BOTELER, Thomas

Boteler’s origins are obscure. He owed his early advancement to his apprenticeship under William Askham†, during Henry IV’s reign one of the most prominent fishmongers in the city of London. He was probably still serving his apprenticeship in November 1413 when Askham made his will (bequeathing to Boteler the substantial sum of £60). Furthermore, Boteler, who was named his late master’s principal executor, was assigned Askham’s great tenement in Thames Street, just above London Bridge. In 1432, Boteler sold this property for 800 marks to John Cornwall, Lord Fanhope, and the Fishmongers’ Company, on which the remainder after Fanhope’s death was settled. The Fishmongers later built their hall on the site.6 W. Herbert, Gt. Livery Companies of London, ii. 55-63; hr 162/71; C1/9/281-2, 11/527.

By 1423, Boteler had gained admission to the livery, and that September he was appointed as one of the four auditors of the City. A month later, he was chosen one of the two representatives of the commoners of the city to attend the Parliament summoned to meet at Westminster on 20 Oct.7 Cal. Letter Bk. London, K, 12. Sharpe erroneously states that he was also elected to the 1422 Parliament: ibid. I, 270. This, however, was to be the extent of his career of civic office holding. Although he evidently enjoyed the respect of his neighbours (he was occasionally called upon to arbitrate disputes, witnessed property deeds and in 1424-5 was admitted to the Tailors’ prestigious fraternity of St. John the Baptist which at the time was recruiting important figures from other crafts as ‘honorary’ members), he never rose to an aldermanry, or – as far as is known – the wardenship or mastership of his own mystery.8 Cal. P. and M. London, 1413-37, p. 66; Corp. London RO, jnl. 2, f. 7; CCR, 1422-9, p. 149; Guildhall Lib. London, Merchant Taylors’ Co. accts. 34048/1, f. 152.

The reason for this notable lack of advancement in London was Boteler’s marriage, which caused his departure from civic society. It is probable that Thomas had forged the connexions that brought it about in the Askham household, for his wife, Maud Sackville, the daughter of a Buckinghamshire knight, had previously been the wife of Nicholas Kentwood, member of a family into which both of Askham’s daughters had married. The match was a profitable one, and established Boteler in home county society. At the time of Maud’s first marriage, her father had settled on her and her husband two of his manors, Crafton (in Wing) and Burston (in Aston Abbots), and these she now brought to Boteler.9 CIPM Hen. VII, i. 317. In addition, Maud also had a jointure for life in property in Cholsey in Berkshire, which had come to her from Nicholas Kentwood.10 C1/10/261A-B. The Botelers’ tenure of these estates was subject to repeated challenges: in 1426 one Thomas Chamberleyn, a descendant of the 14th-century lords of Crafton, claimed that the manor was rightfully his property,11 CP40/661, rot. 130d. while the Botelers’ title to their holdings in Cholsey was called into question in Chancery by one Thomas Tanner.12 C1/10/261A-B. It was perhaps in this context that Boteler became guilty of the trespass of which he was being accused by a Roland Tanner bef. 1438: CPR, 1436-41, p. 208.

As the entails that governed Maud Sackville’s property meant that after her death they would revert either to her children by Kentwood or to her Sackville relatives, Boteler set about acquiring holdings that might in time pass to his own offspring. To this intent, he purchased the Buckinghamshire manor of Pitstone and other property at Cheddington and Wingrave in the same county, and Redbourne, Tiscot (in Tring) and Albury in Hertfordshire from one Thomas Palmer.13 CP25(1)/22/127/29; C1/44/31-36.

Boteler now began to play his part in county society: between 1427 and 1433 he was regularly present at the parliamentary elections in the Buckinghamshire county court and set his seal to the sheriff’s indenture. In the disputed election of 1429 he supported the return of John Hampden II* and Andrew Sperlyng*, but no further details of his involvement, if any, in the incident are known.14 C219/13/5, 14/1-4. From time to time he witnessed his new neighbours’ property deeds, although (at least initially) still styling himself a ‘citizen and merchant of London’.15 CCR, 1422-9, p. 312; 1441-7, p. 139; Herts. Archs., Ashridge II mss, AH 730-3. In 1434, now considered to be an esquire, he was included among the Buckinghamshire gentry required to take the general oath against maintenance, and in the aftermath of his acquisition of the Palmer lands his income was sufficient to qualify him to be distrained to take up knighthood in 1439.16 CPR, 1429-36, p. 397. It was at this time that Boteler was drawn into the complex settlement of the affairs of his son-in-law, Thomas Legh of Shelley (Essex), who had died in June. Legh, who held extensive lands in Essex, Kent and Surrey, left an infant son, and had named Boteler along with his daughter as his executors.17 CIPM, xxv. 164-6; CPR, 1446-52, p. 392; CP40/723, rot. 500d. In November, the wardship of the heir and his lands was sold to the Exchequer official Thomas Thorpe* and Thomas Skargill*, a yeoman of the royal chamber. The boy himself was, however, in the custody of his grandfather and an associate, the Staffordshire landowner Thomas Arblaster*, whose son would before long marry the fishmonger’s widowed daughter, and they proved understandably reluctant to part with the boy, and had to be bound over in the sum of £100 to hand him over to Thorpe and Skargill. This they eventually did on 6 Dec. at St. Albans. Just three days later, Arblaster himself secured a royal grant of the wardship and marriage of the young Thomas Legh.18 CFR, xvii. 110-11, 121; E159/216, recogniciones Mich. rot. 1.

Boteler is last heard of in August 1454,19 CP40/818, rot. 340. but died not long after. His will, of which he appointed the London ironmonger William Corbet and others as executors, is not known to have survived, but it seems that it contained provision for the settlement of his lands on his widow Maud for her life, with subsequent remainder to his daughter’s children by the younger Thomas Arblaster. Maud Sackville survived her husband for only a short time. Her Sackville lands now passed to John Kentwood, her grandson by her first marriage, from whom they would eventually descend to her cousin Thomas Rokes†. Over the Boteler property a disagreement broke out between the Arblasters and Boteler’s feoffees. In November 1460 the Arblasters secured livery of Pitstone, but court proceedings dragged on for several more years before a verdict in favour of Boteler’s daughter and her husband was eventually issued in October 1468.20 C1/26/247A-D, 552, 44/31-36; CCR, 1454-61, p. 479; CIPM Hen. VII, i. 317. To complicate matters, there was another Thomas Boteler, also associated with the Arblasters, who lived at that family’s seat of Longdon, Staffs.: Birmingham Archs., Duke mss, 3415/217-19. The identity of Alice Arblaster’s father is evident from CP25(1)/22/127/29 which styles him ‘late citizen of London’.