A post by Douglas Richardson to soc.genealogy.medieval, concerning Maud de Lucy, wife of Sir Nicholas de Segrave, 1st Lord Segrave (b.c. 1238-d. 1295)
Complete Peerage 11 (1949): 603–605 (sub Segrave) includes a good biography of Sir Nicholas de Segrave, 1st Lord Segrave [born c.1238, died 1295]. Regarding his marriage, the following information is provided:
"He married Maud." END OF QUOTE.
In footnote d on page 605, the following additional information is provided:
"Nichols, op. cit., vol. iii, pt. i, p. 240 sets out a copy of a MS. formerly at Naworth Castle, being an account of the descendants of the marriage of Gilbert de Segrave and Amabil de Chaucombe. Nicholas' wife is there stated to have been Maud Lucy. The MS. appears to have been a genealogy of the founders of Chaucombe Priory. There is no record of any assignment of dower." END OF QUOTE.
Nichols, History & Antiquities of Leicestershire 3(1) (1800): 240 includes as stated by Complete Peerage a transcript of an ancient Segrave pedigree taken from "Chronicis apud Chaucombe." It reads as follows:
“… De ipsis Gilberto [de Segrave] & Annabiliâ exivit Nicholaus, filius & heres; cui nupta fuit Matilda Lucy. De quibus prodîerunt dominus Johannes de Segrave, dominus Nicholaus de Segrave, dominus Galfridus de Segrave, dominus Petrus, and dominus Gilbertus.” END OF QUOTE.
The pedigree appears to be reliable. As such, there is no reason to doubt that Sir Nicholas de Segrave's wife was a member of the Lucy family. But which one?
In this case, we have five good clues as to Maud de Lucy's parentage. First, as shown above, Sir Nicholas and his wife, Maud, named a son, Geoffrey, which name previously was not found in the Segrave family.
Second: in 1259 Sir Nicholas de Segrave is recorded as having gone of pilgrimage to Pontigny together with Geoffrey de Lucy [see Cal. of Patent Rolls, 1258–1266 (1910): 19, 181]. This Geoffrey de Lucy may be readily identified as Sir Geoffrey de Lucy [died 1284], of Chelmscott (in Soulbury), Cublington, and Fulbrook (in Hogshaw), Buckinghamshire, Newington, Kent, etc., which individual was a prominent knight in the reign of Kings Henry III and Edward I. Sir Geoffrey de Lucy in turn was the son and heir of an earlier Sir Geoffrey de Lucy [died 1252], of Newington, Kent, Cublington, Buckinghamshire, Dallington and Slapton, Northamptonshire, etc., by Nichole, daughter of Sir William de Cantelowe.
Third: Baring-Gould, Lives of the Saints, Part 1 (1877): 42-43 includes an interesting story concerns a dispute between Thomas de Cantelowe, Bishop of Hereford [died 1282], and Earl Gilbert de Clare in 1278:
“The bishop had a castle at Ledbury, and the Malvern Hills he claimed as his chase. But the Earl of Gloucester, Gilbert de Clare, the most powerful baron in England, hunted there ... and he assumed that the right was his. The bishop ... poured over his [Earl Gilbert’s] head the awful curse of the Church; and the great earl rode home, very much surprised and indignant at being excommunicated ... because of the hares and wild-deer of the Malvern Hills ... Then S. Thomas summoned all his friends, and for three days defiantly ... hunted over the hills. The hunting party was composed of John Tregoz, his brother-in-law [recte nephew], Nicholas Segrave, Geoffry and Fulk de Lucy.” END OF QUOTE.
As we can see above, Bishop Thomas de Cantelowe's hunting party in Malvern Hills consisted of his nephew, John de Tregoz (mistakenly called his brother-in-law), Nicholas de Segrave (husband of Maud de Lucy), and Geoffrey and Fulk de Lucy. So once again we find Sir Nicholas de Segrave associated with Sir Geoffrey de Lucy.
Fourth: Sir Geoffrey de Lucy [died 1284] is known to have had one brother, Sir Amaury de Lucy, of Newington, Kent, Luton, Bedfordshire, Boxworth, Cambridgeshire, etc., who died without issue in 1285. For proof of their relationship, see Roberts, Calendarium Genealogicum 1 (1865): 343...
Recently while I was going through some Common Pleas records of this time period, I came across a lawsuit dated 1289 concerning the estate of Sir Amaury de Lucy, younger brother of Sir Geoffrey de Lucy. A brief abstract of this lawsuit is provided below.
In 1289 John de Segrave and Walter de ?Olina, executors of the will of Amaury de Lucy, sued Thomas de Roshale in the Court of Common Pleas in a Shropshire plea regarding a debt of 100s.
Reference: Court of Common Pleas, CP40/78, image 918d...
As we can see, John de Segrave is named above as one of the two executors of the will of Amaury de Lucy. John de Segrave named here can be identified as Sir John de Segrave, 2nd Lord Segrave (born about 1256, died 1325), a prominent personage in this time period, which individual was the son and heir of Sir Nicholas de Segrave, 1st Lord Segrave [died 1295], and his wife, Maud de Lucy. Assuming that Maud de Lucy was the sister of Sir Geoffrey de Lucy and his brother, Sir Amaury de Lucy, then John de Segrave the executor was the nephew of Sir Amaury de Lucy, who as I noted died childless.
Fifth: Further evidence of the Segrave-Lucy-Cantelowe connection is provided by the fact that Sir John de Saint John (died 1302), of Basing, Hampshire, a known Cantelowe descendant, referred to Sir John de Segrave (died 1325), 2nd Lord Segrave, as his cousin ["notre cosin"] in a letter dated c.1300 [Reference: Joseph Stevenson, Documents illustrative of the History of Scotland 2 (1870): 305-306].
------------------------------
26 Aug 1288, Westminster
Commission of oyer and terminer to Master Thomas de Sudington and Thomas de Bray, on complaint by Nicholas de Segrave the elder and Matilda his wife that Nicholas le Parker, Roger le Fiz Duze, William de Northcroft [and others] assaulted the said Matilda at Eccleshale, co. Warwick, and violently threw her out of her cart (curru) in which he was riding, and took away her long cart (carectam) laden with victuals and other goods.
Calendar of Patent Rolls, Edw. I, vol. 2, p. 307
Research Notes: