Roger was born about 1280 in England, the son of Hugh Hotchkiss but his mother is unknown.
His wife is not known. They were married, but the date and place have not been found. Their only known child was John (c1307-?).
| || |
| || || |
| || |
Screen Shot ...
Screen Shot ...
Screen Shot ...
!StyleName Roger Hochkys [Hotchkiss].
!Note: Hotchkiss used as a surname. Previous uses so far were as some variant of de Hokswod.
!Note: Apparent Hawkeswood line.
CP 25/1/194/11, number 5.
Link: Image of document at AALT http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT4/CP25%281%29/CP_25_1_194/IMG_0007.htm
Date: One week from St. Michael, 2 Edward III [6 October 1328].
Parties: Hugh, son of Warin de Neenton, and Joan, his wife, querents, by William Milsent, put in the place of Joan, and Thomas, the parson of the church of Neenton', deforciant.
Property: 2 messuages, 1 virgate and 3 nooks of land and a fourth part of 1 messuage in Neenton'.
Action: Plea of covenant.
Agreement: Hugh has acknowledged the tenements to be the right of Thomas, as those which Thomas has of his gift.
For this: Thomas has granted to Hugh and Joan the tenements and has rendered them to them in the court, to hold to Hugh and Joan and the heirs of their bodies, of the chief lords for ever. In default of such heirs, successive remainders  to Alice, daughter of the same Hugh, and the heirs of her body,  to John, son of Philip le Taillour, and the male heirs of his body,  to Richard, son of Walter le Taillour, and the male heirs of his body and  >>> to John, son of Roger Hawys, and his heirs. <<<
Standardised forms of names. [These are tentative suggestions, intended only as a finding aid.]
Persons: Warin de Neenton, Hugh de Neenton, Joan de Neenton, William Millicent, Thomas, Alice de Neenton, Philip le Taylor, John le Taylor, Walter le Taylor, Richard le Taylor, Roger Hawes, John Hawes
Note: from image although partially in Latin, this actually reads:
>>> John fil Rogi Hochkys & his heirs. <<<
It does not say Hawys. What was read as a W is actually CHK.
John would be the 4th choice if Hugh and Joan had no living heirs of their body. These are usually related in other ways, like brothers, cousins, etc.
This means that Roger is likely to be a brother to Hugh or Joan. He could be their son, but this Hugh’s father was Warin de Neenton,rather than John. That would leave things like son-in-law or nephew.
Note: There was a princess descended from the Welsh Powys who had Hawys [How wise] for a first name. She was having children in 1355. It later became a surname, but not related to Hotchkiss.
!Source: http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/fines/FinesArticle.pdf A Short Introduction to Feet of Fines by Chris Phillips
Definition of Successive Remainders
For example, in a marriage settlement the property may be
granted to the couple for their lives, and then to the heirs of their bodies. Obviously the agreement also
has to provide for the possibility of the failure of such heirs, and the more elaborate examples can
involve strings of a dozen or more successive 'remainders', in which sequences of brothers, sisters and
other relations may be named.
Note: This is the best defintion of this legal term I could find.
Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society.Established 1877. 3rd Series, Volume VI., 1906.
THE SHROPSHIRE LAY SUBSIDY ROLL OF 1327.
SIDBURY.—This manor was south of some more important places, and
Middleton lay between. Possibly the Manor of Chetton gave it its name, or it
may have been the “bury” south of the castle of Aethelfleda, the Lady of
Merca. In 1086 it was held by Ralph de Mortimer under-Earl Roger as one
hide. There were two ox-teams in demesne, and six serfs, six villeins, and three
bordars with two teams, and there was land for two teams more. Under Wiga,
a franklin, its Saxon lord, it had been worth 20s. annually, afterwards it was
waste, but in Io86 was worth 18s. A Sir Hugh de Sudberi occurs in 1200, who
probably took his name from Sidbury. In 1203 he accused Robert de Girros,
the then lord of Burwarton, of unjustly seizing his hounds, but withdrew the
cause. Before 1240 Sidbury became the property of Ralph d’Arraz, who in
1255 held it as a hide and half of land. He also held Neenton as half a hide.
Sir Ralph constantly cccurs on matters of business connected with the county
till about 1279. In 1292 it was probably a second Ralph who appears a juror,
and who was summoned to attend at Lcndon on July 7, 1297, with horse and
arms for foreign service. In 1316, Ralph d’Arraz is given as lord of Sidbury,
but Neenton is not mentioned. In 1321, Adam d’Arraz was patron of the
Church of Neenton, and he appears among the followers of Roger Mortimer that
year. He was living in 1348, when he and his wife Andrea occur. Robert
d'Arraz occurs in connection with Sidbury and Neenton in 1424, but the lurslow
family are said to have been seated at Sidbury at the close of the 14th century,
and they held the estate till the middle of the 17th century, when it passed by
marriage to the Cresswells.
