This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
It is misleading to describe Isabella as "Queen Isabella of France". She was Queen of England! Roger Mortimer needs his full title on his own article page heading, but not every time he is referenced in an article such as this. "Queen Isabella and Roger Mortimer" is clear enough in the context. (With links to their correct pages if someone does not know them) Doug (at Wiki) 22:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
An earlier editor (don't know who) described her as 'Queen Isabella of France', and I suspect that someone will now correct you, and describe her as 'Queen consort', not Queen of England! :-) This whole business of the 'correct' terminology to be used in describing the wives of English Kings seems to be one of the more contentious topics on Wikipedia, although in the final analysis it strikes me as a tempest in a teapot. NinaGreen (talk) 01:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Mary de Brewes is not known to be a daughter of Peter de Brewes of Tetbury. Douglas Richardson's book is unreliable on this point. He has no evidence for the relationship and other writers do not accept his identification. Doug (at Wiki) 22:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Here's what the ODNB article on Thomas of Brotherton says of his second marriage:
His first wife had died by 1330, and Thomas married as his second wife, not much more impressively, Mary, widow of Sir Ralph Cobham and daughter of Sir Piers Brewes, who outlived him and died c.1361.
The ODNB thus says the same thing as Richardson, i.e. that Thomas of Brotherton's second wife, Mary, was the daughter of Peter de Brewes (Piers de Brewes). Both may well be wrong. Could you supply some alternate printed sources which provide a different parentage for Mary de Brewes? NinaGreen (talk) 16:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
ODNB is less wrong. Mary de Brewes is associated with a Piers de Brewes. Richardson has decided that this means a particular Peter de Brewes. It is an unfortunate fact in medieval genealogy that much is unknown. Some authors don't like that and fill in the gaps without convincing evidence. I cannot provide a different parentage for Mary just an indication of the uncertainty which should be noted.Doug (at Wiki)
Just for the record, I notice that on p. 182 of Vol. IV of Magna Carta Ancestry Richardson cites entries in the Calendars of Inquisitions Post Mortem which appear to support the relationships. NinaGreen (talk) 18:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
But he does not find anything that actually confirms his supposition. There is no IPM that mentions both Mary, Countess Marshall, and Peter de Brewes of Tetbury. I'm not trying to convince you - you can take your own view but that's all it can be. There's no evidence.Doug (at Wiki) 00:07, 19 October 2013 (UTC)