The implications of Henry and Stephen Segrave being brothers on Mallory genealogy

This is to report that I have found proof that Henry Segrave and Stephen Segrave were brothers, making Henry's daughter Christina, Stephen Segrave's neice. This has long been proposed by others but proof, corroborating such suppositions, has, to date, not been offered in print. As one Christina was the wife of the first Thomas Mallory of Kirkby Mallory (born around 1202) and as canon law would have prohibited a marriage of near relations, one may assume that Thomas Mallory, himself, was not a nephew by blood of Stephen Segrave, something which has also been proposed. 

Other Mallories connected with Stephen Segrave are Robert Mallory (probably born around 1205) and Gilbert Mallory (born around 1201) who was the husband of Stephen's sister, Cecilia, who could have been born no later than 1200 if the daughter of Stephen's father who passed away in 1199. If Cecilia were first married to Thomas Mallory's father Richard and secondly to Gilbert, she could not have been Thomas's mother, though, if born in 1190 or earlier could have been Robert's mother. Though considering that she lived into the early 1280s, it is more likely than less that she was either born in the last year of Stephen's father's life or was the daughter of Stephen's mother by a second husband. Also, a marriage with Richard (His widow is a Cecilia, who does not appear to be Thomas's mother), if it took place, would seem to fit with 1216 or 1217 at the beginning of the reign of Henry III.

In any case, it is highly unlikely that Robert Mallory was a brother of Cecilia's second husband, Gilbert (a second cousin of her presumed first husband), by another unidentified sister of Stephen as this would have effectively acted as a bar to marriage between the two.

The most likely assumption, based on an analysis of charter witness lists, would be that Robert was a brother of Christina's husband Thomas, but not a son of Cecilia. Though no direct proof is available, it would be easiest to see Thomas and Robert as both being the sons of Richard by a first wife who was the daughter of Thomas le Despencer and a sister of the first wife of Stephen Segrave. This, thus, would have allowed Robert Mallory to be designated as the nephew of Stepen Segrave, as well as allowing Thomas Mallory to marry Christina Segrave and both Richard and Gilbert Mallory to marry Cecilia.

This is a reiteration of a hypothesis mentioned in an earlier posting, but with the clear identification of Henry and Stephen Segrave as brothers, the hypothesis is now proven in part and strongly reinforced as a whole.

1 June 2015

Comments on the Archbishop William la Zouche of York

This posting does not pretend to give a comprehensive argument for the details of the life of William la Zouche, either before or after he became archbishop of York. It is merely is meant to give an outline of the tentative conclusions I have so far reached based on on-going research that has lasted, off and on, for eight years, in the hope that should I never be in a position to publish a polished version of my research, others might find a certain amount of stimulation and may be spared some of the long hours of academic struggle that will have gone into these few lines.

All previous studies of the archbishop's life depend heavily on his will as a means for establishing a framework to his life in which to include to mass of other surviving details from the contemporary written record of his time. One point of the published version of the will is quite curious and that is the phrase "parentes, consanguineos meos" which is normally translated as "parents, blood relations". I have come to the conclusion that this should be read as "parentes consanguineos meos" without the comma which almost certainly represents an editorial addition in the printed version and cannot have existed in the original 14th century Latin. As a phrase "parentes consanguineos" was a legal term which exists even today in the Portuguese legal code to indicate someone too closely related for a marriage to be legally binding. If we remember that the archbishop was a university trained specialist in canon law, then, considering the way church law was applied in his lifetime, we might just as easily interpret the passage concerned as meaning "individuals related to me within the degree  of 3rd cousin or less". The passage concerned, thus, cannot be taken as an indication that his parents were still alive, though for six out of the last seven years of my research, just like all of my predecessors, this is a position that I took, too.

