Thomas Colpeper of Brenchley and Bayhall

• Preferred Name: Thomas Colpeper of Brenchley and Bayhall^[1]
  
• Alternate Name: Thomas Culpeppr
  
• Alternate Name: Thomas Culpepper of Benchley and Bayhall
  
• Gender: M
  
• http://familysearch.org/v1/TitleOfNobility: Sir
  
• FSID: LHDS-B12
  
• Other: liv abt 1572 in (prob) of London, Eng.
  
• Bio: with note: Description: Most pedigrees agree in giving John as the Recognitor's son, followed by Sir Thomas as his grandson. If the pedigrees are correct then this Sir Thomas, of Bayhall, must have been an old man in 4 Edward II or 1310 (Note: the date convention used here is "regnal" dating in which the year is the number of years into the reign of the current monarch. Thus 4 Edward II would be the 4th year of the reign of King Edward II). Assuming that the grandfather was fifty years of age when he served as Recognitor, then the two generations succeding him must have covered a period of some eighty years. This would make Sir Thomas Colepeper, in 4 Edward II., when his son Thomas and Margery his wife purchased of him 50 acres in Foulsden, a fairly old man, and although, he indicted in 1305, with his son Thomas, for stealing the goods of the vicar of Ringmer, we can hardly believe that he took any active part in the matter. For this reason it was not probable that it was this Thomas who was porter or janitor of Leeds Castle in 1292; it was more likely his son of the same Christian name. In 1296 (25 Edward I) there is an important reference to Thomas Colepeper, sen; the executors of the will of Sir William de Montfort brought an action against Thomas Colepeper and John his son concerning the manor of Newenton, in Kent. From this it is clear that there was, besides his sons Thomas and Walter, who were executed, another son John, and there was doubtless another son named Nicholas. All four were implicated in the Earl of Lancaster's rebellion, but John and Nicholas evidently in a Iesser degree than Thomas and Walter. There was an order issued in 1322 to the Sheriff of York to receive John Colepeper and others into custody in York Castle. This looks as if John Colepeper took part in the Battle of Boroughbridge, and Weaver, in his Ancient Funeral Monuments, p. 272, speaks of Sir Thomas Colepeper siding with the Earl of Lancaster and being hanged, drawn and quartered at Winchelsea. The place fatal to the Earl was Pontefract, so it seems certain that both Thomas and John were with Lancaster's forces at Boroughbridge. After remaining a close prisoner during the remainder of the reign in the Castles of Berkhampstead and Gloucester, John Colepeper was released on the accession of Edward III., and in the restoration of confiscated lands which then took place those of John Colepeper, of Lynlegh, were included. He was alive eleven years later, when John Colepeper, of Lynlegh, with Johanna, his wife, appear as deforciants in a fine relating to 20 acres of land in Wythyhame. With regard to the other two sons of Sir Thomas Colepeper, sen., Walter and Nicholas, they both suffered for their refusal to admit Queen Isabel to Leeds Castle. Walter "sticked not to tell him" (the Queen's marshal) "that neither the Queen nor any other should be lodged there without the commandement of his Lorde the owner." On the Queen coming to the gate in person "the Captaine most malapertly repulsed her, insomuch that shee complained grievously to the King," who besieged the place and eventually took it. "Then tooke he Captaine Colepeper and hoong him up." Captain Colepeper was doubtless Walter, as the release of Nicholas, his only brother yet unaccounted for, forms the subject of the following order issued in 1323 to Henry de Cobeham, Constable of Rochester Castle: "Whereas Nicholas Colepeper and others are imprisoned in Rochester Castle because they adhered to certain rebels who held the King's Castle of Ledes against him. The King, compassionating their estate, and being unwilling to detain them longer in prison, orders the Constable to release those of them whom he shall find by Inquisition to have no lands, and to cause those of them who have lands to come before the King within 15 days from Easter at their own cost and to do and to receive what the King's Court shall consider in the matter." Of the four sons of Thomas Colepeper, grandson of the Recognitor, we can find no trace of John and Nicholas, while from Captain Walter Colepeper sprang the Colepepers of Oxenhoath and Aylesford. The eldest son, Sir Thomas Culpeper, who was executed at Winchelsea in 1321, seems to have married Margery, a daughter of the Bayhall family, and either by this match, or by purchase, to have acquired their estates. This Thomas is called in 1306 "fil' Thom' Colepeper de Brenchesle."
  
