The Descent of the Manor of Papworth St. Agnes to Thomas Mallory
(1425-1469) -- A first rough draft
Generation - 1
In 1086 at the time of the Doomsday Book we have a man by the name of
Walter (no surname) who holds only a nice-sized parcel of land in the
Parish of Papworth, which was part of the Hundred of Papworth in
Cambridgeshire, and a somewhat a smaller holding in the Sawtry (later
subdivided) in Huntingdonshire. He held both sets of lands as a feudal
subtenant of a man known in Cambridgeshire as Robert of Huntingdon and
in Huntingdon as Robert the Sheriff. The lands Robert held in
Cambridgeshire can be shown to be those lands which later became known
as the Manor of Papworth St. Agnes. The lands in Sawtry held by Walter
were never erected into a manor, though the name, Papworth tract
survived the medieval period into modern times to designate them. That
both were held by the same individual, is a matter of importance
because it provides a key clue as to their own descent later (as well
as the descent of other connected properties which were acquire and
disposed of at later dates during the middle ageas); and this, in
turn, is a very powerful tool in clarifying the family relationships
that were involved, a knowledge of which being what makes history come
alive.
The name of the manor, the parish, and the county hundred was
originally the same. In the earliest periods, it was sometimes written
Pampeworthe (two syllables only), probably in confusion with the place
name of another district of Cambridgeshire which was called
Pampesworthe (three syllables, with the "s" pronounced). Soon enough
Pappeworthe (the modern Papworth) became the most common medieval
spelling, though there are endless variants. Anneys with its own
variations in spelling became suffixed to Pappeworthe to produce
Pappeworthe Anneys as the most common representation of the manor's
name by which it became popularly known from the very last years of
the 12th century, at the latest. The Anneys of Pappeworthe Anneys was
a phonetic representation of the local pronunciation of a woman's
name, Agnes. This was done in honour of the first woman to hold the
manor in her own right, Agnes de Pappeworthe (perhaps the most common
of many medieval spellings of this family's name, so the one I would
like to use, rather than Papworth which I will reserve for the name of
the manor, itself). Apparently, in the 19th century, government
surveyors, when translating into English the Latin version of the name
(Papworth Agnetis) appearing in the legal documents of previous
centuries, hyper-corrected it to Papworth St. Agnes on the mistaken
assumption that the use of a woman's name could only be explained if
the woman the manor was named after were a saint. Actually, this was
partly true, but is a story to be narrated under the next generation.
Walter would have been born around 1055, assuming a normal generation
length between him and the next person to possess the manor. The
Doomsday Book form of his name makes it appear he was English, rather
than Norman French, but no mention is made of his ethnic background as
is sometimes the case with others so, ultimately, his ethnic origin
must be considered unknown. When he died is impossible to estimate,
though sometime during the reign of Henry I would be reasonable as
that would appear to have been during the era in which this manor was
held by its next feudal tenant and under whom the unique manner by
which Papworth St. Agnes was to be held in feudal tenure was likely to
have been determined.
Generation - 2
The next identifiable feudal tenant of both the Cambridgeshire and
Huntingdonshire properties was Agnes de Pappeworthe, a woman who was
very likely to have been the daughter of Walter of generation - 1 and
born around 1080. If not, then she would have been the wife of
Walter's son or nephew and the manor would have been entailed on her
for her life, as her single appearance in the written record is in
what would have to be her old age. An approximate year of birth,
though, at around 1080, of course, assumes a generation length of only
20 years each between the two generations after her because we are
dealing with heiresses, among whom child marriage was common. Agnes
appears in the written record as the lady of Papworth in her own right
only twice in the late 1250s, both times being listed in the Pipe
Rolls as having paid money she, for some reason or other, owed the
crown, the debt being paid off quite quickly. Her age can be roughly
estimated as can the manner of descent due to a special mention made
of the manor in the "Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis de XII
Comitatibus", a survey taken in 1285.
I once came across mention of a story that this particular Agnes had
been a mistress of Henry I, but I would not know how to go about
discovering whether this might be true or not. In any case, Agnes
would have been the right age and the unique form by which she held
her manor of the king seems to be hiding a story of some sort behind
it. It was held by Agnes and her heirs in order to provide feed and
clothe two poor people on an on-going basis and for its possessor to
pray for the souls of the king and his ancestors. Because this was a
religious purpose and was a gift of the king, it was subject to no
other feudal fees, thus the manor effectively became a tax free zone
operating in Cambrideshire to the benefit of its lords. Significantly,
the Huntingdonshire lands are not included in this gift.
