Talk:Thomas Cobham, 5th Baron Cobham

Thomas Cobham, 5th Baron Cobham of Sterborough

 * Daryll Lundy's page is based on the book by George Edward Cokayne, he cites his source, and is quoted above. I think we should go with Cokayne on this one but with the name "V. Thomas de Cobham" instead of "V. Reynold de Cobham". For my reasoning in the box below this:

Looking at the A genealogical history of the dormant, abeyant, forfeited, and extinct ... by Sir Bernard Burke (pp. 124,125).

COBHAM—BARONS COBHAM OF KENT. By Writ of Summons, dated 8 January, 1313.
 * Henry De Cobbeham gave to that monarch 1,000 marks for his royal favour. This Henry had three sons, viz.,
 * Jobn De Cobbeham, the eldest son, executed in the 26th Henry III
 * John, his successor.
 * other sons and
 * Reginald, from whom the Cobhams of Sterborough sprang (see below).
 * John de Cobbehama baron of the exchequer, in the reigns of Henry III. and Edward I.
 * Henry De Cobbam, being then styled Henry de Cobham, jun. (his uncle Henry, of Bundell, then living), he was in an expedition into Scotland; and, in four years afterwards, he was constituted constable of Dover Castle and warden of the Cinque Ports. In the 10th of the same reign he was again in the wars of Scotland, and in the 15th he was made governor of the castle of Tonebrugge. He had been summoned to parliament as a Baron on 8 January, 1313, and in continuation for the remainder of his life.
 * John de Cobham, 2nd Baron Cobham, summoned to parliament from 12 September, 1342, to 20 November, 1360. This nobleman, who had been made admiral of the king's fleet .. In the 28th of the same monarch he was made a banneret.
 * John de Cobham. (3rd Baron?) was summoned to parliament from 24 February, 1368, to 9 February, 1406. In ... Richard II.'s reign being impeached, received  a pardon, but was sent prisoner to the Isle of Jersey. Lord Cobham married Margaret, daughter of Hugh Courtcnay, Earl of Devon, and had a daughter Joan (1) who had a daughter Joan(2) who had a daughter Joan (3).
 * Joan (2) married 1st, Sir Robert Hemengdale, but had no surviving issue. 2ndlyl Sir Reginald Braybroke, by whom she had one surviving daughter (Joan (3)) 3rdly, Sir Nicholas Hawberke, but had no surviving issue; fourthly, Sir John Oldcastle; and 5thly, Sir John Harpenden.
 * Joane (3), m. to Sir Thomas Brooke, Knt. (see Brooke, Lord Cobham).
 * John de Cobham. (3rd Baron?) (d. 1409), leaving his above-mentioned granddaughter Joan(2), then Lady Hawberke, his sole heiress, who marrying subsequently Sir John Oldcastle,  that gentleman was summoned to parliament, jure uxoris, as Baron Cobham, from 26 October 1409, to 22 March, 1413. ...  Joane(3), by the heiress of Cobham, who d. young, and the Barony Of Cobham appears to have remained Dormant from the period of his execution, until revived in the person of John Brooke, great-grandson of the above-mentioned Joane de la Pole, in 1445.

I don't see a Thomas de Cobham in there.

page 125,126 also has:

COBHAM—BARONS COBHAM, OF STERBOROUGH, CO. KENT. By Writ of Summons, dated 25 February, 1342.
 * Reginald de Cobham, of Sterborough, sprung from the 2nd marriage of John de Cobham, of Cobham, with Joane, dau. of Hugh de Nevill, had a chief command in the English army at Creasy and Poicticrs, and was summoned to parliament from Reginald De Cobham, summoned to parliament 44th and 4Gth Edward III.
 * Reginald de Cobham, summoned to parliament 44th and 4Gth Edward III.
 * Reginald De Cobham, who m. 1st, Eleanore, dau. of Thomas Culpepper, and 2ndly, Anne, dau. and co-heir of Thomas, Lord Bardolf, and widow of Sir William Clifford. His issue were
 * I. Reginald, who d. v. p., leaving an only dau. Margaret, who was 2nd wife of Ralph Neville, 2nd Earl of Westmorland of that name.
 * II. Thomas (Sir), m. Anne, dau. of Humphrey Stafford, 1st Duke of Buckingham, and had an only dau. Anne, who m. Edward Borough, or Burgh, whose son Thomas was afterwards created Baron Borough or Burgh, by Henry VIII.
 * I. Elizabeth, m. to Richard, Lord Strange, of Knocking.
 * II. Margaret, m. to Reginald Curteys.
 * III Alianore, m. to Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, iv. Anne, a nun at Berking.

Son ii must be the man in your sandbox but Berke does not state he was a baron nor does he state that his nice Margret was. (BTW I also see that a sockpuppet of user:G.-M. Cupertino has been busy in the articles Ralph Neville, 2nd Earl of Westmorland and Baron Borough in the same sort of way).

