One of John's mistresses. See "About Me" under son, Edward's profile re: ancestry of the Warren family of Poynton. Arms of Warren/Nerford: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2010-10/...

not the same as Maud de Skegeton.

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

John de Warenne, 7th Earl + Maud de Nerford his mistress

Vol 2 Memoirs of the Ancient Earls of Warren and Surrey by Rev. John Watson. Warrington : printed by William Eyres, 1782 [1785]

Having no issue by his wife, he had for that, or some other reason, conceived a dislike to her, and had cohabited with one Maud de Nerford, the daughter of a Norfolk knight,* who bore him children, and for this, probably at the instigation of his wife, the church took congnizance of him, In the British Museum, is a M. S. containing abstracts from the registers of the archbishops of Canterbury, at Lambeth, in which is the following : The clergy of Kent, &c. comend the cause of the countisse -- The clargy of Norffolk write to the noble and brave erl of Surrey and Sussex, discommending his disordinate life in keepinge Dame Mawde de Nereforde against the lawe of God, and the ordre of holy church, puttinge from him his deare wife. The earl finding that he could not have both a wife and concubine, was determined, if he could, to be without the former, and therefore, partly on the pretence of a prior contract made with this Maud de Nerford, and partly because Joan de Barr and he were too nearly related

• A deed, dated 11 Edw. III. sais, that Dame Petronilla de Nerford, and Sir John de Nerford her son, were then dead, and that Sir Thomas de Nerford, knight, her second son, was then living, and held a quarter of a knight's fee at Keteringham (in Norfolk) of Thomas de Brotherton earl of Norfolk, and marischal of England. Of this family, I doubt not, was the above Maud.

[page 9]

lated, he sued for a divorce; accordingly, amongst the Record of the Tower, I find, Johannes de Warren [Latin passage of 3 lines].* In the above-mentioned abstracts is the following entry : [Latin passage of 5 lines].

As the above divorce was sued for, (amongst other pretended reasons) on account of a former contract with Maud de Nerford, it was necessary that the said Maud should libel against Joan de Barr; and accordingly she did so; and as it happened, the said Joan (being the king's relation, and residing at court) was cited in the king's palace at Westminster; it was, therefore, on full examination of the cause, adjudged in Parliament, in these words : [Latin passage of 7 lines],

• Second Part, p. 9, E. 2. m. 32.

[Latin passage of 3 lines].

This divorce, being agreeable to both parties, took place, and the earl settled on the said Joan 740 marks per annum, for life; after which she stayed in England till the 19 Edw. III. when obtaining protection for all her lands in England, which were assigned for her support, with the stock thereupon, for the better defence, and safe-guard of them in her absence, she went beyond sea, on special employment for the king.* 26 Edw. III. she had licence there to continue, till the 15th of St. Michael that year; after which I know nothing more of her, than that the register book of Lewes tells us, that she died in 1361, and was buried abroad.

The earl having settled matters with his late wife, and having no lawful issue, he was at liberty to dispose of the rest of his estate as he thought fit, and knowing that it would not descend to his unlawful children, except it was estated in trust, he gave by special grant the inheritance of all his lands, to the king and his heirs, with intent to have a regrant to his unlawful issue in tail. The form of the said grant was this,+ [Latin passage of 2 lines]

=================================================================================

Generation 10 Edward de Warren by Dr. Holland Warren

Sir Edward Warren, Knight married Maud de Nerford of county Norfolk, daughter of Sir Richard de Skegeton and sister of Sir Ralph de Skegeton who died in 1324. Maud inherited from her deceased brother one half of the lordships of Boton and Skegeton in Norfolk. The other half went to Maud's sister Alice, but Alice gave much of her share to Maud. These estates came to and remained with his branch of Warrens for many years. This Maud de Nerford is not to be confused with the Maud de Nerford who was the mistress of the eight Earl of Warren and Surrey. The two Maud lived at the same time in the same part of England, but according to Rev. Watson they were two distinct and different persons. Sir Edward and Maud had four sons, Ralph, Sir William, Sir Edward and John, Ralph, Sir William and John all died without issue. Sir William was with King Edward 111 at the siege of Calais in 1347