• Birth: 1244 in Tonbridge, Kent, England at LATI: N1.1694 LONG: E0.3167
  
• http://familysearch.org/v1/TitleOfNobility: Sir
  
• http://familysearch.org/v1/TitleOfNobility: Sir
  
• Death: 1309
  
• Notes:

  === Life Sketch ===
  
  Thomas Culpeper (b. 1244, d. 1310)
  Thomas Culpeper (son of John Culpeper) was born 1244 in Brenchley, Kent, England, and died 1310.
  
  Notes for Thomas Culpeper:
  BIOGRAPHY: Most pedigrees agree in giving John as the Recognitor's son, followed by Sir Thomas as his grandson. If the pedigrees are correct then this Sir Thomas, of Bayhall, must have been an old man in 4 Edward II or 1310 (Note: the date conventionused in this hundred year-old document was the refer to the year as the number of years into the reign of the current monarch. Thus 4 Edward II would be the 4th year of the reign od King Edward II)). Assuming that the grandfather was fifty years of age when he served as Recognitor, then the two generations succeding him must have covered a period of some eighty years. This would make Sir Thomas Colepeper, in 4 Edward II., when his son Thomas and Margery his with purchased of him 50 acres in Foulsden, a fairly old man, and although, he indicted in 1305, with his son Thomas, for stealing the goods of the vicar of Ringmer, we can hardly believe that he took any active part in the matter. For this reason it was not probable that it was this Thomas who was porter or janitor of Leeds Castle in 1292; it was more likely his son of the same Christian name. In 1296 (25 Edward I) there is an important reference to Thomas Colepeper, sen.; the executors of the will of Sir William de Montfort brought an action against Thomas Colepeper and John his son concerning the manor of Newenton, in Kent.From this it is clear that there was, besides his sons Thomas and Walter, who were executed, another son John, and there was doubtless another son named Nicholas. All four were implicated in the Earl of Lancaster's rebellion, but John and Nicholas evidently in a Iesser degree than Thomas and Walter. There was an order issued in 1322 to the Sheriff of York to receive John Colepeper and others into custody in York Castle. This looks as if John Colepeper took part in the Battle of Boroughbridge, and Weaver, in his Ancient Funeral Monuments, p. 272, speaks of Sir Thomas Colepeper siding with the Earl of Lancaster and being hanged, drawn and quartered at Winchelsea. The place fatal to the Earl was Pontefract, so it seems certain that both Thomas and John were with Lancaster's forces at Boroughbridge.After remaining a close prisoner during the remainder of the reign in the Castles of Berkhampstead and Gloucester, John Colepeper was released on the accession of Edward III., and in the restoration of confiscated lands which then took place those of John Colepeper, of Lynlegh, were included. He was alive eleven years later, when John Colepeper, of Lynlegh, with Johanna, his wife, appear as deforciants in a fine relating to 20 acres of land in Wythyhame.With regard to the other two sons of Sir Thomas Colepeper, sen., Walter and Nicholas, they both suffered for their refusal to admit Queen Isabel to Leeds Castle. Walter "sticked not to tell him" (the Queen's marshal) "that neither the Queen nor any other should be lodged there without the commandement of his Lorde the owner." On the Queen coming to the gate in person "the Captaine most malapertly repulsed her, insomuch that shee complained grievously to the King," who besieged the place and eventually took it. "Then tooke he Captaine Colepeper and hoong him up." Captain Colepeper was doubtless Walter, as the release of Nicholas, his only brother yet unaccounted for, forms the subject of the following order issued in 1323 to Henry de Cobeham, Constable of Rochester Castle: "Whereas Nicholas Colepeper and others are imprisoned in Rochester Castle because they adhered to certain rebels who held the King's Castle of Ledes against him. The King, compassionating their estate, and being unwilling to detain them longer in prison, orders the Constable to release those of them whom he shall find by Inquisition to have no lands, and to cause those of them who have lands to come before the King within 15 days from Easter at their own cost and to do and to receive what the King's Court shall consider in the matter."Of the four sons of Thomas Colepeper, grandson of the Recognitor, we can find no trace of John and Nicholas, while from Captain Walter Colepeper sprang the Colepepers of Oxenhoath and Aylesford.The eldest son, Sir Thomas Culpeper, who was executed at Winchelsea in 1321, seems to have married Margery, a daughter of the Bayhall family, and either by this match, or by purchase, to have acquired their estates. This Thomas is called in 1306 "fil' Thom' Colepeper de Brenchesle." - From "The Sussex Colepepers", published in the "Sussex Archaeological Collections", Volume XLVII, 1904, pp 49-51
  Thomas Culpeper and :Marriage: 1241, Kent, England.
  Children of Thomas Culpeper are:
  +Thomas Colepeper, b. 1278, Brenchley, Kent, England, d. 1321, Winchelsea, Sussex, England.
  