Cokayne pp. 353,55: COBHAM (of Sterborough)

[After (1372) 46 Edw. III no writ of summons was issued to any members of the family. Presuming the writ of 1347 to have established an hereditary dignit, those that would have been entitled thereto are as under.]
 * I. Reynold de Cobham, of Sterborough, C') in Lingfield, Surrey, s. and h. of Sir Reynold de C, of Orkesden and Eynesford, Kent, by Joan, da. and h. (or coh.) of William d'Evere, was b. about 1295; was distinguished  (1327-60) in nearly all the battles in France and Flanders; Knight Banneret 1339.
 * II. 1361. 2. Reynold (de Cobham), Lord Cobham, only s. and h., b. 1348, being aged 13 at his father's death,
 * III. 1403. 3. Sir Reynold de CoBHAM, of Sterborough Castle, apparently, according to modern doctrine. Lord CoBHAM, but who was never so styled, 2nd('') but 1st surv. s. and h. by 2nd wife. He was b. 1381 ...
 * IV. 1446. 4. Margaret, Countess of Westmorland, and apparently, according to modern doctrine, Baroness Cobham, granddaughter and h., being da. and h. of Sir Reynold de Cobham
 * V. 1460? 5. Sir Reynold de Cobham, of Sterborough Castle, apparently, according to modern doctrine. Lord Cobham, but never so styled, uncle and h., being 2nd but 1st surv. s. and h. of Sir Reynold de C, by his ist wife, Eleanor
 * VI. 1471. 6. Anne Cobham, apparently, according to modern doctrine. Baroness Cobham, only da. and h. She w., when very young, between 18 June and i Dec. 1475, Edward (Blount), 2nd Baron Mountjoy, who d. s.p., aged 8, and was bur. i Dec. 1475, at the Grey Friars, London. She m. 2ndly, in 1477, Edward (Burgh or Borough), Lord Burgh, and d. 26 June 1526. He became "distracted of memorie," and d. 20 Aug. 1528. See "Burgh," Barony by writ, cr. 1487, with which dignity any supposed right to this Barony of Cobham became, on the death of this lady, united.

I think I have found the discrepancy. The entry for "Margaret, Countess of Westmorland" says "when the family estates were settled (by her grandfather) on her and her issue, with rem. to her uncle, Sir Thomas de Cobham." and then the V. one says "He suc. to the family estates on the death, s.p., of his niece abovenamed" So it is a mistake by Cokayne the V entry should read
 * V. 1460? 5. Sir Reynold Thomas de Cobham, of Sterborough Castle,...

--PBS (talk) 01:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC) (From User talk:Lady Meg) -- Lady Meg (talk) 02:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The text comes in several formats, one easy to read is page 355 the other is in plain OCR text:

As I explained above, I think that REYNOLD should be struck out and replaced with THOMAS.

But this leave one question, should an article on this man who is not known in many older sources as 5th Baron Cobham be under the "5th Baron Cobham"? -- PBS (talk) 10:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

--PBS (talk) 10:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I must agree with the substitution of Thomas. Without further evidence, it would not be clear which place in CP was wrong, but ODNB agrees (and does not call any of the last four Lord or Lady Cobham). Your extract from Cockayne omits that the second Lord Cobham and his wife were cousins (I forget if there is a footnote); after the birth of their son, they got an annulment and remarried; the son had to sue for his inheritance.  Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:03, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It states on page 355 that "After 1372, No writ of summons was issued to any members of the family. Presuming the writ of 1347 to have established a hereditary dignity, those that would have been entitled thereto are listed under" -- and it continues with the 3rd Lord Cobham, I'm assuming as de jure and according to modern doctrine, as he was never accordingly styled. The 3rd Lord Cobham was the father of Thomas and Reginald. Also, Margaret was not Countess of Westmorland in her own right. I see now where in Margaret's entry, they mention her uncle Sir Thomas Cobham. Perhaps it was a typo on Cockayne's part because I don't understand how Margaret's father Reginald would succeed her and from the other sources listed, there is no other Reginald in the family -- the 2nd son was Sir Thomas. Then in the V. Baron -- it says 'succeeded to the family estates on the death, s.p., of his niece abovenamed.' What a mess this has been sorting this all out. Also, in the notes (b) for Margaret it says 'inq p.m. Sir Thomas de Cobham, 2 Edw. IV' -- which means? -- Lady Meg (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I asked this on my talk page I think -- since the Baron Willoughby de Broke page lists every de jure Baron -- should we list these on the main Baron Cobham page? The barony does pass to the Burgh family after Anne.. what do you think.. too redundant? -- Lady Meg (talk) 07:13, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Corrections of The Complete Peerage
See Baron Cobham of Sterborough Corrections -- Lady Meg (talk) 03:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)