Agnes's husband's name is unknown, as is whether she even had a
husband. Her surname, if she were Walter's daughter, was probably no
more than a territorial designation, not a surname in the modern
sense, and so, too, would have been the name of any spouse or
significant other, if he had been a native Englishman. In fact, there
are at least two other Pappeworthe families I have come across in
medieval England in different counties who cannot very well have been
related to each other or to the lords and ladies of Papworth St.
Agnes.
Nevertheless, whatever the marital state of Agnes de Pappeworthe, she
did appear to live a long life and certainly must have appeared to do
good, especially during the troubled times of King Stephen when much
of the English countryside was devastated and the economy wrecked. For
whatever reason, the manor became so indelibly identified with her
that, by the time of her death, which I estimate to have been as late
as 1165, the manor was popularly known as "Pappeworth Anneys" (or, any
of the many numerous spelling variations, thereof), a name which is
noted in the written record as early as the first years of the 13th
century not more than 50, perhaps not more than 40 years after her
death.
Generation - 3
The nature of English common law was such with regard to the
inheritance of the lands held by feudal tenure, that we can know that
Agnes de Papworth had only one surviving child, a daughter, who
married and had at least one child who was a son. If Agnes had had a
brother, she couldn't have inherited anything. If Agnes had had a
sister or if her sister had had a child, there would have been a co-
heir Agnes would have been forced to share her properties with. As it
is, the one record of Agnes comes at a time when we can prove that her
next heir was a man with an different surname from hers and that Agnes
was in sole possession of her properties, meaning that the man could
not have been Agnes's husband. Moreover, as this man can be shown to
have had a daughter each by two different wives and that both
daughters were considered co-heiresses at his death, it means he could
not have been a husband of a daughter or granddaughter of Agnes who
was merely holding the Pappeworthe lands in the right of his wife. He
would have held it in his own right for this to have happened. As his
family name was different from that which Agnes used, under the normal
workings of the common law of the period, this man must have been the
son of Agnes's daughter and only surviving child. Agnes's daughter's
name is unknown. However, we can rather roughly estimate her year of
birth as being around the year 1100, meaning that the girl could, in
terms of chronology, very well have been yet another of Henry I's
numerous illegitimate progeny. However, my gut feeling is that she
probably wasn't, as Henry I rather aggressively used his illegitimate
daughters to increase his human relations network among his more
important subjects and difficult neighbours. A daughter would have
been treated as a valuable human resource by him and not left
neglected in the rural countryside as some of his sons seem to have
been. Whoever her father might have been, Agnes's daughter was married
to a man of the Stanton family sometime probably by around 1119, and
certainly not after 1126, at the very latest. Though the mother and
father's forenames remain unknown, the son's name was Gumer de
Stanton. When Agnes's daughter died is unknown and impossible to even
estimate, the only thing we know is that she was not alive in 1285.
Generation - 4
Gumer de Stanton, as mentioned above, would have been born no later
than 1127, but I would personally prefer an earlier date of around
1120 as a rough estimation of his birth year, because that would keep
a fairly normal generation length between him his oldest surviving
child, a daughter by the name of Elena, who was born to him by his
first wife in 1145. His forename may have had its origin in the Breton
name of Guiomar, and his father's ancestors could have arrived after
the Conquest with Count Alan who held Stanton in 1086. In his very old
age, Gumer married, at least, for his second time and had another
daughter who was one year old in 1185 when the "Rotuli de Dominabus et
Pueris et Puelis de XII Comitatibus" was written and he was already
dead, leaving Papworth St. Agnes to be held by two co-heiresses, one
of whom was 39 years older than the other.
Generation - 5
The oldest daughter of Gumer de Stanton was mentioned as having four
sons and two daughters in 1185, but no husband is mentioned, something
which would have been the case had he still been alive, nor are any
names mentioned other than that of her father Gumer. However, thanks
to future court cases in the coming decades, her name, the name of her
husband, and those of most of her children can be fairly safely
inferred. Her own name would have been Elena and her husband's
Geoffrey de Pappeworthe, a man who was, in spite of the surname and
the manor's name being the same, surely not closely related, as the
Church in the early Middle Ages hardly ever granted dispensations for
either first or second cousins to marry, not even among royalty.