  i. SIR THOMAS CULPEPER, b. Abt. 1260, England; d. 1321.
  
  SIR THOMAS CULPEPER (JOHN, THOMAS
  was born Abt. 1230 in England, and died Aft. 1309.
  Child of SIR THOMAS CULPEPER is:
  
  Sir Thomas (Thomas) Culpeper of Brenchl formerly Culpepper
  Born about 1244 in Tonbridge, Kent, Englandmap
  Son of John Culpepper and [mother unknown]
  Father of John Culpepper of Lynlegh, Nicholas Culpepper, Walter Culpepper and Thomas (Colepeper) Culpepper of Bayhill Died about 1309 in England
  
  -----------------------------------------------------
  Sir Thomas Culpeper of Bayhall, who was executed at Winchelsea in 1321, seems to have married Margery, a daughter of the Bayhall family, and either by this match, or by purchase, to have acquired their estates. This Thomas is called in 1306 "fil' Thom' Colepeper de Brenchesle." Sir Thomas Colepeper, who "probono servicioin partibus Scotie" received a pardon in the 32nd year of Edward I for breaking the park of the Prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, at Westwell, and the park of the Prior of Michelham, in the 29th year of that King's reign, took the side of the Earl of Lancaster against Edward II, and being Governor of Winchelsea, was there executed in 1321. Previous to this, however, by a fine levied in 1320, part of his estates, consisting of 2 messuages, 2mills, 405 acres of land, 20 acres of meadow, 60 acres of pasture, 80 acres of wood and 20 shillings annual rental in Pepyngbery, Thonebregg and Teudele, were settled on himself and Margery his wife for life, with remainder to their sons Walter, John and Richard in succession. By Inquisition taken at Tunbridge 25th February, 1 Edward III. (1327), it was found that Thomas Colepeper died seized of Bayhalle, with lands in Pepyngbery, Thonebregg and Teudele, and that Walter was his son and heir, aged 22 years on the feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary last past (2nd February, 1327). In the Inquisition deterris foris factis, 17 Edward II., taken at Lamberhurst, mention is made of Thomas Colepeper's estate in Pepynbery, included in the fine levied in 1320, besides which it is stated that he had acquired 50 acres in Foghelesdenne from Thomas Colepeper, senior, in1310, 1 messuage and 1 carucate of land in Bernette and Ramherste from Richard Wychin 1320, 1 messuage and 60 acres of land in Bocstede from Ralph Marscot, 10 acres in Bayrugge from Michael de Bettesfield, and 40acres in Fernth (i. e., Frant) from Roger de Ferrugge. All these lands had been seized by the King on November the 6th, 1321, on account of the felony of the said Thomas, and for no other reason. It was not long, however, before all these estates were restored to the family. By deed bearing date 1st July, 17 Edward II, Margery, widow of Thomas Colepeper, agreed to grant the Pepinbury estate to the King for the term of her life on the payment of 12 marks per annum from the Exchequer. But apparently she soon repented of this bargain, and addressed a petition to the King praying that "le manoir de la Bayehalle" might be restored to her, the grounds for the request being that the King's ministers had not only neglected to pay the rent, but had let her houses go to ruin, "a g'nt damage de l'avantdite Marg'iede xlli." On this the King issued a commission to Henry de Cobham and others to investigate the matters set forth in the petition, and the direct result of this enquiry was an order for the immediate restoration of all the, property. The out lying estates were to be restored unconditionally, and if lands had been "demised at ferm" the farmers were to be satisfied for their expenditure on the land, while with regard to Bayhall and the land included in the fine levied in 1320, there was this saving clause, viz., that this portion of the property was to revert to the King in case all the parties mentioned in the fine died without issue. From this order it appears that ThomasColepeper acquired the Buxted property mentioned above in 7 Edward II., and in 13 Edward II. he purchased from Reginald, son of Reginald Burgeys, of Boxstede, 1 messuage and 50 acres in Boxstede and Marsefeld. The 40 acres in Fernth (Frant), co. Sussex, is supplemented in this order by 10 acre sof wood bought in10 Edward Il. from Roger, son of Richard de Ferrugge, while another 20 acres in the same town is stated to have been acquired from William son of John de Netteworth. -From ("The Sussex Colepepers", published in the "Sussex Archaeological Collections", Volume XLVII, 1904, pp 51-54.)
  