On close examination, the archbishop's will shows a far greater partiality to his relatives than is apparent at first sight, as an examination of the executors of his will would show. Lord Neville of Raby, the first person mentioned as an executor, is the husband of an individual my current research indicates to have been a second cousin of the archbishop. In addition, he was a companion in war and can be shown to have been a political ally. Ralph la Zouche is specifically mentioned as being the archbishop's brother. Anketil Mallory is either a brother-in-law (more probably) or a half-brother (less probably). Christopher Mallory is either a first or a second cousin, depending on whether his mother was a much younger sister of the archbishop's father or a first cousin of that man. Robert Constable would have been directly ancestral to the man who was either contracted or already married to the archbishop's neice. This would lead one to expect that the other executors would also have some family connection, either direct or indirect, with the archbishop, too.

Another thing one should be careful about is not to confuse the archbishop or his brother Roger with two sons of the first baron William la Zouche of Harringworth. It is extremely easy to do as it would seem that both Williams became clerics and both Rogers were knights and lords of manors, though it would seem that the Roger who was the son of William la Zouche of Harringworth did not leave descendants. It is on the basis of this overlapping in naming and what I believe to be a mistaken reading of the archbishop's will that many people in the past (including myself) have assumed that the baron was the father of the archbishop, as he was old enough to be the archbishop's father, alive at the archbishop's death, and clearly the father of a William who was a cleric. Other contemporary evidence, however, makes it impossible to believe that this could be the case.

The archbishop and his brother Roger have to be the sons of the first Roger la Zouche of Lubbesthorpe and Juliana (Tresgoz?). Moreover, William would appear to have been a youngest son, being born either shortly before or soon after his father's death, as he is nowhere mentioned in the property settlements made after the first Roger's death, whereas as various other sons are. One can assume, on this basis, that the archbishop was probably born around 1300 or 1301. Ecclesiastical preferment before the mid-1320s probably refers, not to him but to his cousin who was the son of the first baron la Zouche of Harringworth.

The archbishop's career was a brilliant one and he was undoubtedly a man of energy and, being highly educated, of talent. What should not be overlooked is that he was also well-connected in terms of family and that he placed importance on family interest in the management of his affairs, both as archbishop and before. Moreover, this was natural for a man of his times.

Concerning the archbishop's Mallory connections, Anketil Mallory is mentioned by a late 14th century memorandum of a complicated series of land transfers as being the brother of the archbishop which would not be impossible if we assume that this particular Anketil is the son of the archbishop's mother, Juliana, and her second husband Reginald Mallory. However, another document in the same collection refers to a William Mallory as being this Anketil's brother, though he is closely associated with Anketil, at no time does he appear in connection with the archbishop during the archbishop's life. Considering other matters that cannot be gone into here, it would be easier to assume that Anketil was the husband of a sister of the archbishop, thus making him a brother-in-law instead of a blood brother. On the other hand, William would have been a blood brother of Anketil, though not directly connected with the archbishop by blood or marriage.

Christopher Mallory, however, would appear to be a representative of a different branch of the Mallory family (Kirkby Mallory) from Anketil (Walton on the Wold). His connection can best be explained as a cousin (either first or second) but would have been well within the degree of blood relationship for the archbishop to have considered him as being closely related according to the definitions provided by canon law at the time.

I hope eventually to provide a fuller and much more coherent life of the archbishop in the future, but, even if I don't, a better understanding of the points raised above can help a future researcher do the same. I don't see anything brought up in this blog as being a final statement of fact, but rather as an attempt to stimulate research taking place in directions it may not have otherwise gone.

The implications of la Zouche chronology as it intersects with Mallory history: Juliana of Lubbesthorpe

Without accounting for the chronology of the la Zouche families of Ashby la Zouche, Harringworth, and Lubbesthorpe and their sometimes intricate intertwining range of relationships with the Mallorys, it is impossible to fully understand Mallory history from the last half of the 13th century through the first half of the 15th, whether it concerns the Mallory families of Kirkby Mallory, Walton on the Wold, Hutton Conyers, Sudborough, or Papworth St Agnes. In historical terms, however, the various branches of the la Zouche family consistently made more of an impact on England than did any branch of the medieval Mallory family. Nevertheless, there are many aspects of la Zouche chronology, especially before the mid-14th century which are confusing in the extreme and deserve careful attention. It is rather like encountering an immensely difficult example of sudoku, where one must process literally hundreds of possible numerical combinations before coming across hopefully the only one that can fully satisfy the various disparate bits of contemporary data that survive in the full glory of their disarray.

In connection with the book I have been working on now for the last eight years and which could take another eight before it is finished, I have been and will continue to do research on the la Zouche family, something which many others are also doing and from whose efforts I have benefited and continue to benefit. Recently, the online publication of the third edition of Charles Cawley's Medieval Lands by on the fmg.ac website has proven to be an invaluable tool, when combined with the extensive notes I took when I was on a year's sabbatical in London, and I feel I have been able to make a certain progress in dealing with this treacherously confusing historical territory.

In consideration of my age and the uncertainty of human fortune, I have decided to upload to this blog my observations as I come across them. This blog, however, is not meant to substitute for the series of books I eventually intend to publish when I no longer have to deal with PhD student dissertations or the still inadequate research skills of master's students. It is merely meant to point people in the direction of possibly fruitful research should I eventually prove incapable of completing in manuscript form what I have begun.

As for the connections between the la Zouche and the Mallory families, the key individuals to consider are Juliana (the widow of the first Roger la Zouche of Lubbesthorpe and the second wife of Reginald Mallory of Walton on the Wold) and her son the Archbishop of York William la Zouche (certainly a close relative of the first Anketil Mallory of Sudborough and the first Christopher Mallory of Hutton Conyers, both Mallorys appearing in his will).

The connection to Lubbesthorpe by Juliana's husband, Roger, best makes sense, if we assume his birth in the mid to late 1240s. His father William la Zouche would have been born around 1220 and, on these grounds, best fits an identification with the William la Zouche who was the son of a Roger la Zouche and the brother of an Alan la Zouche of Ashby la Zouch. The key problem with this identification would be that King's Nympton, a manor given to William by his father, was inherited by William's daughter Joyce Mortimer of Richard's Castle, a woman whom it would make best sense to think of as having been born between 1250 and 1255. What is generally overlooked is that Joyce's descendants (and not the descendants of the son of Joyce's mother by her first husband) also inherited her mother's manor of Howbridge in Essex and that William was a second husband of Joyce's mother Maude and that Maude died well before her husband did, though under English law he continued to possess her manor until his death in 1270 in his capacity as the father of a child by her.  He may be expected to have had a third wife and to have possibly fathered other children after Maude's death. This hypothetical third wife may have been a woman by the name of Alice, though this name might also refer to a wife of the younger son (also a William) of William's older brother Alan. It will be argued in a future blog that a daughter of William by this third wife would have been a second or third wife of Thomas Mallory of Kirkby Mallory who was active in the last quarter of the 13th century.

If the above reconstruction is correct, one must account for an older son by a first wife being disinherited in favor of the daughter of a second. One must assume that, as was common during this era, one of the conditions imposed by Maude in her marriage contract was that William make legal arrangements preferring her descendants by him over those of any other marriage, past or future. For William, who would have been a younger son with far from extensive land-holdings, marrying Maude would have been an attractive proposition, as she would have been quite a bit richer than him with her own inheritance as an heiress and one third of the properties of her first husband as a widow's dower. Disinheriting his young son would not necessarily have been seen as being disadvantageous to the boy, himself, as access by William to the financial resources Maude would have brought to him for the duration of their marriage would have given him a feeling of being able to promote his son Roger's career in ways that could more than make up for the lack of a landed inheritance.