Perhaps, in fact, they were not related at all in the normal modern
sense of the word. Elena's children's names will be discussed under
the next generation.
In the very last years of Elena's life, however, lightning struck.
1207, King John decided to give Papworth to a man from the Parish of
Kimbolton in Huntingdonshire called John Russell. He appears to have
belonged to a merchant family that appeared frequently in the medieval
records of Huntingdonshire. Elena demanded an inquisition be taken to
determine whether the property was hers by inheritance or not. An
inquisition was taken 1208, but sided with the king, thus
dispossessing her of Papworth St. Agnes and all her cattle on these
lands, as well as charging her a monetary fine for court costs. A
decision was made in favour of the king on the technical grounds that
the manor concerned was held of the king for a purely religious
purpose and, as it paid no tax, could be disposed at the king's own
pleasure. Her lands, though, in Huntingdonshire, being subject to
feudal aids, were left in her possession. From the records generated
by this process, we learn that her heir's name was Walter, possibly so
called after her great-grandmother's presumed father.
Probably a few years before this, she entered into another court case
for the benefit of her daughter Agnes, who would surely have been the
namesake of Elena's long-lived great-grandmother, in order to ensure
that the rent off a certain piece of property she had a dower right to
in Bedfordshire would go to her daughter after her death. We can also
learn that Elena de Stanton's husband was Geoffrey de Pappeworthe.
This Pappeworthe is unlikely, though, to have had his origin in either
the Parish of Papworth St. Agnes or in Papworth Hundred in
Cambridgeshire. The fact that Elena de Pappeworth had dower rights in
Bedfordshire she was in a position to dispose for the benefit of her
daughter would indicate the man was from a Papworth family having its
origins in a different county. He did, though, have, by coincidence,
the same family name as the manor over which people must have expected
him to eventually become lord of through right of his wife but which
he did not live long enough to do so, thus preventing his existence
from obscuring the historical record even further than it already is,
by obscuring that of his wife and heir. If destiny and history are
brothers, they must be comedians, because they are constantly playing
tricks on humankind.
Since Helena's year of birth must be 1145 or thereabouts, a rough
estimate of Geoffrey's year of birth would be about 1140. He and his
wife would have married around 1160 and their first son, quite
probably, would have been Walter who appeared as his mother's heir in
1207 and 1208 and who would have been born by around 1165, when his
then legendary great-great-grandmother, Agnes, the St. Agnes of future
popular imagination, would have been in the very last years of her
long life. She could not, in any case, have passed away very much
before his approximate year of birth. One can easily imagine that this
by then awesome matriarch named him, giving him the name of her own
presumed father, Walter. Even if Agnes had recently died, she still,
though, would have been very much alive in people's memories, being
locally famous for having kept fed and clothed continually throughout
most of her long life at least two poor people and, something which
was probably more difficult, having prayed all the days of her life
for the richly sinful souls of the five kings of England that had co-
existed with her during her time on earth and for their sometimes even
more sinful ancestors. Dying between 1208 and 1210, Elena did not long
live after the shock of having lost Papworth St. Agnes, but coming
from the stock of what legends are made of, she probably was not
killed by that shock either, as will be further explained below.
Nothing is known of Gumer de Stanton's youngest daughter who was one
year old in 1185, not even her name. She probably died soon after the
survey was taken, because she doesn't figure in the inquisition of
1208 to determine whether Papworth St Agnes belonged to Elena de
Pappeworthe by right of inheritance or not.
Generation - 6
Of Elena de Stanton and Geoffrey de Pappeworthe's children, most,
rather surprisingly, can be identified, though, of course, with
varying degrees of certainty. They will be listed in order of
certainty.
Walter de Pappeworthe was Elena de Pappeworth's heir in 1208. He was
probably born between 1160 to 1165, and, if as I suspect he was the
namesake of his great-grandmother's father, probably born earlier
rather than later, as she could easily be believed to be alive in
1160, but less so as the years go on. He would have married early as
was customary at the time, so a rough estimate of 1181 would not be
far wrong as a year for him to have begun a family. His presumed
children will be covered in the next generation. When his mother was
dispossessed by King John, they would have still had their lands in
Huntingdonshire. These lands are the subject of a 1210 Curia Regis
case alluded to above, from which we can deduce that this particular
Walter de Pappeworth, like his mother, had already passed away by that
time.
