ROGER, John I

This shire knight was the younger of the two sons of John Roger, the wealthy merchant of Bridport and Bryanston, both of whom were named John after their father. The merchant, who founded the fortunes of the family, had purchased extensive estates in Dorset, Somerset and Wiltshire, valued at £171 p.a. for the tax assessments of 1412, which along with more lands acquired subsequently he divided between his two namesakes. The elder son was destined to come into the bulk of his holdings: not only the principal family estates in Dorset and Somerset, which he duly inherited on the merchant’s death in 1441, but also seven manors and other properties in Hampshire, centred on Mapledurham, which the patriarch had purchased and settled on him in the 1420s.5 CCR, 1422-9, pp. 45, 319; C139/107/32; Dorset Feet of Fines (Dorset Recs. x), 338; CP25(1)/207/32/11; JUST 1/1540, rot. 1. John Roger ‘of Mapledurham’ was assessed for tax in 1436 on lands in Hants and elsewhere worth £90 p.a.: E159/212, recorda Hil. rot. 14 (i)d. Naturally enough, that John Roger was expected to be the more prominent of the two brothers in public affairs: he served on royal commissions from 1436 onwards, initially in Hampshire, though later in Dorset (where he was a j.p. from 1442), and after his father’s death he served the Crown as sheriff of Hampshire in 1441-2, escheator of Somerset and Dorset in 1443-4 and a verderer in the New Forest in the late 1440s. Throughout the same decade, too, he received fees as an esquire in the royal household, where he established sufficiently good relations with the King’s chamberlain, Ralph, Lord Sudeley, Sir William Beauchamp*, Lord St. Amand, and James Butler, earl of Wiltshire, as to feel able to ask them to be feoffees of his estates.6 E101/409/9, 11, 16; 410/1, 3; CPR, 1446-52, p. 411. Yet, at a relatively early stage in his career, this John died, on 3 Oct. 1450, leaving a son aged only two years old and a widow, Anne, the daughter of the Sussex landowner Sir Thomas Etchingham. The widow then married John Audley*, afterwards Lord Audley, to whom she took a handsome dower and jointure from the Roger estates, which she kept until her death nearly half a century later.7 Misccellanea Geneaologica et Heraldica, ser. 1, i. 258; CCR, 1441-7, p. 425; 1447-54, p. 147; C139/140/34; CP, i. 341-2; CIPM Hen. VII, ii. 148, 160.

Although our John Roger was not his father’s principal heir, he was by no means neglected by him, for the merchant negotiated on his behalf a lucrative marriage. At Newbury on 16 Dec. 1428 he formally agreed with John Shotesbrooke of Ordeston that this son should be married to Shotesbrooke’s daughter Elizabeth before the following 2 Feb. Within a month of the nuptuals Roger would settle on the couple in tail his manors of Benham Valence and East Enborne in Berkshire, and within four years would make sure estate to the groom of manors and lands to the annual value of £100 to have to him and his issue after the merchant’s death. He duly completed the first part of this contract on 24 Feb. 1429. As his part of the agreement, the bride’s father promised to grant the young couple the manor and advowson of Standon ‘Vyvian’ in Staffordshire, and ensure that they would inherit Ordeston and his manor of Beckett in Shrivenham after the deaths of him and his wife Alice. As to the residue of Shotesbrooke’s lands, these were to be settled on Shotesbrooke and any male issue he might have with successive remainders to the couple and their issue.8 Chute (Vyne) mss, 31M57/748; E326/9405; CAD, i. B365; VCH Berks. iv. 171, 535. Evidently, Standon was soon transferred to our MP as promised, for in 1433 he brought an action in the court of common pleas against John Wolaston, the cleric whom his father-in-law had presented to Standon church, for assaulting a servant of his, making him too frightened to leave his house to cultivate the land. The case had not been resolved by July 1435, when Wolaston was bound over to him in 100 marks.9 Wm. Salt Arch. Soc. xvii. 147; CCR, 1429-35, p. 364. By the time Roger and his wife put their manors of Benham Valence and East Enborne in the hands of feoffees in December 1433 they had established noteworthy connexions, for besides members of the family (such as Roger’s elder brother and Elizabeth’s father and uncle, the distinguished soldier and diplomat Sir Robert Shotesbrooke*), the feoffees included the chancellor of England, John Stafford, bishop of Bath and Wells, and the experienced parliamentarian John Golafre*.10 CAD, i. B362-3; E326/11066.