-The Manor of Neenton was held in 1453 by John, Earl of Shrewsbury, and
later by one of the Hill family.
-Hugh, son of Warin, occurs in a deed of 1328 relating to lands at Neenton.
Gregory and William de Hokeswode took their name from a place near
Stottesden. In 1303, Hugh de Mou of Hokowood had a grant of land at
Chorley bounded by the mill of Sidbury, and the lands of Baldwin and John de
Baskerville and others.]
s d s d
Adam de Arraz ... ij |Ph'o le Tayllour ... X
Gregor de |Ric'o fil’ Joh'is ... X
Hokeswode - - - xij | | Will'O de
Nich'o atte Grene ... ix |S'bt' | Hokeswode X
Will'O fil’ Henr” ... xij| ib'd'm |Hug' fil’
Regin fil' Alani ... xiij| |Warini ... viij
Henr’ Wyllies - - - vij
Will'o Mylsand ... xij | pb Sma xijs j"
Rob'to Hobalt ... X -
Joh’o Shakel • * * viij
Note: These Warins must be descenants of Hugh son of Warin who was High Sheriff in 1102.
High Sheriff of Shropshire - Wikipedia
Warin the Bald
c. 1086 Rainald De Balliol, De Knightley [1040–1086]
1102 Hugh [son of Warin]
The Patent Rolls [Latin: Rotuli litterarum patentium] are a series of administrative records compiled in the English, British and United Kingdom Chancery, running from 1201 to the present day….
The patent rolls comprise a register of the letters patent issued by the Crown, and sealed "open" with the Great Seal pendent, expressing the sovereign's will on a wide range of matters of public interest, including – but not restricted to – grants of official positions, lands, commissions, privileges and pardons, issued both to individuals and to corporations. The rolls were started in the reign of King John, under the Chancellorship of Hubert Walter. The texts of letters patent were copied onto sheets of parchment, which were stitched together [head-to-tail] into long rolls to form a roll for each year. As the volume of business grew, it became necessary to compile more than one roll for each year.
In English law, the assize of mort d'ancestor [“death of ancestor”] was an action brought where a plaintiff claimed the defendant had entered upon a freehold belonging to the plaintiff following the death of one of his relatives. The questions submitted to the jury were, "was A seised in his demesne as of fee on the day whereon he died?" and "Is the plaintiff his next heir?" This assize enabled the heir to obtain possession, even though some other person might have a better right to the land than the deceased.
Seisin [or seizin] denotes the legal possession of a feudal fiefdom or fee, that is to say an estate in land. It was used in the form of "the son and heir of X has obtained seisin of his inheritance", and thus is effectively a term concerned with conveyancing in the feudal era. The person holding such estate is said to be "seized of it", a phrase which commonly appears in inquisitions post mortem [i.e. "The jurors find that X died seized of the manor of …”]. The monarch alone "owned" all the land of England by his allodial right and all his subjects were merely his tenants under various contracts of feudal tenure.
In the feudal system, the demesne [/dɪˈmeɪn/ di-MAYN] was all the land which was retained by a lord of the manor for his own use and support, under his own management, as distinguished from land sub-enfeoffed by him to others as sub-tenants. In England, royal demesne is the land held by the Crown, and ancient demesne is the legal term for the land held by the king at the time of the Domesday Book.
!Source: Fitz - Wikipedia
Fitz [pronounced "fits”] is a prefix in patronymic surnames of Norman origin, that is to say originating in the 11th century. The word is a Norman French noun meaning "son of", from Latin filius [son], plus genitive case of the father's forename.
!Source messuage - Wiktionary
messuage [plural messuages]. [chiefly law] A plot of land as the site for a house; later, a residential building taken together with its outbuildings and assigned ...
Tenement - A comprehensive legal term for any type of property of a permanent nature—including land, houses, and other buildings as well as rights attaching thereto, such as the right to collect rent.
!Source Antiquities od Shropshire, by Robert William Eyton, Rector of Ryton.Vol. IV. London MDCCCLVII., page 175
On March 19, 1303, John fitz Nicholas of Northwod grants to
Hugh le Mou of Hokswood, for four merks, a messuage in Northwod,
bounded by the messuages of Henry and William Blundell ; also
11 1/2 acres in the fields towards Chorleye, bounded by lands of
Baldwin and John de Baskerville, William de Chorleye, Nicholas de
Byriton, and by the Mill of Sudbyr [Sidbury] .—Witnesses : Ralph
d'Arraz, Knight, Gwido de Glazeley, John de Ludlowe of Neenton,
William de Hokeswod, ete. : dated at Northwod. 166
!Source Antiquities of Shropshire, by Robert William Eyton, Rector of Ryton.Vol. IV. London MDCCCLVII., page 175
On Dec. 20, " 4 Edw." [i. c. Dec. 20, 4 Edw. II, 1310] Richard,
son of Hugh le Mou, gives to John de Baskerville of Northwude,
for a sum of money, all his messuage, lands, and tenements, which
John de Hoxwode gave to Hugh his Father in the vill and fields of
Northwude, to hold of the Lords of the Fee.—Witnesses : Sir Roger
de Baskerville, Sir Ralph d'Arraz, Knights; Wydo de Glazeley,
Geoffrey Lord of Uverton, Thomas his brother : dated at Northwud.
