, son of Margery, who put in his claim according to the endorsement on this concord, was probably her son. His second wife was Cecilia, possibly daughter of Jorwerth de Hulton, to whom Paulinus de West-Houghton gave the third part of that vill in fee, an estate afterwards found in the possession of Gilbert's son, John de Barton (Whalley Coucher, pp. 59, 881).
It is not easy to interpret the meaning of this concord. I can only suggest that Christiana was in some way connected by blood with Edith de Barton. She married . . . de Allerton, and had a son, Richard, who in 1246, together with John de Blackburn and Henry de Whalley, obtained licence to concord with Thomas Grelley, and make acknowledgment that they had no right of chase in Thomas' forest [of Horwich] (Assize Roll, No. 404, m. 8). The early references to Allerton, near Liverpool, are somewhat scarce, and do not assist in the identification of this family. (See No. 59, temp. John, and No. 98 postea, also Mamcestre, p. 353).
Late in the volume, Farrer added this correction for the above:
p. 89; note, line 32, cancel the sentence which begins "His first wife." Margery de Elland was Gilbert de Notton's first wife, and therefore Gilbert de Barton's grandmother.
_____________
The following is from VCH for Lancashire, Vol 4, pp. 363-376, By W Farrar and J Brownbill, for the Township of Barton:
MANORS
Under the lords of Manchester the great manor or fee of BARTON was held by a family using the local surname. In its full extent the fee extended over the greater part of the parishes of Eccles and Deane, and as the family held also the manor of Worsley with Hulton of the king in thegnage, the only townships exempt from their lordship were Pendlebury, Pendleton, and Clifton in the east, and Rumworth and Horwich in the north. (fn. 20) Originally the Barton fee appears to have been accounted as that of two knights, but, probably by division among co-heirs, a knight's fee and a half only was held in 1212 by Gilbert de Notton in right of his wife, Edith daughter of Matthew son of Leysing de Barton. (fn. 21) Of Edith's father and grandfather nothing is certainly known. (fn. 22) She was one of four daughters and co-heirs, and by her first husband, known as Augustine de Barton, (fn. 23) she had a son John, who died young, and a daughter Cecily, who married William, a son of Gilbert de Notton by a former wife, (fn. 24) and carried to him the manor of Barton, and also in right of her father that of Breightmet.
Gilbert, the eldest son of William and Cecily, was a minor in 1220 at the death of his grandmother Edith, but had livery of his lands two years later; (fn. 25) he adopted Barton as a surname, and was made a knight. He fell into the hands of Aaron, the Jew of York, (fn. 26) and parted with large portions of his lands, (fn. 27) and finally sold his great lordship to Robert Grelley his feudal superior. (fn. 28) This sale was confirmed by his son John. (fn. 29) Gilbert retained or regained the manor of Barton, but this was given to his daughter Agnes, (fn. 30) perhaps in view of her marriage with a Grelley, (fn. 31) and her daughter and heir Loretta by marriage with John del Booth, about 1292, carried it into a family which, as Booth of Barton, retained it for 300 years.
John de Barton, the son of Gilbert, retained lands in the township which his descendants enjoyed for some generations; occasionally they laid a claim to the manor. (fn. 32)
________________