Over the years Roger made further acquisitions of property on his own account, independently of his father but continuing the latter’s policy of extending the family holdings. In 1437 he acquired a sizable estate on the Berkshire Downs at ‘Chipping’ Lambourn, Upper Lambourn and Bockhampton, which provided grazing for 2,000 sheep besides 60 oxen, 60 hogs and 20 horses; and three years later he bought the manor of Weston by Welford, which he was later to exchange with Abingdon abbey for a burgage and yet more land at Lambourn.11 CCR, 1435-41, pp. 119, 129; VCH Berks. iv. 255; CP25(1)/13/83/21; 84/6; CPR, 1441-6, p. 358; E326/7483. Another important purchase was the manor of Freefolk in Hampshire, which he obtained from Henry Somer*, the former Exchequer official, in 1441,12 VCH Hants, iv. 283. and he bought from Reynold West, Lord de la Warre, that of Church Speen (adjoining Benham Valence) early in 1445, for the payment of 300 marks in instalments to be completed two years later.13 CPR, 1441-6, p. 331; E326/5754, 8405, 11291-2; CAD, i. B1094; CCR, 1441-7, p. 288. Associated in this transaction was Thomas Hardegrave*, with whom Roger acquired in 1446 the reversion of the manor of Leckhampstead to fall in after the death of Joan, widow of William Danvers I*, only for them to convey it later to the dowager duchess of Suffolk.14 Harl. Chs. 54 I 16, 55 D 45; Cott. Ch. xxix 19. His earlier dealings with Joan Danvers over a lease of her manor of Stainswick led eventually to a suit in the c.p. in 1453 in which he claimed damages of £200: CP40/770, rot. 406. He made an enfeoffment to his own use of his manor in Lambourn in July 1450, but later settled a life-interest of the same on John Colynggrugge†, the lawyer, perhaps as a reward for services rendered.15 CIPM Hen. VII, ii. 318.

Under the terms of his marriage contract, Roger and his wife should also have inherited the manors of Pibworth in Aldworth, Berkshire, and Broad Blunsdon and Stratton St. Margaret, in Wiltshire after the death of her father. In 1443 Roger joined his father-in-law as the sole commissioners appointed by the Crown to investigate wastes at Stratton, but when John Shotesbrooke died (at an unknown date within the next five years), his brother Sir Robert Shotesbrooke claimed that these estates had been settled in tail-male by his great-grandfather, and therefore now belonged to him rather than his niece.16 CP40/748, rot. 126d. The Rogers disagreed, and settled the two Wiltshire manors on their daughter, Margaret, when she was betrothed to Thomas Langford, the son and heir of Edward Langford*, their Berkshire neighbour. By transactions sealed in March 1450 and June 1451 Roger arranged that the groom’s father should hold the manors for 11 years, after which they were to pass to the young couple (presumably when they came of age), and Edward promised that after the same period had elapsed they should also take possession of his manor of Langford in Devon.17 CP25(1)/293/72/361; CPR, 1441-6, p. 201; CIPM Hen. VII, i. 934, 1004; iii. 707 (where the date of the settlement is incorrectly given as 9 Hen. VI instead of 29 Hen. VI).