  === Thomas COLEPEPER ===
  Thomas COLEPEPER
  ABT 1244 - AFT 1310
  
  * BIRTH: ABT 1244
  * DEATH: AFT 1310
  * EVENT: Brenchley, Kent, England
  Locality:
  * AFN: G5PM-FT
  
  Father: John COLEPEPER
  
  Family 1 :
  
  * MARRIAGE: ABT 1273
  
  1. John COLEPEPER
  2. Nicholas COLEPEPER
  3. +Thomas COLEPEPER
  4. +Walter COLEPEPER
  
  _Thomas COLEPEPER _
  _John COLEPEPER _|
  | |___________________
  |
  |--Thomas COLEPEPER
  
  === Source: Hasted, History of Kent, Vol. V, ===
  Source: Hasted, History of Kent, Vol. V, pages 264-267. Owners of Bayhall: Sir Thomas Culpeper1 *(Henry III) 1247-1286: Sir John Culpeper2 *(Henry III, Edward I) 1286-1312: Sir Thomas Culpeper3 of Brenchley and Bayhall*(Edward I, Edward II) 1312-1321: Sir Thomas Culpeper4 of Bayhall*(Edward II) 1321-1323: Walter Culpeper5*(Edward II) 1323-1327: Due to an act of rebellion by the Culpepers, Edward II seized Bayhall and other Culpeper properties and held them for several years. 1327-1372: Sir John Culpeper5 of Bayhall and Hardreshull*(Edward III) 1372-1428: Sir Thomas Culpeper6 of Bayhall, Hardreshull and Exton*(Edward III, Richard II, Henry IV-VI) 1428-1430: Sir John Culpeper7 of Bayhall, Hardreshull and Exton*(Henry VI) 1430-1462: Walter Culpeper Esq7 of Goudhurst, Bayhall and Hardreshull*(Henry VI, Edward IV) 1462-1480: Sir John Culpeper8 of Bayhall, Hardreshull and Bedgebury*(Edward IV) 1480: Manor sold to Humphrey Stafford, Duke of Buckingham. of Benchley and Bayhall;
  
  === Most pedigrees agree in giving John as t ===
  Most pedigrees agree in giving John as the Recognitor's son, followed by Sir Thomas as his grandson. If the pedigrees are correct then this Sir Thomas, of Bayhall, must have been an old man in 4 Edward II (1310). Assuming that the grandfather was fifty years of age when he served as Recognitor, then the two generations succeding him must have covered a period of some eighty years. This would make Sir Thomas Colepeper, in 4 Edward II, when his son Thomas and Margery his with purchased of him 50 acres in Foulsden, a fairly old man, and although, indicted in 1305, with his son Thomas, for stealing the goods of the vicar of Ringmer, we can hardly believe that he took any active part in the matter.
  
