Genealogie Wylie » Hugh de Morville , of Burgh & Knaresborough (± 1138-1202)

Persönliche Daten Hugh de Morville , of Burgh & Knaresborough 

• Auch bekannt als Hugh de /Moreville/.
• Er wurde geboren rund 1138 in Burgh-by-Sands, Cumberland, England.Quelle 3
• Er ist verstorben im Jahr 1202 in Knaresborough Castle, West Riding Yorkshire, England.Quelle 4
• Alternative: Er ist verstorben im Jahr 1204.Quelle 5
• Ein Kind von Hugh de Morville und FirstwifeHugh de Morville
• Diese Information wurde zuletzt aktualisiert am 5. April 2023.

Familie von Hugh de Morville , of Burgh & Knaresborough

Er ist verheiratet mit Helwise (Helewise Heloise) de Stuteville.

Sie haben geheiratet nach 1184 in 2nd husband.

Kind(er):

1. Ada de Morville  ± 1187-> 1230 
2. Hugh de Morville  ± 1196-???? 

Notizen bei Hugh de Morville , of Burgh & Knaresborough

This Hugh de Morville was one of the murderers of Thomas a Becket on 29Dec 1170 (along with William de Tracy, Reginald FitzUrse, and Richard leBret). Note: There is a difference of opinion about whether this Hugh(or his nephew Hugh) was the murderer of Thomas a Becket--see e-mail fromDennis Theriot far below.

The following post to SGM, 5 Jan 2003, by Hal Bradley, differentiates theancestry of Hugh who participated in the murder of Thomas a Becket, 1170and d. in 1204 from the other Hugh who m. Beatrice de Beachamp:

From: "Hal Bradley" (hw.bradley AT verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Morville-Stuteville-Beauchamp
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 2003-01-05 15:48:49 PST

I believe you are conflating two distinct individuals. Hugh de Morville,who died in 1204, was one of the murderers of St. Thomas of Canterbury.He was most probably the son of Simon de Morville, who held the barony ofBurgh-by-Sands, Cumberland, in right of his mother, Ada, daughter ofWilliam de Engaine. This Hugh married Helewise de Stuteville. He shouldbe distinguished from Hugh de Morville (d. 1162) father of Richard deMorville (d. 1189), who married Beatrice de Beauchamp.

I can provide references if desired.

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

Note that I differ from the ancestry given for Hugh in the followingnotes, given in a post-em by Curt Hofemann, curt_hofemann AT yahoo.com.I agree with The Complete Peerage which has Hugh as son of Simon & Adad'Engaine, while the text below has Hugh the son of Hugh & Ada d'Engaine.

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

The following information was provided in a post-em by Curt Hofemann,curt_hofemann AT yahoo.com:

from: Wedgewood website athttp://www.geocities.com/Heartland/3203/Morville.html

Hugh de Morville, d. 1204, one of the murderers of St. Thomas ofCanterbury, was most probably the son of Hugh de Morville, who held thebarony of Burgh-by-Sands, Cumberland, and several other estates in thenorthern shires, in succession to his mother, Ada, daughter of William deEngaine(1). He must be distinguished from Hugh de Morville (d. 1162) sonof Richard de Morville (d. 1189) and from Hugh de Morville (d. 1200).Hugh's mother was licentious and treacherous(2), he ‘was of a viper'sbrood.’ From the beginning of the reign of Henry II he was attached tothe court, and is constantly mentioned as witnessing charters. His nameoccurs also as a witness to the Constitutions of Clarendon. He marriedHelwis de Stuteville, and thus became possessor of the castle ofKnaresborough.

He was forester of Cumberland, and itinerant justice for Cumberlandand Northumberland in 1170, and he held the manor of Westmereland. He hadbeen one of Becket's men when he was chancellor; but he had always beenof the king's party, and he was easily stirred by the king's bitter wordsto avenge him on the archbishop. In the verbal contest which preceded themurder he asked St. Thomas ‘why, if the king's men had in aught offendedhim or his, he did not complain to the king before he took the law intohis own hands and excommunicated them’(3) While the others were smitingthe saint he kept back with his sword the crowd which was pouring intothe transept from the nave, ‘and so it happened that with his own hand hedid not strike him’(3). After all was over he fled with the other knightsto Saltwood, thence to South Malling, later to Scotland; but he wasfinally forced to flee to his own castle of Knaresborough, where hesheltered his fellow-criminals(4). There they remained, though they wereaccounted vile by all men of that shire. All shunned converse with them,nor would any eat or drink with them(4).

Finally a penance of service in the Holy Land was given by the pope,but the murderers soon regained the royal favour. In 1200 Hugh deMorville paid fifteen marks and three good horses to hold his court withthe rights of tol and theam, infangenetheof, and the ordeal of iron andof water, so long as his wife, in whose right he held it, should retainthe secular habit. He obtained also license to hold a market atKirkoswald, Cumberland, on One of the Murderers of St. Thomas ofCanterbury.

Thursdays, and a fair on the feast of St. Oswald(5). He died shortlyafterwards (1204), leaving two daughters: Ada, married in 1200 to Richardde Lucy, son of Reginald of Egremont, and afterwards to Thomas de Multon,and Joan, married to Richard de Gernum, nephew of William Brewer, who hadbeen appointed her guardian.