Of perhaps greater importance was a double match Roger arranged with the wealthy (Sir) John Lisle II*, whereby Lisle’s son and heir, Nicholas, was married to another of Roger’s daughters, and Nicholas’s sister Margery to Roger’s younger son, John Roger II. The Hampshire manor of Freefolk was settled on young John and his bride in reversion after our MP’s death.18 Procs. Hants Field Club, v. 80; CCR, 1454-61, p. 445; Hants RO, Jervoise of Herriard mss, 44M69/C/586, 589, 590. Any material advantages to be derived from marrying his son and heir apparent, Thomas Roger, to a daughter of Thomas Uvedale*, came second in importance to the social ones, for the Uvedales ranked high among the gentry of southern England. Nevertheless, in the long term the marriage was to lead to the acquisition by Roger’s descendants of a number of manors once held by the bride’s maternal grandfather, Thomas Foxley*.19 W.H. Cope, Bramshill, 8; VCH Suss. iv. 171; CIPM Hen. VII, i. 345, 365; iii. 916. In addition to all his other property interests, in the closing years of his life Roger leased a large house in Southampton and the demesne land of the bishop of Winchester at Whitchurch, the latter for a term of 44 years. Finally, in 1456 he purchased from Thomas Winslow I* for 240 marks the manor of ‘Bryans’ near Wantage, worth 14 marks a year.20 Cart. God’s House (Soton. Rec. Ser. xx), 395; HMC Var. iv. 155; CAD, vi. C4551. As all this suggests, Roger ranked among the most affluent esquires of the region. Nevertheless, on three occasions he refused the knighthood warranted by his wealth and standing. No contemporary valuation of his lands has been discovered, but to judge from the estimates given by the jurors at his sons’ inquisitions post mortem they were worth at least £150 p.a.21 C140/39/63; CIPM Hen. VII, i. 117, 339.

In contrast to the copious records about Roger’s dealings in real estate, relatively little is known about his career. In February 1432 he obtained a lease at the Exchequer of the manor of Benham Lovell and lands nearby, and like his older brother (who stood surety for him) his participation in local government began in January 1436: while the elder John was appointed as a commissioner of array in Hampshire, the younger served in Berkshire. John junior had been included among the gentry of that county required to take the oath against maintenance two years earlier. In July 1438 both brothers entered into recognizances with the Dorset lawyer John Stork†, undertaking to pay him £80 in four instalments up to Midsummer 1442. Although this transaction was probably connected with their dealings in property, or the affairs of their father,22 CFR, xvi. 82; CPR, 1429-36, p. 402; CCR, 1435-41, p. 188. it may have had a wider significance, for Stork was a retainer of Richard, duke of York, and it was conceivably through his introduction that John junior himself entered York’s service. On 17 May 1441 he took out letters of protection as about to embark for Normandy in the retinue of the duke, recently appointed lieutenant-general of France. It seems likely that he stayed in York’s company for a year or more,23 DKR, xlviii. 346; E101/53/33. although he was back in England by the spring of 1443. Then appointed a j.p. in Berkshire, he took up office as sheriff two years later. Shortly after the end of his term, on 9 Dec. 1446, he was given the keeping for 40 years of certain lands called Maidencourt, provided that he built at his own expense a small dwelling there. His friend Thomas Hardegrave had relinquished his farm of the same so that he might have it, and now offered securities on his behalf.24 CFR, xviii. 61.

Roger’s standing as a landowner in Berkshire led naturally to his election as a shire knight early in 1449. While attending Parliament he was probably instrumental in obtaining the royal licence, granted on 15 Mar., for an enfeoffment of the de la Mare manor of Aldermanston, whereby he was to be jointly seised with Humphrey, duke of Buckingham, and the latter’s half-brother Thomas Bourgchier, bishop of Ely, among others, but it is unlikely that his links with these two members of the Upper House were ever particularly close.25 CPR, 1446-52, p. 245. Roger attested the indenture recording the Berkshire elections held at Abingdon in 1450. Strong suspicions of malpractice must attach to the returns he himself made at the next elections, held during his second shrievalty on 21 Feb. 1453. Not only did Roger conduct the proceedings at his own place of residence, Lambourn, where the county court had never met for elections before, but he also returned as one of the shire knights his own son and heir, Thomas, no more than 23 years old.26 C219/16/1, 2. Furthermore, in direct contravention of the ordinance forbidding the return of sheriffs, Roger went on to accept election as representative for the neighbouring county of Hampshire. The motives lying behind the Rogers’ determination to have seats in the Commons on this occasion remain a matter for conjecture. John attended the elections held in the shire court at Winchester for the next Parliament, that of 1455, in which his younger son, John II, was to represent the Wiltshire borough of Ludgershall. That Parliament met after the Yorkist victory at St. Albans, and although there is little direct evidence to indicate where Roger’s political sympathies lay he paid rent from his manor of Speen to the duke of York and at an unknown date the duke appointed him steward of two of his lordships. Furthermore, Roger’s experience of war in France as a member of York’s retinue may well have predisposed him to favour the policies advocated in Parliament by the new regime.27 E326/8393; CPR, 1452-61, p. 588.