Agnes de Pappeworthe would surely have been named after her great-
great-grandmother, but, as the court case her name appears in could
have only taken place, at the earliest, in 1195, and, the object of
the case was to give her future property rights in a yearly rent, this
would seem to indicate it was part of a marriage settlement.
Considering the early ages at which people got married, I would
estimate her year of birth as being around 1180 and would think she
might be her parents' younger daughter. Who her husband might be, may
prove impossible to discover as might an estimated year of death.
Robert de Pappeworthe, the elder, on the basis of the 1210 Curia Regis
case can be deduced to have existed in the Cambridgeshire/
Huntingdonshire area and can be most easily placed in this generation.
He seems to have left no record in which he is directly mentioned. All
that can be said about his life is that he would have probably been
born between 1165 and 1180 and would have died after 1210 and that he
probably never wandered far from where he grew up, thus the need for
the widow of someone of the same name who has to be of the next
generation calling her former husband by the name he must have been
known by, Robert the younger (literally, "little Robert").
According to the Curia Regis Rolls, Geoffrey de Pappeworth, a monk
belonging to the Abbey of Sawtry, was given power of attorney by the
abbot for a certain period of time in 1214 in anticipation of the
abbot making a trip abroad, most likely to the mother abbey of Bon
Repos in Viscounty of Leon in Brittany, an abbey whose neighbouring
castle was called Joyeuse Garde. As nothing else is known about this
Geoffrey, he could just as easily fit in the next generation as he
would here. However, if he were a member the next generation, I would
rather expect a man given his name to be the family heir as so many
men in earlier centuries named their first sons after their fathers.
Before continuing, though, a short digression to illustrate a small
number of possible Pappeworthe and Mallory of Papworth St. Agnes
connections with "Le Morte Darthur". The adjective of Leon, by the
way, is Leonaise (hopefully, I remember my French spelling correctly)
which appears in the "Le Morte Darthur" in medieval English spelling
as Lyonesse, the Kingdom of Lancelot. Lancelot's castle is called
Joyeuse Garde and when King Arthur fights the Emperor of Rome, one of
the Roman senators is named Sawtry. Interestingly, both the barons la
Zouche of the first and second creations appear to be ancestors of
Thomas Mallory of Papworth St. Agnes (1425 - 1469) and the la Zouches
descend from a ruling house of Brittainy. The Abbey of Sawtry itself
was founded and funded by others of the later Pappeworthe descendant,
Thomas Mallory of Papworth St Agnes's ancestors, the Earls of
Huntingdon, certain of whom also became kings of Scotland. One Duchess
of Brittany, whose father had been an Earl of Huntingdon, chose to be
buried at Sawtry, and the Papworth's, throughout their history, kept a
close relationship with the abbey, a relationship that was continued
by Thomas Mallory, himself, as well as his son, Anthony, right up
until the dissolution of the monasteries made that no longer possible
in the late 1530s. None of this is decisive. All is suggestive. This
is just a very small selection of items creating a presumption on my
part that the possible authorship of "Le Morte Darthur" is still open
to debate.
Of the possible sons, there is a Ralph who would probably fit
chronologically but for whom there is no other evidence, even
circumstantial, that could justify his inclusion here, other than the
fact that he had a son named Robert, a name which appears to have been
common in this family during the late 12th and early 13th centuries.
One remaining daughter, as of yet, cannot even be tentatively
identified.