!Source: Annual Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records
[work of] Mr. Frank Scott Hay don, B.A., was appointed a Junior Clerk
in this Office in November 1845, a Senior Clerk in June 1860,
and an Assistant Keeper in May 1885. He died in October
1887. During the last few years of his life, he was accounted
second to no officer of this Department in knowledge of the
writing, language, and usages of medieval England. The first
instalment of his elaborate Calendar of the Patent Bolls of the
reign of Edward I. was printed in the Appendix to the Forty-
second Beport of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, and
further portions have been printed since, the Calendar for the
eighth year of the reign being given in the Appendix to this
Report [pp. 1-200].
No. 1.-Calendar of Patent Rolls: 8 Edward I 
m. 21d. . Sudbir', Hokeswod', and Fuleswarthy [Salop]; appointment of
Radulph de Hengham and Reginald de la Leye to take the assise
of mort dancestor arraigned by Henry son of Henry le Clerk, of
Sudbir’, against Joan late wife of Radulph de Araz, touching
THE FORTY,FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE DEPUTY KEEPER OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS. [7 August 1883.]
APPENDIX TO THE FORTY-FOTJRTH REPORT OF THE
Calendar of Patent Roils : 3 Edward I. 
m. 5d. . Worthen, Foules [“ Foulesworthin “] [Salop]; appointment of
Radulph de Hengham and Walter de Hopton to take the assise of
novel disseisin arraigned by Thomas Costentyn against Radulph de
Araz and Nieholas le Clere, touehing a tenement in.
!Notes: Summary early Sidbury and Hokeswod records. Hawkswood House is about 1 mile southwest of Sidbury, so no they aren’t the same thing. That is more or less toward Chorley.
Before 1066 - Under Wiga, a franklin, Sudbury’s Saxon lord, it had been worth 20s. annually, afterwards it was waste.
1086 - Sudbury was held by Ralph de Mortimer under-Earl Roger de Montgomery as one hide. There were two ox-teams in demesne, and six serfs, six villeins, and three bordars with two teams, and there was land for two teams more. In I086 was worth 18s
1200 - A Sir Hugh de Sudberi occurs, who probably took his name from Sidbury.
Before 1240 Sidbury became the property of Ralph d’Arraz.
1255 - Ralph d’Arraz held Sidbury as a hide and half of land. He also held Neenton as half a hide.
1280 - mention of Hokeswod along with Sidbury and Fulesworth in an assize of mort d'ancestor where Henry son of Henry le Clerk, of Sudbury attempts to reclaim his inherited land in feudal tenure from Joan late wife of Radulph de Araz who had taken possession after the death of his [Henry’s] father Henry le Clerk.
1303 - John fitz [son of] Nicholas of Northwod sells land to Hugh le Mou of Hokswood witness William de Hokeswod [grant of land at Chorley]. One source mentions Gregory and William de Hokeswode, but can’t find original reference.
1310 - Richard son of Hugh le Mou of Hokswood sells to John de Baskerville of Northwude, land which John de Hoxwode gave to Hugh, Richard’s Father in the vill and fields of Northwude. I’m not sure if this includes the land given as near Sidbury, but this is not Hokeswode as Hokeswode was already given as belonging to William and Hugh prior to the 1303 purchase.
1316 - Ralph d’Arraz is given as lord of Sidbury, but Neenton is not mentioned.
1328 - Hugh, son of Warin de Neenton. acknowledges he had gifted tenements to Thomas, the parson of the church of Neenton, who grants to Hugh, son of Warin and Joan his wife and their heirs the same tenaments at Neenton. John fil Rogi Hochkys & his heirs are listed as the 4th of the successors if Hugh and Joan had not living descendants.
So from the above, we have:
Nicholas of Northwod
John of Northwod and de Hoxwode, son of Nicholas 1303 Sells land to son Hugh, Richard’s father - William of Hokeswode is witness
Hugh le Mou of Hokswod, son of John 1310 possibly dead as son Richard is selling some land from his father to John de Baskerville of Northwude. Richard’s grandfather would be too old to be John.
Richard, son of Hugh of Hokswod 1310 adult, born before 1290, maybe 1285.
So we have Richard son of Hugh, and Roger as contemporaries, possibly brothers.
William is also likely to be related to both Hugh and John. I’m going to guess for now as Hugh’s brother, which would leave John as father to all 3.
Note: Detailed source information is under Roger.