Previously, I believed that the parents of 1050811Joan ___ were 2101622Thomas de Dene and 2101623Martha de Shelving. However, researcher Pete Andrews called my attention to 2101622Thomas' inquisitions post mortem, which I had overlooked. 2101622Thomas' two IPM's strongly suggest that he is not 1050811Joan's father (since the IPM explicitly notes 2101622Thomas' daughter Joan as deceased in early childhood, among other incongruences). Nevertheless, because 1050811Joan certainly seems to be related to 2101622Thomas in some manner, and because my older work could prove useful for future research, I've isolated the profile pages that I'd written for 1050811Joan's formerly proposed ancestors into a separate section of my website, starting from the old version of Joan's page onward. You can see a list of those ancestors or a family tree of them.

Key Facts

Snapshot:	sheriff of Kent; fought for England during its conquest of Wales
Parents:	33625960Robert de Manekesye/Gatton 33625961Isabel de Gatton
Born:	by circa 1242 location unknown
Died:	2 July 1292 location unknown
Buried:	unknown

16812980Hamo de Gatton is the son of 33625960Robert de Manekesye/Gatton, and was born by circa 1242 (On 14 July 1264, 16812980Hamo was described as age 22 and more).1 His mother was 33625961Isabel de Gatton, as explained below.

Problem: Resolved Who is 16812980Hamo's mother? On 30 November 1234, 33625960Robert de Manckes was granted properties at Catteshall and Artington (in Surrey) by Thomas de Bavelinham and his wife 67251923Mabel.2 This came after a legal dispute in which they (67251923Mabilia de Gattona and Thomas de Rauelingham) were opposed by 67251923Mabel's son, Hamonis de Gattona. During the dispute, Thomas and 67251923Mabel described the pending transfer to 33625960Roberto de Manekeseya as ad exheredacionem ipsius Mabilie, i.e. as an inheritance from Mabel.3 Notice that 33625960Robert isn't described as a son, just an heir. This implies that they're related in some other manner, e.g. as in-laws. In Henry Elliot Malden's The Victoria History of the County of Surrey, Volume III, page 32, footnote 85, we read: Assize R. 80, m. 3 d. Robert de Manekesey married Mabel's daughter Isabel As best I can tell, this refers to JUST 1/80, m. 3d, which you can see at these two URL's: http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/JUST1no80/bJUST1no80dorses/IMG_0305.htm http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/JUST1no80/bJUST1no80dorses/IMG_0306.htm For reference, you can see 3f here: http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/JUST1no80/aJUST1no80fronts/IMG_0257.htm I was unable to find the entry that Malden cites, but the text is admittedly difficult to read. Similarly, in Archaeologia Cantiana, Volume V, page 222 insert we see: Quo War. Roll, Surr. 25 H. III rot. 1 dors. [...] [33625960Robert de Mankesey] held [property at Cateshull and Ertindon], 1241, as given to him "in maritagium cum Isabella filia eorum." I think (but am not sure) this refers to JUST 1/867, m. 1d, which you can see at these two URL's: http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/JUST1no867/bJUST1no867dorses/IMG_8866.htm http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/JUST1no867/bJUST1no867dorses/IMG_8867.htm For reference, you can see 1f here: http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/JUST1/JUST1no867/aJUST1no867fronts/IMG_8820.htm Again, I was unable to find the entry in question, but the text is exceedingly difficult to read. Despite my inability to find the original sources cited, both the Victoria County History and Archaeologia Cantiana are generally very reliable, so I'm confident that the evidence exists (somewhere...) and that 33625960Robert truly did marry 33625961Isabel as described. Since 33625960Robert and 33625961Isabel must have married by 1234,2 since 16812980Hamo was born probably not long thereafter (by circa 12421), and since 16812980Hamo later owned the same two properties4 (at Catteshall and Artington) that 67251923Mabel had granted to her son-in-law 33625960Robert in 1234,2 it seems very likely that 16812980Hamo's mother is 33625961Isabel de Gatton.

A 1271 fine mentions 16812980Hamo and his wife Joh͡a, i.e. Johanna.5 (For another record that might refer to her, see here.)

This 1271 fine is the only reliable record I've found that mentions 16812980Hamo's wife Johanna. Full page.5

A 1274 hundred roll mentions 16812980Hamo's properties in Gatton in Surrey; and Boughton Malherbe, Throwley, and Wormshill in Kent.6

A record dated 8 November 1278 shows that someone had trespassed on his land in Surrey and poached deer.7

16812980Hamo filled several law enforcement roles: On 12 March 1279 he was given a commission to report of the progress of Kent's sheriff in distraining large landowners who were not knights.8 The following 26 November he was commissioned to make an inquisition of some kind in Kent.9 In 1285 he served as the Sheriff of Kent.10

In 1277 and again in 1282, he was ordered to muster for expeditions during England's conquest of Wales.11

16812980Hamo died on 2 July 1292.* His inquisitions post mortem mention his many properties, all of which have already been mentioned above except for one additional manor in Pirbright, Surrey.4

Footnotes:

*

One of 16812980Hamo's inquisitions post mortem states that he died on Wednesday next before the Translation of St. Thomas the Martyr, 20 Edward I.1 The Translation of St. Thomas the Martyr is on July 7th, which in the year 1292 (i.e., 20 Edward I) was on a Monday. The preceding Wednesday was July 2nd.

Sources Cited:

1: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem [...]: Volume 1, Henry III (London, 1904), page 182

2: Calendar of the Charter Rolls [...]: Volume 1, Henry III, A.D. 1226-1257 (London, 1903), page 188

3: F. W. Maitland, ed., Bracton's Note book: A Collection of Cases Decided in the King's Courts during the Reign of Henry the Third, Volume III (London, 1887), pages 186-188

4: Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem [...]: Volume 3, Edward I (London, 1912), page 14

5: UK National Archives reference C 60/68, membrane 4, an entry for Hamo de Gatton and his wife Joan. I downloaded an image of the relevant entry from the Henry III Fine Rolls Project at <https://finerollshenry3.org.uk/content/fimages/C60_68/m04.html> on 18 August 2022. The Project's description of the relevant entry reads, "[No date]. Kent. Hamo of Gatton and Joan his wife give half a mark for having a writ ad terminum. Order to the sheriff of Kent." There's a transcription of the original Latin in: Caroli Roberts, ed., Excerpta è Rotulis Finium in Turri Londinensi Asservatis, Henrico Tertio Rege, A. D. 1216-1272, Volume II, page 547.

6: Rotuli Hundredorum: Volume I (1812), page 208, right column, about halfway down the page. 16812980Hamo is also mentioned on pages 210 (right column, about 2/5 down the page) and 223 (left column, in a paragraph that begins "It̄ d͞nt qd͞  Hugo de Girund").

7: Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward I, A.D. 1272-1281 (London, 1901), page 294

8: Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward I, A.D. 1272-1281 (London, 1901), page 343

9: Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward I, A.D. 1272-1281 (London, 1901), page 406

10: Edward Hasted, The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent, Volume I, 2nd edition, page 183

11: The Parliamentary Writs and Writs of Military Summons, page 628