Legends soon attached to his sword, as to the sword of Tracy. It wassaid to have been long preserved in Carlisle Cathedral, and a sword, witha much later inscription, now at Brayton Castle, is supposed to be theone which he wore on the day of the murder. This is the most probableaccount of his last years. But it may be that he was the Morville who wasRichard I's hostage in 1194, in which case he would be noteworthy ashaving lent Ulrich of Zatzikoven the Anglo-Norman poem which Ulrich madethe basis of his ‘Lanzelet.’ Tradition also states that he died in theHoly Land, and was buried in the porch outside the church of the Templars(afterwards the Mosque el Aksa) at Jerusalem. The tomb is now inside thebuilding.

(1)WILLIAM OF CANTERBURY in "Materials for Life of Becket, i. 128;RICHARD OF HEXHAM, Chron. Stephen, &c., Rolls Ser. iii. 178).

(2)WILLIAM OF CANTERBURY, ib.
(3)ROGER OF PONTIGNY Materials, iv. 73.
(4)BENEDICT OF PETERBOROUGH, Rolls Ser., i. 13)
(5)LYSONS, Cumberland, p. 127)
Sources:
Materials for the Hist. of Becket (Rolls Ser.), vols.i-iv.; William ofNewburgh, lib. ii. cap. 25 (Rolls Ser. Chronicles Stephen, Henry II, andRichard I, i. 161-5); Benedict of Peterborough, Rolls Ser. i. 13;Garnier, ed. Hippeau, pp.178-200; Pipe Rolls (Pipe Roll Soc.), 5 Henry IIp. 29, 6 Henry II p. 14, 7 Henry II p. 35, 8 Henry II p. 51, 9 Henry IIp. 57, 10 Henry II p. 11, 11 Henry II p. 47, 12 Henry II p. 35, 13 HenryII p. 78, 14 Henry II p. 79, 15 Henry II p. 31; Thomas Saga, ed.Magnsson, Rolls Ser. i. 514; Foss's Judges of England, i. 279, 280;Stanley's Memorials of Canterbury, 4th edit. pp. 70, 107, 196; Lysons'sCumberland, p. 127; Eyton's Itinerary of Henry II, pp. 33, 53, 68, 78,145, 150, 152; Robertson's Life of Becket, pp. 266 sqq.; Morris's St.Thomas Becket pp. 137, 407 sqq.; Norgate's Angevin Kings, ii. 78, 432note n; Gent. Mag. 1856, i. 380-2.

Contributor W. H. H.
PUBLISHED 1894
©Oxford University Press 1995
Converted to HTML by John Wedgwood Pound B.A. (Hons)

Regards,
Curt

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

The following e-mail from Dennis Theriot, denther AT gte.net, cites asource that has Hugh's nephew as the murderer of Thomas a Becket:

Dear Jim,

I do not believe that Hugh de Morville, ID:I00338, of Burgh-by-Sands wasthe murderer of Becket. I will quote K. J. Stringer, "Earl David ofHuntingdon", p 196, Edinburgh University Press, 1985: "If we take thetwelfth and thirteenth centuries as a whole, there are merely twoimportant examples of partition between surviving sons, and each arose inexceptional circumstances rather than from any deep-seated family desire'to keep English estates distinct from Scottish'. The Brus partition ofc. 1138 was followed by the division of the Moreville lands: the formerhad been precipitated by war, the later was dictated by King Henry II. Inthe 1140's King David had settled the lordship of north Westmoreland uponhis Constable, Hugh de Moreville of Lauderdale and Cunningham (d. 1162).But when the northern shires were surrendered in 1157, Henry IIrecognized the Moreville title only on the condition that Hugh stood downin favor of his (oldest?) son and namesake, subsequently a member ofHenry II's military household, an Angevin royal justice, and one of theassassins of Thomas Becket. King Henry's concern to reassertsystematically his powers in the north country was made fully explicitwhen Hugh II died on pilgrimage to Jerusalem in c. 1173. Most ofWestmoreland proper thereupon escheated to the crown, although Hugh wassurvived by his brother Richard, successor in 1162 to Lauderdale andCunningham and the Constableship of Scotland, and by his sister Maud,wife of William de Vieuxpont II. Here the royal will made a rareintervention in succession and descent." Stringer goes on in a note: " Ithas usually been assumed that the younger Hugh de Moreville's estatesescheated for his support of the Scots in 1173-4."

According to this "Hugh the Murderer" was the son of Hugh de Morville (d1162) and Beatrice de Beauchamp. So I will repeat what I said in my laste-mail, I believe that Simon de Morville of Burgh-by-Sands, ID: I04650,was (1) the brother of Hugh the Constable, (2) father of Hugh ofBurgh-by-Sands, and (3) uncle of Hugh the Murderer. Stringer may bewrong, but that is my reference. Apparently, Hugh the Murderer left nochildren.

Dennis Theriot

Haben Sie Ergänzungen, Korrekturen oder Fragen im Zusammenhang mit Hugh de Morville , of Burgh & Knaresborough?
Der Autor dieser Publikation würde gerne von Ihnen hören!

Zeitbalken Hugh de Morville , of Burgh & Knaresborough

Klicken Sie auf den Namen für weitere Informationen. Verwendete Symbole:  Großeltern    Eltern    Geschwister    Kinder