That regime lost power in the autumn of 1456, and although Roger was named on ad hoc commissions by the Lancastrian government in the course of the next two years, after February 1459 such appointments ceased. It looks very likely that he took up arms for York and his Neville allies that autumn, fighting either at Blore Heath on 23 Sept., or at Ludford in October. A chronicler recorded his name among those of York’s affinity who were attainted in the Parliament which met at Coventry on 20 Nov., but he was not listed in the official Act of Attainder as recorded on the roll of the Parliament, or among those to whom the King granted mercy.28 Roger was one of just four men listed by the chronicler but not mentioned in the roll: English Chron. 1377-1461 ed. Marx, 81; PROME, xii. 453-64. Probably his name was on a draft bill of attainder which was subsequently amended: cf. discussion of Parl. of 1461 in S.J. Payling, ‘Edw. IV and the Politics of Conciliation’, in The Yorkist Age ed. Kleineke and Steer, 81-94. What is certain is that he was removed from the Berkshire bench and lost his office as steward of York’s Hampshire lordships when an Act made void the duke’s letters patent of appointment. That he became a fugitive from the law and was anxious to protect his family’s interests from forfeiture is strongly suggested by the legal arrangements he put in place on 1 Jan. 1460. By these he transferred to his younger son possession of his estate in the manor of Freefolk, together with his house in Fishmarket Street, Southampton (already promised to him in reversion), and all his moveable goods in Hampshire.29 CCR, 1454-61, p. 445; Jervoise of Herriard mss, 592. Yet despite this attempt to secure his property, the house in Southampton was taken over by John Audley, his sister-in-law’s husband, whose father, James, Lord Audley, had been killed by the Yorkists at Blore Heath.30 Cart. God’s House, 395.

It looks as if Roger met with a violent end, perhaps in captivity, for it was later reported that ‘a yeoman of the crown of Henry VI’ was ‘slayne at Lambourne in Barkshire about the takyng of John Rogers’.31 Tropenell Cart. ed. Davies, i. 295. He died bef. 15 Sept. when a writ de diem was issued from Chancery (CFR, xix. 282), but no inq. post mortem has survived. In June 1460 the treasurer, James Butler, earl of Wiltshire, and his fellow commissioners of oyer and terminer went to Newbury, ‘the whyche longed to the duke of York’, conducted trials of those alleged to have shown friendship to the duke and his allies and executed many of those found guilty. Roger’s son and heir Thomas was imprisoned in Wallingford castle gaol, along with several men from his father’s territory at Lambourn, Freefolk and Speen. He, as an esquire, was the most important of the prisoners, though with him were seven gentlemen, 17 yeomen, and 43 others (mainly artisans). They were not freed until two months after the Yorkist victory at Northampton in July. Thomas was returned for Berkshire to the Parliament summoned for 7 Oct., which annulled the acts of its predecessor and debated the claim of the duke of York to be King. Towards its close he obtained a formal pardon for all gifts, alienations, purchases of lands held in chief and all intrusions and entries into his inheritance without due suit of livery.32 CPR, 1452-61, pp. 643, 648-9;

In 1452 John Roger had been associated with (Sir) Edmund Hampden* and others in purchasing a licence to grant in mortmain to Abingdon abbey certain lands in Sugworth and elsewhere, but his principal concern as a benefactor was the endowment of five almshouses at Lambourn, and provision for the priest attendant upon them. He left the five almsmen 8d. per week each, and the priest a stipend and every third year three yards of Bruton russet cloth for his robes, and by his will (which has not survived) he apparently designated the profits of certain properties in the locality for this purpose, in return for prayers for his soul. The almshouses remained in the hands of his feoffees (headed by Thomas Lisieux, the dean of St. Paul’s, with whom he had long been associated), until 1469, when they passed to his heir.33 CPR, 1446-52, p. 549; J. Footman, Hist. Church Chipping Lambourn, 62-63, 84. Roger was buried in the parish church of St. Michael in Lambourn, in the chapel dedicated to St. Katherine.34 His yr. s. John asked to be interred next to him: PCC 24 Logge (PROB11/7, f. 181).