General Notes

Of the sons of Sir Thomas Colepeper, Walter succeeded to al
l the
estates except Exton on the death of his half-brother, Si
r John, and
was the only one to leave sons...
Walter Colepeper, who continued the line, married Agnes, th
e
daughter of Edmund Roper, of St. Dunstans, Canterbury, an
d is so
described on her tombstone at Goudhurst. She was also the w
idow of
John, son of John de Bedgebury, a fact not mentioned in th
e pedigrees
recorded in the Visitations, but which is amply evidenced b
y an
undated Chancery Procceding, temp. Hen. VI., where Walter C
oulpepir
and Agneis, his wife, late the wife of John, son of John d
e Beggebury
and Thomas Chaundeler, chaplain, appear as plaintiffs i
n a dispute
relating to property in Goudhurst, Cranbrook and Hawkhurst
, which
John, son of Roger de Beggebury, left to pay for two chapla
ins to sing
masses for his soul and for that of Johanna, his wife. By t
his
marriage Walter Colepeper had, with two daughters--Margaret
, married
to Alexander Clifford, and Elizabeth, married to John Harde
s, of
Hardes, co. Kent--three sons, Richard, John and Nicholas. A
gnes, his
wife, predeceased him on the 2nd December, 1457, and was bu
ried at
Goudhurst, and Walter himself died on the 24th November, 14
62, and was
also buried at Goudhurst.
Although the pedigree given above differs in many respect
s from
those recorded in the Visitation, it is substantiated not o
nly by many
Inquisitions, Deeds and Grants, but also by a suit entere
d on membrane
484 of the De Banco Roll, Hilary, 4 Edward IV., whence th
e following
pedigree is deduced:
..John Culpeper(5)
....Thomas Culpeper(6)
......Thomas Culpeper(7)
......Walter Culpeper(7)
........John Culpeper(8)
........Richard Culpeper(8)
........Nicholas Culpeper(8)
......John Culpeper(7)
......Nicholas Culpeper(7)
This suit has reference to the fine levied in 1320, the Joh
n at
the head of the pedigree being the son of Sir Thomas and Ma
rgery, and
the plaintiffs, John, Richard and Nicholas Colepeper, claim
ing one
quarter of these lands against Sir John Fogge, according t
o the
customs of gavelkind, in right of their father Walter.
Although Richard is entered in the Visitation in Kent, in 1
619, as
Walter Colepeper's eldest son, this was not the case, as Si
r John, as
the eldest son, inherited Hardreshull, co. Warwick, Bayhall
, co. Kent,
and Wigsell, co. Sussex. It appears also from the same Visi
tation that
this Sir John married Agnes, daughter of John Bedgebury, bu
t no
mention whatever is there made of the undoubted fact that s
ome time
before 1460 he was the husband of Agnes Gainsford, which i
s clearly
proved by the Proceedings in Chancery relating to the abduc
tion of the
two Wakehurst heiresses by Sir John's brothers, Richard an
d Nicholas,
where it is expressly stated that a sister of John and Will
iam
Gainsford was wedded to John Culpepyr, and later on in th
e same suit
mention is made of John Culpeper and Agnes, his wife. The m
arriage is
also alluded to in De Banco Roll, Trin., 5 Edward IV., m. 1
18d, and it
explains the mention of Ottewell and George Gainsford (gran
dsons of
the above John Gainsford, who married Anne Wakehurst, aun
t of the
co-heiresses, and sons of Sir John Gainsford, by Anne, daug
hter of
Ottewell Worsley), as cousins in the will Walter Colepeper
, of Calais,
1514--1516.
The question arises, therefore, as to whether the record o
f Sir
John's marriage with Agnes Bedgebury is not due to a mistak
e on the
part of the heralds. In their pedigree they certainly omi
t these two
important facts, viz., that before 1460 Sir John was the hu
sband of
Agnes Gainsford, and also that his father Walter's wife, o
f the same
Christian name, was the widow of John Bedgebury. It seems t
herefore
not improbable that these two marriages have been confused
; such,
indeed, must ha