9*8. VII. MAY 25, 1901.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
403
Mowbray, elder daughter of the first Duke of
Norfolk, and William Berkeley, the son of
James, Baron Berkeley, and Isabel Mowbray,
the younger daughter of the same nobleman.
Each of these ladies therefore became en-
titled in 1483 to one-sixth of the Sanford
manors. Sir Robert Gowshill, of Havering-
ham, Notts, and Elizabeth Fitzalan, had left
a daughter and heiress, Johanna, who married
Thomas, Lord Stanley; and his son Thomas,
first Earl of Derby, became also entitled to
a sixth share of the manors. Sir Rowland
Lenthall's descendants had apparently lapsed
with his son Edmund, who died without
issue, and the Lenthall share was therefore
divisible among the other coheirs. The
remaining third of the manors was inherited
by Elizabeth Beauchamp, daughter and
heiress of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Wor-
cester (killed in 1422), the son of William
Beauchamp, Lord of Bergavenny, and Joan
Fitzalan. Elizabeth Beauchamp married
Edward Nevill, who was summoned to Par-
liament as Lord of Bergavenny, and died in
1476. He was succeeded by his son George,
from whom the present Marquis of Aber-
gavenny is descended. To resume. When
the Tudors ascended the throne one-third of
the manor of Tyburn belonged to George
Nevill, Lord Bergavenny; one-sixth to John
Howard, Duke of Norfolk; one-sixth to
William, Marquis Berkeley; and one-sixth
to Thomas Stanley, Earl of Derby. I have
traced the descent of this manor at some
length, because, so far as I am aware, it has
never been done before, and certainly not
by Lysons.*
It is a little difficult to say how the present manor of Marylebone was formed. I have an impression that originally only that portion of the manor of Tyburn which fell to the share of the Mowbrays was so named, for in the Inquisition p.m. of John, third Duke of Norfolk (1 Edward IV., 1461), he and his wife Alianora, who was daughter of William, Baron Bourchier, and grand- daughter of Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, are said to have been seised of the manor of Tyborne al's Marybone. This is the earliest mention of Marylebone that I have been able to trace. Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells, who was high in favour with Edward IV., but who took the
- With reference to the Inquisition p.m. of
William Essex, 20 Edward IV., 1480, 1 think MR. RUTTON will find on inspection that while Essex held the manor of " Westowne in MiddV he was in possession of lands only in "Kynsyngton, Bromp- ton, Chelcheth, Tyburne, and Westburne." He did not own those manors (see ante, p. 311).
wrong side in the time of that monarch's
successor, and was imprisoned in consequence
by Henry VII., seems to have acquired the
manor from the Berkeleys. This was trans-
ferred by his nephew 'and heir, Thomas
"Manor of Marybourne," which seems to
have included premises in Tyburn, Lileston,
Westbourn. Charing, and Eye. Sir Reginald
Bray sold the manor to Thomas Hobson,
gent., who also acquired in 1503 the shares
of Lord Bergavenny, the Earl of Derby, and
the Earl of Surrey (the dukedom of Norfolk
being then under attainder), and thus became
possessed of the whole of the old manor of
Tyburn. It remained in the hands of the
Hobson family until 1544, when it was ex-
changed with King Henry VIII. for some
other lands. It is unnecessary to pursue the
history of the manor further, but it may be
as well to state that there is no evidence
that the boundaries of the manor granted
by King James I. in 1611 to Edward Forset
corresponded in every particular with the
boundaries of the old manor of Tyburn We
know, for instance, that the space which
had been formed into. Marybone Park was
excluded, and it is possible that the lands
situated in Paddington which were included
in the manor were among those granted to
the See of London by Edward VI. in 1551.
It is generally considered that the site of the old church of Tyburn, which in the ' Taxatio Ecclesiastica ' of Pope Nicholas IV., circa 1291, was valued at 61. annually, was on or near the present court-house in Mary- lebone Lane, the only ground for this opinion being a statement by Maitland that a number of human bones were dug up while the founda- tions of the old court-house were being pre- pared in 1727. Some more bones seem to have been discovered when the present court-house was being built in 1822, and this is sufficient for Thomas Smith to declare that the old cemetery, which hypo- thetically adjoined the church, must have occupied this site (* Account of Marylebone,' p. 60). A writer in the City Press has recently pointed out that it is very difficult to excavate anywhere in London without finding human bones, and the presence of bones in Marylebone goes a very little way to prove the existence of a church. Applying the test of common sense to the (jueshon, we find that Oxford Street was anciently called Tyburn Road; that Park Lane was called Tyburn Lane; that Tyburn turnpike stood at the southern end of the Edgware Road; that
