Sir Robert de Mohun, of Porlock

Sir Robert married Elizabeth, daughter and heir of Simon de Roges of Porlock. The marriage does not seem to have turned out happily, for, after his murder about the end of 1331, his relict and her mother were alike suspected of being privy to the crime. Very little is known about the circumstances beyond the fact that a neighbour, John of Luccombe, was the chief person implicated. The widow soon married another husband, Sir Robert of Stockhey. The date of her death is not recorded, but she must have been succeeded by a son, for, in 1353, there is mention of John de Mohun of Porlock, knight, who is elsewhere described as son of Sir Robert de Mohun. The Mohuns of Fleet, in Dorset, claimed descent from him.

Source: A history of Dunster and of the families of Mohun & Luttrell, Vol I, Page 39

Primary Sources

1329 April 19. Wallingford.
Exemption of John de Mohun, in consideration of age and infirmity, from attendance in parliament, and from service with the army, as also from that which he owes for his lands; provided that Robert de Mohun his son attend the parliament in his stead and do the aforesaid services for him.
Source: Calendar of the Patent Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward III 1327-1330, Page 383

1332 Feb. 4. Hatfield
Commission of oyer and terminer to John de Bello Campo, Richard Lovel, Philip de Columbariis and John de la Fosse, touching the murder of Robert de Mohun, knight, at Curry, co. Somerset.
Source: Calendar of the Patent Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward III 1330-1334, Page 284

1332 March 25. Westminster.
Commission of oyer and terminer to Philip de Columbers, John Inge and John atte Fosse touching the murder of Robert de Mohun at Purlok, co. Somerset.
Source: Calendar of the Patent Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward III 1330-1334, Page 290

Petition c. 1333
Petitioners: Pain de Mohun.
Addressees: King and council.
Pain de Mohun states that those who killed his brother, Robert de Mohun, were indicted for this and appealed from county court to county court, but that when they were on the point of outlawry, they purchased a writ to supersede. Pain then purchased a writ to have the indictment brought into King's Bench, but some of those indicted surrendered themselves to Newgate prison by means of a false appeal not sued by the King, and are about to be released. He requests a letter under the privy seal to the justice of Newgate to supersede in the delivery of John de Lokcombe . . . until Pain can sue for his brother on behalf of the King.
Held by: The National Archives, Kew

1333 Oct. 13. Waltham.
To the sheriff of Devon. Order to deliver the manor of Cleyhangre with the issues thereof to the prior and brethren of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem in England, or their attorney, as it was agreed in the parliament of the late king held three weeks after the Purification in the 17th year of his reign, that the lands etc. which belonged to the dissolved order of the Templars should not escheat to their chief lords, but that all the demesne lands, fees, advowsons and liberties which belonged to the Templars at the time of their cession should be assigned and delivered to the said prior and brethren, which statute was afterwards ratified by the king in parliament, and lately, at the prosecution of the said prior and brethren, showing that divers men of that county neglected to observe that statute, and occupied divers lands etc. of the said Templars, pretending that they had escheated to them, the king ordered that sheriff to take all the lands etc. in Cleyhangre and elsewhere which had been so occupied into the king's hand without delay, and to keep them safe until further orders, and to inform the king of the nature and yearly value of such lands and by whom they were occupied; and the sheriff informed the king that he had taken the said manor of Cleyhangre into his hand, together with the advowson of the church of that town, and that William Martyn had entered upon it after the said dissolution and held it until John de Mohun ejected him therefrom, and that the said John afterwards gave it to Robert de Mohun, his brother, who gave it to Payn de Mohun, his brother.

Source: 'Close Rolls, Edward III: October 1333', in Calendar of Close Rolls, Edward III: Volume 3, 1333-1337, ed. H C Maxwell Lyte (London, 1898), pp. 136-151. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-close-rolls/edw3/vol3/pp136-151 [accessed 12 October 2017].

1362 Oct. 28. Westminster.
Inspeximus and confirmation to Richard, now prior, and the convent of Bryutone and their successors of a writing of John de Mohun, late lord of Dunsterre, witnessed by Oliver Seint Johan, Henry Seint Leger, John son of Sir Robert de Mohun, John de Bekyngton and William Carevill, and dated at Bryuton, on Thursday after the feast of St. Barnabas, 20 Edward III [11 June 1346]
Source: Calendar of the Patent Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward III 1361-1364, Page 254

Source: "A history of the ancient church of Porlock and of the patron Saint, St. Dubricius, and his times" by Hook, Walter (Publication date 1893) page 27. < Archive.Org > … The lay subsidies paid at Porlock were — from Robert de Mohun ii ‘ iiii ‘’ …