As it was, Eudon la Zouche would seem to have played a decisive role in Roger's advancement. Eudon is commonly referred to as Eon, Ivo, and occasionally as John, though every time he appears in records produced by the government of Henry III he is referred to as Eudon, exclusively, so this would seem to be the best name to call him by. Eudon would seem to have been the youngest surviving brother of Alan and William la Zouche mentioned above and to have been too young to have received property from his father Roger before that individual's death. A comparison with the dates of various life events of his supposed siblings would suggest that Eudon was born between 1230 and 1235. By 1268 when Eudon's assumed nephew Roger was first assigned Lubbesthorpe to manage by Millicent de Monte Alto, Eudon would seem to have already been married to the lady, a daughter of the baron of Abergavenny William de Cantelo and the former wife of John de Monte Alto. Millicent would have been born around 1247 and have been the child bride of her first husband who seems to have died before her marriage was consummated. At this point, Millicent would not yet have been the great landed heiress she became on the death of her brother several years later, but would have been in possession of lands (including Lubbesthorpe) granted to her and her husband by her father on the occasion of her first marriage. Millicent's marriage to Eudon, thus, has the makings of a love match of sorts between two individuals without any future prospects of greatness. As it was, the death of Millicent's brother without any children changed both their lives profoundly and for most of the last decade of his life, Eudon became a man of consequence in the affairs of England.

My best estimate is that Eudon would have been in his mid to late forties when he passed away in 1279 and his older brother William about 50 at his decease at the beginning of the decade. After Eudon's death, his presumed nephew Roger continued to managed Millicent's interests in Lubbesthorpe until, probably in connection with his marriage to Juliana sometime around 1290, she made him lord of the manor with her as his immediate overlord. Juliana must have clearly been a much younger relative of Millicent's, but cannot have been a daughter, as has sometimes been maintained and which I, myself, thought of as a likely possibility for quite a few years.

Juliana, herself, is unlikely to have been born before 1270 and probably not later than 1275. She could conceivably be a last child of Millicent's sister Joan, but this individual's children, daughters included, seem to be already otherwise accounted for, nor is there any compelling onomastic reason for assigning Joan such a daughter. Nevertheless, Juliana is a name appearing in Millicent's family, it being the name of Millicent's father's sister who married a Tresgoz. Juliana's husband was a son of Sybilla d'Ewias, an important heiress who was the closest living relative in her time to the last Anglo-Saxon King of England, Edward the Confessor, being a direct descendant of Edward's full sister rather than his half-brother, the ancestor of the future kings of Scotland and England. Sybilla's children by her first husband, though, were actually raised from their early childhood by her second husband, Roger Clifford. Millicent's aunt, Juliana de Cantelo, had two sons of whom only the name of the first is known, though the fact that a second son married and had at least one son who had come into possession of a modest amount of family property is something for which there is charter evidence.

If we take into account the onomastic traditions which were common at the time and evident among the families with which we are dealing (Cantelo, Tresgoz, Clifford, la Zouche, Mallory), then we see that a son was not generally named after his father, nor a daughter after her mother, but the oldest son or daughter was, in each case, very often named after a grandfather or a grandmother (normally through the father but also through the mother, especially if the mother were an heiress or the particular grandparent a person of importance). Thus, the naming of Roger la Zouche and Juliana's oldest son, Roger, might normally be expected to mean that he was being named in honor of Juliana's father and not of Roger, himself, or Roger's father, whom we known, from government created documentation in the time of Edward III, to have been a William.

There is, of course, no place in the written record where we can find her family name. However, onomastically and chronologically, assuming that Juliana was the daughter of a Roger Tresgoz who was a second son of a Juliana who was the sister of Millicent's father would fit perfectly, especially as the first Juliana can be shown to have lived at least until the mid-1280s and might very well have been instrumental in arranging the marriage of a granddaughter with limited marital prospects to a much older, securely well off, presumed nephew of Millicent's second husband, Eudon la Zouche.