=============================================================================================================================================

Descendants of John de Warren 8th earl=illegitimate children. Joan de Bar was legal wife. He & Prince Edward knighted & he wed She was granddaughter of King Edward & King of France. He would not live with her. Tried to divorce on nearness of kin (3rd cousins I believe) the Pope would not grant it & excommunicated him. 3 sons of Maud de Nerford did die. Who is mother of others is not known. The ALICE d of Lincoln was married at 10 to Lancaster. Warren ”kidnapped “ her & took her to her lover>>> Not his mistress. Lancaster captured part of his lands. King restored Conisborough and othere. Maud Nerford got his North Riding Estate for her children???. Ravlyn his son rode with him and bore his arms???May have been Welsh) His will gave Wm his French Bible, Joan de Bain a silver cup, Katherin 10 marks, Isabel canoness 20 marks. He had no children by Isabella de Holland. Dictionary of National Biographies says Joan de Bar lived in the Tower through 3 kings and after John Warren’s death quitted England & returned to France. The Fitzalans could not use the title Earl of Surrey until after her death. This is so sad to me-a life gone wrong because the king married him to wrong woman----Chautune June 2nd Edw. III ”The king should thenceforth protect and defend him: as also that he should support him in the peaceable possessions of all his lands, whereof he was that the time seised, eith in England or Wales, and that if God should please to send him an heir, by Isabel de Houland then his wife, should the same heir be male or female, it should be joined in marriage to some one of the blood royal, whom the king should think fittest, so that the whole inheritance of this earl, with the name, and arms of Warren should be preserved by the bloodroyal continu4ed

Change Date: 7 FEB 2005 at 13:25:53

---

Owned the Manors of Boton & Skegeton

---

On 16 August 1309, Edward II gave John licence "to make whom he please heir of the lands which he holds," as long as he "will not disinherit any heir he may have by the king's niece," which suggests that even then, despite her extreme youth, John wasn't sure if he would ever have children with Jeanne and that their marriage was not a success. [2] John had an illegitimate son called William born sometime before 24 August 1310 (see below), and it may have been his birth or imminent birth which prompted John to ask this favour of the king. In the spring of 1313, John and Jeanne's marriage collapsed completely: Edward sent William Aune to bring Jeanne to him and subsequently paid all her expenses at the Tower of London, and specifically invited her to come with him on his trip to France that year. John meanwhile was openly living with his mistress Maud Nerford and was threatened with excommunication on this account in 1313, a sentence finally carried out three years later. He had at least three sons with Maud, and in 1316 made strenuous though ultimately unsuccessful efforts to annul his marriage to Jeanne, marry Maud and make these boys his heirs. By the autumn of 1320, though, his relationship with Maud had ended: he petitioned parliament to ask for her brother John to be removed from a commission of oyer et terminer in Norfolk on the grounds that John Nerford and his fellow commissioners were doing all the harm they could to John, because he had "banished Maud de Nerford from his heart and ousted her from his company." [3]

Source: Kathryn Walker, "Illegitimate Children of John de Warenne".
http://edwardthesecond.blogspot.com/2009/09/illegitimate-children-o...

---

Mistress, never wife, of John de Warenne, 7th Earl of Surrey & Sussex.

By 1316, John de Warenne had two sons by Maud Nerford, and in August that year persuaded Edward II to accept them as his heirs: he surrendered his lands to Edward and received them back "with remainder to John de Warenna son of Matilda de Neirford and the heirs male of his body, and failing such issue to Thomas de Warenna, son of the said Matilda..." [7] John evidently was the elder of the two and presumably named after their father; Thomas may have been named after Thomas Nerford, one of Maud's brothers.

