Sir Adam de Musgrave, Knight, Lord of Musgrave

Is your surname de Musgrave?

Research the de Musgrave family

Sir Adam de Musgrave, Knight, Lord of Musgrave's Geni Profile

Records for Adam de Musgrave

9,363 Records

Share your family tree and photos with the people you know and love

  • Build your family tree online
  • Share photos and videos
  • Smart Matching™ technology
  • Free!


Adam de Musgrave

Birthplace: Great Musgrave, Westmorland, England
Death: Died in Sanford, Westmorland, England
Immediate Family:

Son of Robert de Musgrave and Unknown de Musgrave
Husband of Alicia de Holebec
Father of Sir Thomas de Musgrave, Knight, Sheriff of Westmorland; Richard de Musgrave; Adam de Musgrave; Robert de Musgrave; Roger de Musgrave and 2 others
Brother of John de Musgrave; Walter de Musgrave; FNU de Musgrave and Peter De Musgrave

Managed by: Private User
Last Updated:

About Sir Adam de Musgrave, Knight, Lord of Musgrave

Adam de Musgrave was the son of Robert, Lord of Musgrave. He was born c.1170 in Great Musgrave, Westmorland, England and died c.1216 at Sanford, Westmorland, England. He married Alicia de Holbec c.1195 in Cumberland County. Seven known children.

Adam lived during the reign of King John, who reigned from 1199 to 1216. Adam was in favor with Robert de Vipont the Baron of Appleby, and held Musgrave in Cornage. (Cornage was a very prestigious job, no work, good pay, he had to blow a horn if the Castle was ever attacked).

According to Burke's General Armory, the arms of Sir Adam Musgrave, contemporary of King John (12th c.) were Gules (red) with six annulets or. And the crest: two arms in armour embowed proper the gauntlests grasping an annulet or. Centuries later, the red ground was replaced with blue.

Adam de Musgrave witnessed a very interesting deed, now in the Machel collection at Carlisle. William de Sandford, who calls himself William son of Robert de Sandford, thus fixing his place in the pedigree, executed this deed, by which he granted to Robert de Veteripont his whole wood and turbary of Sandford for 15 marks of silver and one palfrey, and for the release of the rest of his lands from homage and service. The deed is particularly interesting as it gives the complete boundaries of the land thus granted.

  • "Beginning from Creskeld-beck where it falls into Coupemanebeck, and so going up through the middle of Erthasegill to a place where Rouch-beck falls into the said Greskeld-beck and so going up Rouche-beck into Tonwode mire which lies between the aforesaid wood of Sandford and Humfreysheved, and so from Humfreyshead going up to the sike which falls from the pack of Burton and so to the way which goes from Sandford toward Burton, and then going down northwards to the corner of the field of William son of Simon, and so going up by the side of the said field towards the south to the head of Swinesete and so going along between the improved land and this wood which encompasseth Sealestedes mire - descending westward to the brook which is called Sandwath just at the going out of Sandford aforesaid to Coupmane-beck:, which was paying to him and his heirs yearly 3d. at the feast of St Lawrence."

Dispute over Sanford lands

It was during the lifetime of Sir Adam de Musgrave that the Musgrave family acquired the manor of Sanford as well as a considerable portion of the Sanford lands, which passed father to son until 1356, almost 140 years. Sir Adam's son Thomas inherited the Sanford manor and lands from his wife Isabel's father, William de Sanford. (Thomas de Musgrave was required to turn over 1/3 of the land to Beatrix, the wife of William's son Robert, so it is assumed that Robert was deceased by this time.)


In 1278 Thomas de Goldington brought an action against Thomas de Musgrave "for enclosing ground in Sanford." In his suit he claimed Thomas de Musgrave had no right to the lands because all the easements had been warranted to his father William de Goldington before they had been given to Thomas de Musgrave, in reply to which, Thomas de Musgrave claims that he had all William de Sanford's rights and could exercise them.

Thirteen years passed by and the Goldington family still refused to recognize the Musgraves as their lords. Once again Thomas de Goldington brought suit against Thomas de Musgrave, this time for seizing his cattle which were on the Sanford property. Thomas de Musgrave countered that anyone who uses his lands is obliged to pay homage (a ceremony by which a man acknowledges himself the vassal of a lord) and service (the work or action performed by one who serves). Thomas de Goldington had not paid his services and dues and thus, owed de Musgrave. Nevertheless, because Thomas de Goldington had not made an agreement to become a tenant of the new landlord Thomas de Musgrave (which would give de Musgrave rights over all property movable and immovable), Thomas de Musgrave lost the case.

In the year 1300, the Goldington family once again tried to claim the Sanford lands as theirs. A full verdict is given in which it is found that Richard de Musgrave had been Lord of Sanford and that Thomas his son succeeded to his rights.

  • (a) This Richard de Musgrave was son of Thomas de Musgrave and Isabel de Sandford. Thomas de Musgrave and Isabel however also had a son Thomas , whose daughter and heiress Avice married Thomas de Hellebeck, and amongst other lands the Hellebecks held the manor of Smardale which they granted to Guido de Smardale in 1291, except half a carucate and six acres - the same amount of land that Robert to Sandford had kept back from his grant to Nigel de Smardale in 1203.
  • (b) It seems that somehow or other the Musgraves had become possessed of a considerable portion of the Sanford lands. Smardale, as we have seen, descended to a daughter, but the manor of Sanford went down in the male line of the Musgraves until1356, when, it once more came back to the Sanfords. There is little doubt however that whatever the Musgrave claim was it was not an undisputed one. In an enquiry held in the year I284 as to the names and lands of those holding their estates from the Veteriponts, Thomas de Musgrave is given as mesne lord of Soulby, Marton and Great Musgrave, and Richard de Sandford as mesne lord of Sanford and part of Smardale,
  • (c) and at the partition of the inheritance of the Veteriponts between the two daughters of the last Robert de Veteripont, Idonea had allocated to her the homage and service of Richard de Sandford.
  • (d) It would seem that their overlords at least would recognise only the Sanfords as the lords of Sanford. The de Goldington family, as we have seen, refused to recognise the Musgraves as their lords, having brought an action against Richard de Musgrave for seizing his cattle.

Links to additional material:

view all

Sir Adam de Musgrave, Knight, Lord of Musgrave's Timeline

Great Musgrave, Westmorland, England
Age 26
Great Musgrave, Westmorland, England
Age 28
Age 30
Age 32
Age 34
Great Musgrave, Cumberland, England
Age 36
Age 39
Musgrave, Westmorland, England
Age 46
Sanford, Westmorland, England