After the second Roger la Zouche of Lubbesthorpe's birth, Juliana and her husband went on to have at least four other sons during the last decade of the 13th century and presumably a certain number of unrecorded daughters. Presumably the youngest of these children, perhaps even posthumously born, was William la Zouche who later became Archbishop of York. It would seem rather than having been named for Roger's father, he was more likely to have been named for Roger's cousin, William la Zouche of Harringworth, the son of Eudon and Millicent and also Roger's immediate overlord. This William would, in turn, have been named for Millicent's father, as, when he was born, Millicent had already come into possession of half of her father and mother's lands as the co-heiress of her brother. A presumably older sister of William was already named for Millicent's mother.

On the death of the first Roger la Zouche, Juliana took immediate action to gain the guardianship of her son and his lands and then very shortly after married Reginald Mallory as his second wife. Significantly, Reginald would have been much closer in age to Juliana than her first husband and, although he eventually came to inherit Walton on the Wold, Tachebrook Mallory, and Botley, he would seem to have still been at the time of his marriage a favored younger son rather than the natural heir to his father's properties. As was the case with Millicent's second marriage, this also has the markings of a love match, at least on the part of Juliana, herself.

Whether Juliana had any children by Reginald is not clear. His heir, John, was Reginald's son by his first wife Joan. Nevertheless, the marriage can be shown to impact Mallory history for over 100 years, as will be discussed in other postings to this blog when I have time to write them..

On the origin of the Mallory family of Hutton Conyers and Studley Royal

According to a visitation of 1563, Christopher Mallory married Joan Conyers, the heiress of Hutton Conyers, and was, through her, the ancestor of the Mallorys of Hutton Conyers and Studley Royal. Christopher Mallory was recorded in the visitation as the son of a Sir Thomas Mallory and a daughter of "Lord Zouche". When Christopher Mallory first appears in 1347 together with William la Zouche of Lubbesthorpe, the nephew of the Archbishop of York, he would have already been an adult, indicating a birth year not later than the mid-1320s.

Although one cannot expect that a visitation taking place 200 years after the fact and relying on family tradition to be entirely accurate in every respect, one cannot entirely discount it either. In fact, the Mallory coat of arms mentioned in the visitation do not perfectly match the contemporary arms of any late 13th century or early 14th century Mallory family to the extent that they have survived or have been otherwise recorded. One would not expect that the Zouche coat of arms mentioned (those of the only surviving Zouche baron in 1563) to be the same, though obviously one cannot not discount this as being impossible, either.

One would expect that Christopher Mallory would have been closely related to the William la Zouche, the Archbishop of York during most of the 1340s, especially as he is named as an executor of the Archbishop's will. If Sir Thomas Mallory (b. ca. 1242) were the father of Christopher, then we must assume Christopher to be a contemporary of the Archbishop and to have been born sometime in the first years of the first decade of the 14th century at the latest. If the coat of arms evidence is to be taken at face value, then one would expect that the mother of Christopher to have been a daughter of Eudo la Zouche, the husband of Millicent de Monte Alto (nee Cantelou), though not necessarily by Millicent who may have been a second wife. If the coat of arms evidence in the visitation is not to be taken at face value, another possibility as Christopher's mother would have been a sister of the Archbishop's father who would have also been closely connected to Eudo la Zouche (the Archbishop's father, Roger, was the son of a William who would have been the brother of Eudo). 

It will, in fact, be argued in the book I am working on that that the coat of arms evidence cannot be reliably used in this case and that Sir Thomas Mallory would have married as a second or third wife, the daughter of William la Zouche, a woman who would, as is indicated above, been the sister of the archbishop's father. It will also be argued that Christopher Mallory would have been either the youngest or close to the youngest of the children born to this marriage. Christopher Mallory would, thus, have been a first cousin of the Archbishop, thus explaining the archbishop making him an executor of his will.

A suggestion for further research on the origins of Peter Mallory of New Haven

This is not based on research, merely a suggestion for further research originally made by S. V. Mallory Smith, a scholar for whom I have the highest respect and whom I once had the privilege of meeting together with her husband at their home in Cambridge. On page 101 in her book, A History of the Mallory Family, she suggests that Peter might have been the son of a certain John Mallory, the putative, posthumous, son of Sir Chistopher Mallory of Studley Royal who passed away in 1555 by Mary, the daughter of Sir Christopher Danby and Elizabeth, the daughter of Lord Latimer. This John Mallory was said to have been dispossessed by his father's brother, William Mallory, though an attempt was made in 1578 to recover a third part of Sir Christopher Mallory's property.
My suggestion is that it might be worthwhile to go over these cases quite carefully. One might find that the Mallory of John Mallory was actually a legal fiction and that genetically speaking he might not have been of the same male-line Mallorys as other bearers of that name. It would appear, however, that chronologically speaking, if there is a connection between Peter Mallory of New Haven and John Mallory, it would have been that of a grandson rather than of a son, which could still account for the very different y-chromosome profiles of Peter Mallory of New Haven Mallory men (and their English counterparts) and other Mallory lineages.

When I met S. V. Mallory Smith some seven or eight years ago when I was on Sabbatical in England, she assured me at length that Peter Mallory of New Haven's ancestry represented at that time a genealogical black hole for which no genealogically acceptable answers had so far been forthcoming. She also assured me that this was of interest to her, as she herself had her origins in the same genealogical line as Peter Mallory of New Haven. She also expressed disappointment at people appropriating her work verbatim as their own and for others who have passed themselves off as her. 
Though this is not a research I intend to get involved in, it is nevertheless something worth pursuing, if for no other reason than out of respect for a great lady and impeccable scholar.

First hypothesis regarding Mallory Anglo-Saxon pre-history

This is a much simplified abstract of ongoing research on the possible Anglo-Saxon antecedents of the presumed second wife of Robert Mallory, the presumed first Mallory lord of Kirkby Mallory. There is no way to reconstruct the name of this woman, but one can assume that she was the heiress of a small enclave inside Welton in Northamptonshire held directly of the king and that, passing away no later than the early 1140s, this land, and perhaps other property, was inherited by her son and possessed by him while her husband was still alive. As a working hypothesis, one can now assume that she was the daughter (or, less likely, a sister) of a Richard who was the son of a certain Ralph and a woman who would have been the daughter of Vlmar (Woolmer), a minor English aristocrat, who held the small, approximately, 20-acre enclave in Welton, not only in 1086 at the time of the Domesday Book but also in 1066 at the time of the Norman Conquest. Domesday Book data would indicate close relations with the important native English Arden family. (The family name is used here for convenience only. It came into actual use much later.) This family was one of the extremely few native English families to have actually benefited in terms of increased lands, power, and prestige, as a result of the Norman Conquest. Because of the close connection that is indicated between Vlmar and those most closely associated with him with Arden family related land transfers, a family relationship is indicated and, as a working hypothesis, it will be assumed that Vlmar was possibly nephew by marriage, of the two powerful Arden brothers Aluuin (Alwin, a sheriff of Warwickshire for William I and the direct male-line ancestor of William Shakespeare's mother) and Leuuin (Lewin, Bishop of Litchfield at the time of the Norman Conquest and later abbot of Coventry, Warwickshire's most important town at the time of the Conquest).

The actual argument is, of course, quite complicated, being based on an analysis of many pages of data taken from the Domesday Book and analyzed for underlying patterns. This research is, of course, not new, being based on that of previous scholars. However, it is quite a bit more focused and, as such, goes deeper, covering more comprehensively a smaller number of individuals than previous research was able to do. It is to be hoped this will take shape in a book form sooner rather than later.