16 August 1309, Edward II gave John licence "to make whom he please heir of the lands which he holds," as long as he "will not disinherit any heir he may have by the king's niece," which suggests that even then, despite her extreme youth, John wasn't sure if he would ever have children with Jeanne and that their marriage was not a success. [2] John had an illegitimate son called William born sometime before 24 August 1310 (see below), and it may have been his birth or imminent birth which prompted John to ask this favour of the king. In the spring of 1313, John and Jeanne's marriage collapsed completely: Edward sent William Aune to bring Jeanne to him and subsequently paid all her expenses at the Tower of London, and specifically invited her to come with him on his trip to France that year. John meanwhile was openly living with his mistress Maud Nerford and was threatened with excommunication on this account in 1313, a sentence finally carried out three years later. He had at least three sons with Maud, and in 1316 made strenuous though ultimately unsuccessful efforts to annul his marriage to Jeanne, marry Maud and make these boys his heirs. By the autumn of 1320, though, his relationship with Maud had ended: he petitioned parliament to ask for her brother John to be removed from a commission of oyer et terminer in Norfolk on the grounds that John Nerford and his fellow commissioners were doing all the harm they could to John, because he had "banished Maud de Nerford from his heart and ousted her from his company." [3

His sons John and Thomas had both joined the order of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem by November 1345, and their mother Maud Nerford was dead by then. [9] Neither of them appeared in their father's will.

References: Kathryn Warner holds a BA and an MA with Distinction in Medieval History and Literature. http://edwardthesecond.blogspot.com/2009/09/illegitimate-children-o...

---

Maud De Skedgeton was born on c. 1299 in England. Maud began an affair with Sir John De Warren, 8th Earl of Surrey on 1314 in England and had 6 children: Sir William De Warren, Sir Edward De Warren, Knight, Joan De Warren, Katherine De Warren, Isabel De Warren, and Dan William De Warren. She passed away in England and is buried in Lewes Priory, Lewes, Sussex, England.

Maud De Skedgeton is my 23rd great grandmother.

Note:

• 1304 John the 8th and last Earl de Warenne was the previous Earl's grandson and succeeded because his father had been killed in a tournament at Guildford in 1286. John, aged 18 when he succeeded to the Earldom, made an unhappy marriage to Joan de Barr, granddaughter of Edward I. There were no children to this marriage and in c.1316 John had an affair with Maud de Nerford, which incurred the displeasure of the Bishop of Chichester who excommunicated him. Stow reported that, "the sayd Earl came to the Byshoppe with armed men, and foure more hasty than the reste, threatened the Byshoppe, whereupon the Byshoppes men fell on them and tooke the Earl and the reste and imprisoned them". Soon after this occurrence, John abducted the wife of Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, as a result of which, he lost his castles of Conisbrough and Pontefract to Thomas. During the time that the Earl of Lancaster held Conisbrough he ordered that timber from the wood there be felled to repair the chapel roof. This must have referred to a chapel within the inner ward in addition to that in the keep. On the death of the Earl of Lancaster, Conisbrough was held by the King.
• None of John de Warenne's children were legitimate..

Notes for MAUDE DE SKEGETON: aka: Maud de Nerford Was NOT married to John de Warenne, she was his mistress.

• ***************************************************************************************

Margaret ferch Gruffudd married Madog ap Gruffudd (died 1277) of Powys Fadog. They had two sons, Gruffudd ap Madog and Llywelyn ap Madog. The two boys died in mysterious circumstances shortly after the outbreak of war in 1282. Thomas Pennant[1] states that the boys were ‘drowned in the River Dee’ at Holt by their guardians John de Warenne, earl of Surrey, and Roger Mortimer the younger. D. Powel[2] mentions the ‘destruction’ of the two princes, whose guardians, Warenne and Mortimer, ‘so garded their wardes wit so small regard, that they never returned to their possessions. And shortlie after the said guardians did obtaine the same lands to themselves by charters of the king.’