  Leeds CastleFor this reason it was not probable that it was this Thomas who was porter or janitor of Leeds Castle in 1292; it was more likely his son of the same Christian name. In 1296 (25 Edward I) there is an important reference to Thomas Colepeper, sen.; the executors of the will of Sir William de Montfort brought an action against Thomas Colepeper and John his son concerning the manor of Newenton, in Kent.
  
  From this it is clear that there was, besides his sons Thomas and Walter, who were executed, another son John, and there was doubtless another son named Nicholas. All four were implicated in the Earl of Lancaster's rebellion, but John and Nicholas evidently in a Iesser degree than Thomas and Walter. There was an order issued in 1322 to the Sheriff of York to receive John Colepeper and others into custody in York Castle. This looks as if John Colepeper took part in the Battle of Boroughbridge, and Weaver, in his Ancient Funeral Monuments, p. 272, speaks of Sir Thomas Colepeper siding with the Earl of Lancaster and being hanged, drawn and quartered at Winchelsea. The place fatal to the Earl was Pontefract, so it seems certain that both Thomas and John were with Lancaster's forces at Boroughbridge.
  
  After remaining a close prisoner during the remainder of the reign in the Castles of Berkhampstead and Gloucester,9 John Colepeper was released on the accession of Edward III., and in the restoration of confiscated lands which then took place those of John Colepeper, of Lynlegh, were included. He was alive eleven years later, when John Colepeper, of Lynlegh, with Johanna, his wife, appear as deforciants in a fine relating to 20 acres of land in Wythyhame.
  
  With regard to the other two sons of Sir Thomas Colepeper, sen., Walter and Nicholas, they both suffered for their refusal to admit Queen Isabel to Leeds Castle (Modern day map of castle grounds). Walter "sticked not to tell him" (the Queen's marshal) "that neither the Queen nor any other should be lodged there without the commandement of his Lorde the owner." On the Queen coming to the gate in person "the Captaine most malapertly repulsed her, insomuch that shee complained grievously to the King," who besieged the place and eventually took it. "Then tooke he Captaine Colepeper and hoong him up." Captain Colepeper was doubtless Walter, as the release of Nicholas, his only brother yet unaccounted for, forms the subject of the following order issued in 1323 to Henry de Cobeham, Constable of Rochester Castle: "Whereas Nicholas Colepeper and others are imprisoned in Rochester Castle because they adhered to certain rebels who held the King's Castle of Ledes against him. The King, compassionating their estate, and being unwilling to detain them longer in prison, orders the Constable to release those of them whom he shall find by Inquisition to have no lands, and to cause those of them who have lands to come before the King within 15 days from Easter at their own cost and to do and to receive what the King's Court shall consider in the matter."
  
  Of the four sons of Thomas Colepeper, grandson of the Recognitor, we can find no trace of John and Nicholas, while from Captain Walter Colepeper sprang the Colepepers of Oxen Hoath and Aylesford, with whom, as being more connected with Kent than Sussex, this paper has no concern.[The Sussex Colepepers, from Sussex Archeological Collections, Col. FWT Attree & Rev JHL Booker]

1. Richard Colepeper II, b. ABT 1271 in Ardingly, Sussex, England     d. AFT 1318 in Ardingly, Sussex, England

1. Title: Legacy NFS Source: Thomas Colpeper -
   Author: The Sussex Colepepers, From Sussex Archaeological Collections; Col F.W.T. Attree & the Rev J.H.L. Booker {1904}, Page number: XLVII:47-48
   Page: Migrated from user-supplied source citation: urn:familysearch:source:2736742600