Generation - 7
I would place a certain Robert de Pappeworthe the younger as the
oldest son of the above mentioned Walter de Pappeworthe and born
perhaps around 1182 or 1183. He married a woman by the name of Clera,
the one mentioned above as having brought a Curia Regis case against
Walter de Pappeworthe for her dower in the Pappeworthe Huntingdonshire
lands which had been at least partly inherited from the Walter who
appeared in the Doomsday Book. Several things may be deduced, one of
which is that, her husband had possessed the Huntingdonshire lands up
till his death which might very well have been that same year of 1210
and close in time to the deaths of his presumed father and his
grandmother. To summarize the facts, at the beginning of 1208, the
holder of these lands would have had to have been Elena de Pappeworth
and her heir was Walter, not Robert. Neither Clera's husband nor the
Walter who is being sued can, thus, be Elena's children. Clera
distinguishes her former husband as being Robert the younger and, as
properly distinguishing people who could be confused with one another
has always been an important matter in English common law, it means
there very likely must be a Robert the older still living of whom
Robert the younger cannot be a direct heir. Also, there must be yet at
least the possibility of another Robert the son of Walter being born
before the Curia Regis case is actually decided. Taken together, the
most economical explanation is that Walter de Pappeworth I, the son of
Elena and Geoffrey de Pappeworthe, died around the same time as his
mother in around 1209 and that also at about the same time Walter de
Pappeworthe I's son Robert the younger died with a widow but without
any surviving children. It would also mean that Walter de Pappeworthe
I's younger son Robert the elder, Walter I's second son Walter de
Pappeworthe II, and that possibly even a newly born son of Walter de
Pappeworth II by the name of Robert were in existence when the court
case opens. Assuming these identifications to be correct, I would also
assume that sometime during the years 1208 to 1210, Huntingdonshire
was hit by one of the many plagues and diseases that regularly
devasted Europe throughout the middle ages every 10 years or so,
though none as disastrously as that of the Black Death of 1349 when
roughly one third of England's population was killed off in a single
year. A record of whether Clera received her dower or not has not
survived.
Walter de Pappeworthe II would have been, for reasons mentioned
immediately above, almost certainly been a younger son of Walter de
Pappeworth I. A rough estimate of his approximate year of birth would
be 1185. As a younger brother without land, it is unlikely he married
until his older brother died in perhaps 1209. He is most likely to
have had at least two sons, the younger of whom survived, as an
identifiable Papworth line of descent for the Huntingdonshire
properties continued into the 14th century. In 1219, there was another
Curia Regis case brought against Walter II by Robert Russel, being
most likely the same Robert Russel who was awarded Papworth St. Agnes
in 1208. After this, I have been unable so far to find any further
records concerning this member of the Pappeworth family.
For reasons that will be evident elsewhere, I would like to include
the Robert Russel who was given the Manor of Papworth St. Agnes by
King John (for a fee to be paid, of course, which was guaranteed by
two earls) in this generation. He appears to have married after
acquiring Papworth St. Agnes as no known children of his appear to
have been born earlier than this event, so I would not consider him to
be much older than 30 (if that old) when King John dispossessed Elena
de Pappeworthe of her manor for his benefit. A rough estimate of his
year of birth would, thus, be around 1180. He came from Kimbolton,
which means his family could not have been a gentry family, as the
only known medieval Russels in the Kimbolton region of
Huntingdonshire, which appear to be numerous, were described as
merchants whenever a profession is mentioned. According to folio 200
of the Harleian Manuscript 807, this Robert Russel of Papworth St.
Agnes is the father of John Russel of Papworth St. Agnes who is the
father of Mary Russel who is the wife of Walter Papworth, etc. The
same manuscript entry also ascribes the first Robert Russel with a son
Ralph who marries the daughter of James de Novo Mercato and from whom
a long line of Russels in Gloucestershire descend. Many of the
pedigrees in this manuscript, though, seem corrupt, as does this one,
too, the corruptness, though, being based on inadequate information
rather than bad intentions. However, the pedigree is not impossible
chronologically, at least, with regard to Papworth St. Agnes, if we
also assume the first Robert Russel was an old man when he acquired
the manor and that his older son John, to whom the manor was to
descend, died before his father, leaving several children behind. I am
not prepared to reject this possible argument as being completely out
of hand, however, and am supplying information here about it for
anyone who might find it attractive. However, I do not, myself, at the
moment, personally consider the argument to be attractive. I would
rather think that the heirs of the first Robert Russel of Papworth St.
Agnes were his children and not his grandchildren, as there are no
contemporary records in which I have so far been able to find
justification for an intermediary generation. Also, I think it
unlikely, though of course not impossible, that the Russels of
Gloucestershire were related to this family. Confirmation would be
needed to believe so, considering that the concerned Harleian
manuscript was written perhaps as much as 500 years afterwards and, as
is typical of such documents, does not list its sources. I would,
thus, place this Robert Russel's marriage at perhaps around 1210 and
place the birth years of the three children who survived him at around
1210 to 1225.
Generation - 8
The first of the older Robert Russel's children to inherit Papworth
St. Agnes was his son Robert Russel II. If the father of Robert Russel
I were not yet another Robert, as is entirely possible, this Robert
might also not be the first son of his father, though would have been
the first to survive to adulthood. I would, thus, suggest an
approximate year of birth as about 1215. As heir of the manor, he
would not have been allowed to not get married, but who his wife was
or whether they had children or how many is, to date, completely
unknown. When he passed away, the various family lands at Papworth St.
Agnes in Cambridgeshire and other lands which Robert Russel I appears
to have had in Huntingdonshire before acquiring Papworth St. Agnes
went to his next heir, which was his brother John. No former wife of
Robert II appears demanding a dower, indicating she, too, had died, as
well as any children they might have had.
John Russel was the second of the elder Robert Russel's children to
survive. According one inquisition post mortem of his brother, John's
year of birth would be around 1219 and according to another it would
have been 1221. For our purposes we should assign him a birth year of
about 1220 give or take a year. If he married, it probably was late,
perhaps even after he acquired the family lands in 1249. He did not,
in any case, have children who survived him, as, when he died in 1290
his next heir was the son of his sister.
Robert Russel II's sister's name is nowhere written in any
contemporary record I have so far been able to locate. However, on
folio 200 of the British Library's Harleian Manuscript no. 807, a
pedigree of the Russel family which has already been referred to
above, gives her name as Mary. Although the pedigree seems unreliable,
for the sake of convenience, I would be prepared to accept Mary as
being the lady's name, as long as no other name shows up in any yet to
be discovered contemporary record, as a name makes it easier to
remember the individual and to keep known data in one's mind about
that individual with far greater levels of accuracy. Mary's son must
have been born before 1258, but as his future heir was born in 1299,
it is unlikely this son William de Pappeworthe's year of birth is many
years before the 1258 date mentioned just above. Mary's own
approximate year of birth would probably be not much beyond 1225, if
her brother's known life records can be considered an accurate
guideline. That she would have been probably more than 30 at the birth
of the future de Pappeworthe family heir of the Russel lands in
Papworth St. Agnes and elsewhere, however, deserves comment. This
would indicate that her only known husband, Walter de Pappeworthe was
probably her second husband and that by her first, if any children
survived, she would have had daughters only. Mary died before her
second surviving brother did in 1290, but when is impossible to know.
Mary, during her presumed second marriage, was, considering the
history of their families, sleeping with the enemy. This is another
reason for assuming that Walter de Pappeworthe was her second husband.
If she had been married before, it would have most likely been to
another member of the gentry class her father had schemed so hard to
become a part of and which her father or oldest brother would have
chosen for her, but not into a family her immediate family had
deprived of its rightful inheritance. If, in her late 20s or early
30s, she were a widow of a fairly well off lord of a manor or a
gentleman possessing significant lands by feudal tenure, as many did,
her dower rights would have given her financial independence, whether
or not she had any children, thus giving her both the means and the
ability to more or less chose her second husband as she pleased, as
long as she paid an appropriate fee to her immediate feudal overlord,
someone who, in the case of her dower lands, would not have been her
brother and not cared about the human relations aspect of what she was
doing.
Mary's husband Walter was the heir of the Walter de Pappeworthe II of
the previous generation who had been sued by his presumed sister-in-
law and can be shown to have inherited this man's lands, as they later
appear as a part the possessions which were noted by early 14th
century documents as having been held by Mary and Walter's son. It
would, therefore, be convenient to think of this Walter de Pappeworth
III as the elder Walter de Pappeworth II's son, the proof being in the
descent of land held in Offord Darcy in Huntingdonshire which was at
issue when Clera sued the elder Walter de Pappeworthe II and which had
never formed a part of the Russel estate.
As indicated previously, Walter de Pappeworthe III probably had an
older brother named Robert who was born in around 1210, but who must
have died young. He would also either have had other older brothers
who died young or sisters who may have survived but do not appear in
contemporary records in an identifiable fashion. Walter de Pappeworthe
III, like his wife Mary, must have been over 30 at the time of his
marriage to her, but was probably not very much older, as there is
good reason to assume that both were financially independent and of
age and that both could marry as they pleased, thus indicating a love
match. And though there is always the exception that proves the rule,
love matches most generally occur among those of the same generation.
I would, therefore, assume him to be no more than five years older
than his wife, if that, therefore tentatively setting his approximate
year of birth as 1220. This would mean, too, that barring an older
brother surviving until early adulthood, just as he was probably
Mary's second husband, so was she probably his second wife. In his
case, too, if he did have a first wife and have children by that woman
to survive, they would have surely been daughters, as his son by Mary
can be shown to have inherited property through both parents,
something he normally could not have done, unless he were Walter de
Pappeworthe III's first son to survive to adulthood. Concerning
contemporary records, he must have been an exceptionally non-
confrontational individual, as there is only one contemporary record I
have so far been able find of him and that is only as the witness to a
charter concerning someone else. His year of death is unknown, but has
to be before 1300 when his son by Mary Russel dies having held his
father's Pappeworthe property in Huntingdonshire in addition to his
inheritance from his mother's family.
Generation - 9
Sir William de Pappeworthe, son of the above Mary Russel and Walter de
Pappeworthe, by an almost comic quirk of history united in his person
the two families, both the possessed and the dispossessed, who, since
the Norman Conquest, had been lords of the manor of Pappeworthe St.
Agnes. Not only that, through the possession of estates which had
apparently belonged to the Russels before King John awarded them
Papworth St. Agnes, he is likely to have also held more land in feudal
tenure than any of previous lord of Pappeworth St. Agnes had before
him. He might very well have been the product of second marriages on
the part of both of his parents and was probably born not much earlier
than 1258. He was able to hold in feudal tenure the lands of his
mother's family from 1290. His holding of lands inherited from his
father could have come at any time in the last half of the 13th
century, as there is currently no way to estimate when his father
died, though he certainly was dead by 1299 when Sir William, himself,
died. Sir William played an active role in local society and was
chosen as a county representative in the House of Commons. He had two
known sons by Ada who, considering Sir William's age at his sons'
birth, was probably his second wife. It is also convenient to think of
him having had a rather much older (relative to his sons) daughter,
who was probably not Ada's child. Passing away in 1314, his widow
survived him, though for how long is unknown.
Generation -10
Sir William's presumed daughter could also have been the only
surviving child of a next older full brother or the only surviving
child of an only surviving full sister with no surviving sisters to
produce heirs on either Sir William's father or mother's sides. Only
by stretching things to the realm of the barely possible could she
have been a daughter of his only known wife, Ada, whose oldest son was
born in 1299. Whatever this presumed daughter's true affiliation was
with Sir William, it could only have been through her that the
Mallory's could have inherited Papworth St. Agnes. It is more
convenient to think of her as Sir William's daughter than a niece and
would better explain the continued connections with the Mallorys which
ensured their future inheritance of Papworth St. Agnes. She would have
been born around 1280 and would have been the wife of a man by the
name of Thomas Brocket of Kirkby Mallory, a man of fairly moderate
means who was not the lord of the manor, but had been raised as a
member of the gentry class and who, in spite of his apparently
somewhat modest means, was very actively involved in the local affairs
of his time. They had only one daughter called Ala (Ela in modern
English) to survive. Sir William's daughter quite possibly survived
her husband to continue as a link between the Pappeworth's and her
daughter's descendents, her husband Thomas Brocket most likely having
died around 1320 as there are no records of him being alive after 1316
in which he deeds a piece of land in Kirkby Mallory to a certain
Robert Mallory in what must be a marriage settlement. Taken together,
this would indicate that the Brocket line had died out in that area of
Leicestershire and would also indicate that Thomas Brocket did not
outlive his wife or, if he did, did not remarry to produce a second
family that would have needed to be provided with lands.
Sir John de Pappeworthe, born in 1299, was 14 1/2 when his father passed
away in 1314, the inquisition post mortem of his father being
unusually precise about his age. His mother Ada was assigned a dower
and swore not to remarry without the king's permission as it was the
king, himself, who was the direct feudal overlord Papworth St. Agnes
was held of. The name of Sir John's wife is unknown. He did play an
active role in local society and, like his father, was elected as a
county representative of the House of Commons. He passed away in 1359.
Edmund was a younger brother of Sir John, but played no known role in
local society and I have not yet been able to trace him elsewhere. He
probably died young and did not marry or have children.