Note: On May 25, 1306 Warenne married Jeanne of Bar, daughter of count Henry III of Bar and Eleanor, eldest daughter of King Edward I of England. The two were soon estranged and live apart, and had no children, both parties sued for divorce, though the marriage was never dissolved. In 1316 Warenne was excommunicated for adultery with Maud de Nerford, by whom he had several illegitimate children, and Isabel Holland, sister of Thomas Holland, later earl of Kent.whom later married. Warenne died in 1347 on his sixty first birth day and is buried at the monastery of Lewes. His sister Alice wife of Edmond Fitz Alan, 8th Earl of Arundel, became his heir, and conveyed the great estates of the Warrens (Plantagenets), into the Fitz-Alan family. Her ladyship’s son Richard Fitz-Alan, 9th Earl of Arundel, is considered to have succeeded to the Earldom of Surrey, and so styled himself, but it is doubtful if he were ever formally invested with the dignity. He died in 1375, all passed to his son and heir, Richard Fitz-Alan, 10th Earl of Arundel and Surrey, who was beheaded in 1397, when all his honors became forfeited. The Earlship of Surrey reverted to the Crown who did not see fit to pass it to any other. And on failure of male heirs of the house of Arundel, passed to the Duke of Norfolk, who bear the arms of Warren as one of the quarterings on his escutcheon.

Note: It is then for the first time shown, that the last Earl of Warren had a son who bore the name of Edward; and as the house of Poynton is known to descend from an Edward de Warren, who must have been contemporary with that Edward; as there was a strong current of tradition that it did descend from an illegitimate son of the last Earl of Warren; as the distinction in the arms of the Warrens of Poynton was a lion rampant ermine, which was the coat of Nereford,2 and the earl is well known to have had a mistress of the name of Maud de Nereford; as there also is an absence of all evidence for any other descent of Sir Edward Warren, the undoubted ancestor,-- we confess we see not how the conclusion can be evaded that he is the Edward de Warren named in the will, a son, but not legitimate, of the eighth and last Earl.

Sources:

• 1. Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists Who Came to America Before 1700 by Frederick Lewis Weis
• 2. [http://www.warrenfamilyhistory.com/Docs/Our%20Warrens%20in%20Englan...]

  ---

  
  

Maude de Skegeton, called Maud de Nerford: She was the mistress of Sir John de Warenne, Earl of Surrey. She was alive in 1326, but dead before 22 Nov 1345.

In 1316 Warenne was excommunicated for adultery with Maud de Nerford, by whom he had several illegitimate children.

Memoirs of the Ancient Earls Vol 2: Having no issue by his wife, he had for that, or some other reason, conceived a dislike to her, and had cohabited with one Maud de Nerford, the daughter of a Norfolk knight,* who bore him children, and for this, probably at the instigation of his wife, the church took congnizance of him.

In the British Museum, is a M. S. containing abstracts from the registers of the archbishops of Canterbury, at Lambeth, in which is the following : The clergy of Kent, &c. comend the cause of the countisse -- The clargy of Norffolk write to the noble and brave erl of Surrey and Sussex, discommending his disordinate life in keepinge Dame Mawde de Nereforde against the lawe of God, and the ordre of holy church, puttinge from him his deare wife.

The earl finding that he could not have both a wife and concubine, was determined, if he could, to be without the former, and therefore, partly on the pretence of a prior contract made with this Maud de Nerford, and partly because Joan de Barr and he were too nearly related, he sued for a divorce ...

• A deed, dated 11 Edw. III (1338) sais, that Dame Petronilla de Nerford, and Sir John de Nerford her son, were then dead, and that Sir Thomas de Nerford, knight, her second son, was then living, and held a quarter of a knight's fee at Keteringham (in Norfolk) of Thomas de Brotherton earl of Norfolk, and marischal of England. Of this family, I doubt not, was the above Maud. "Royal Ancestry" by Douglas Richardson, Vol. V, page 313-315: