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.
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.
Have you considered doing research on the Mallory family of Dunkeswick in the parish of Harewood @20 miles from Studley? It is not proven where they fit in but there is conjecture that they are descended from the Studley Mallory family. Unfortunately, Walbran, who wrote the Memorials of Fountains Abbey, died before he could follow up the references he had found about them. They are an interesting sideline as there is a connection with the Strickland family through Walter Mallory alias Strickland, Sir George Calvert who founded Maryland, and possibly the Seymour family of Wiltshire. Please send a private message if you would like to know more.
ReplyDelete