Theoretical Genealogy and the Earliest Mallorys

I recently had a chance to read three books in French by the famous genealogist, Christian Settipani, a gentleman whose research is impeccable and whose writing style is everything that academic writing should be. This has prompted me to review my material on the earliest Mallorys from the viewpoint of onomastics (the study of names and how their are inherited), canon law (church law) with regard to prohibited degrees of marriage, and medieval English common law real estate inheritance systems. I am planning to incorporate this into the book I have been working on now for almost two years. Basically, I will argue that the first Robert Mallory of Kirkby Mallory is likely to have had two sons by a first wife and two by a second, that his oldest was possibly a Geoffrey named after his father and who inherited, through his father, his grandfather's possessions. I will argue that the Laurence Mallory found in the Pipe Rolls was probably the son of this hypothetical Geoffrey. I will also argue that this line of Mallorys daughtered out with Laurence's generation and that one of the daughters (possibly a Cecilia) to whom the manor of Botley devolved would have been married to a man who may have been a William and who had a son would have been a John. This couple would have also had at least one daughter who was a second or third wife of Gilbert Segrave and the mother of Cecilia Segrave, probably a second wife of the second Richard Mallory of Kirkby Mallory and certainly the first and only wife of Gilbert Mallory of Walton on the Wold. I will argue that it would have been through Cecilia Segrave that the originally Mallory property of Botley became a Mallory property once again around 1225.

I will argue that the first Robert Mallory's second son was Anketil Mallory. I have already outlined his career in considerable detail in a book I published in 2013. Anketil was basically a self-made man. His first son Robert, it will be argued, must have married an heiress of sorts and had at least one son Anketil before this line either daughtered out or became extinct. Anketil's second son, Henry, used his service to king John to recover properties of his father which had been alienated to the crown during an unsuccessful revolution during the reign of king Henry II. Gilbert would have been a son of Henry Mallory's by a second wife and was born rather late in his life. It is from Gilbert Mallory and Cecilia Segrave that the Mallorys of Walton on the Wold descend. Gilbert will be shown to have had a younger brother, Anketil, from whom the first line of Yorkshire Mallorys would have descended.

As for the Mallorys of Kirkby Mallory, it will be shown that they descend, as has previously been described, from what I now consider to be Robert Mallory's third son, Richard, and the first son by a wife who would have been a minor heiress in Northampton, being probably the daughter or the grand daughter of the daughter of an Anglo-Saxon land-holder by the name of Ulmar, about whom practically nothing is known. Richard would have inherited certain properties from his mother before the death of his father and would have been the inheritor of the properties given to his father by the earl of Leicester. Richard, himself, married another Northampton heiress. His son William had in turn a son named Richard. It will be argued that this second Richard married firstly a daughter of Thomas Despencer and, in this way, would have been a brother-in-law of Stephen Segrave. By his first wife he would have had two sons, Thomas, who inherited Kirkby Mallory, and Robert who became a priest. The second Richard's second wife would have been Stephen Segrave's younger half-sister Cecilia Segrave who would have been not more than two or three years older than her stepsons, Thomas and Robert, or her second husband Gilbert. It is from Thomas Mallory that the future Mallory's of Kirkby Mallory descend, something for which their is solid documentation.

It will be argued that the Ralph Mallory, the crusader, who is mentioned elsewhere in this blog as a possible son of the first Richard Mallory would be better considered as a second son of the first Robert Mallory of Kirkby Mallory by his second wife. This particular Ralph Mallory will probably have left no descendants.

This represents an attempt at theoretical genealogy which makes use of network theory to create genealogical frameworks that can be used as models for testing historically surviving data in a logical, rather than in a romantic, fashion. As such, it will probably be unsatisfactory to those who find comfort in dogmatic approaches and perhaps will be misused by those attempting to create new genealogical dogma. I hope there will be some who can accept what will appear for the purposes for which it was designed to bring forward discussion on. In any case, this delays furtherthe appearance of my already much delayed new book, but I think for a good purpose.