Generation - 11
Ala Brocket, the daughter of Thomas Brocket and his wife the presumed
oldest surviving child of Sir William de Pappeworth of generation - 9,
would have been born around 1300. He father deeds her a piece of
property when still a child and deeds further property in 1316 in what
can only be interpreted as a marriage settlement to Robert Mallory,
the second or third son of Sir Thomas Mallory, lord of the Manor of
Kirkby Mallory, and his wife whose name is unknown but is fairly
likely to have been the sister of the last Baron la Zouche of the
first creation. They were endowed with enough property to survive
comfortably when considered with relation to the times in which they
lived, but given normal circumstances, their children's chances of
holding on to gentry status would have been quite slim. Destiny has
its favourites, though, and merely clinging to the fringes of gentry
status was not what destiny had in mind for the children of these
individuals.
Sir William de Pappeworthe II was the only surviving child of Sir
John. He was born around 1331 and died in 1414, having played an
important role in both local society and at the national level, having
fairly frequently been a member of the House of Commons. He was a
fairly close associate of Roger Flore, the most influential
parliamentarian of his times, a man who was often chosen by the House
of Commons to serve as its Speaker. Another of Sir William's
associates was the family of his young neighbour who literally had
estates bordering his, the future Lord Tiptoft, a man who, in his
earlier years participated frequently as a member of the House of
Commons, but, on marrying an aunt of the Duke of York and near
relative of the royal family, was ennobled and became a member of the
House of Lords. Lord Tiptoft's son, who Sir William would not have
lived long enough to know, was the future first Earl of Worcester, a
man who played an important role, even if indirectly, in the lives of
the descendants of Sir William's cousin, Ala Brocket.
Sir William had no surviving siblings. Considering his family's
relative wealth, Sir William II's father married him to a woman who
brought only very modest additions to the family estate. Her name was
Elizabeth Preston, the daughter of John Preston of Preston Plucknet in
Somersetshire. She and Sir William had a son by the name of John, but
he died as a child. Then, in 1359, within a matter of weeks, Sir
William's father, his father-in-law, and finally his wife pass away.
He is judged, due to the fact that he and his wife had a child
together, to have a life interest in his father-in-law's manor.
Feeling a sense of responsibility, he bought out the shares of his
wife's coheirs, being either the sisters of her father or, when not
living, their heirs. However, after gaining full title in his own
right to the manor, he then sold it. He married again when he was
around 40 to a woman by the name of Alice. If they had any children,
none survived and, as he reached his mid-50s, he came to an agreement
with his next heir, the grandson of his first cousin Ala Mallory that
his lands should passed to that man's second son William Mallory who,
if not his godson, would appear, based on the course of later events,
to have at least been his namesake. In fact, at the death of William
Mallory's father when he was still a small boy, Sir William de
Pappeworthe seems to have taken over the role of the young William's
foster father, with Sir William making two series of property
settlements on the boy, the second of which takes place in 1408 and
would indicate that the young William Mallory, having come of age, had
married a woman the older Sir William and his wife had chosen for him,
possibly a close relative of his wife Alice, though since history has
provided no clue as of yet to the woman's name, this must remain
speculation. Sir William de Pappeworthe passed away in 1414 having
previously arranged to leave behind bequests to his old associate
Roger Flore and to the Abbey of Sawtry with which all the lords of
Papworth St. Agnes of the Pappeworthe family had traditionally kept a
close relationship and which the Mallorys were to continue. His wife
Alice died in 1416, at which the young Sir William Mallory took full
possession of those properties Sir William had entailed him, becoming
not only the first Mallory lord of Papworth St Agnes in Cambridgeshire
and Huntingdonshire (it straddled county borders), but also the first
Mallory lord of Shelton in Bedfordshire, a manor which had never
previously belonged to either the Pappeworthes or the Mallorys, but
which Sir William de Pappeworthe went to a special effort to acquire
his much loved heir.
Generation - 12
Even though there is no direct proof, Ala Brocket and Robert Mallory
can fairly safely be considered the parents of a man by the name of
Anketil Mallory. There is documentary evidence that they also had a
son by the name of John and another by the name of Robert.
John was probably the oldest son, perhaps being born around 1317 or
1318. Anketil would have perhaps come second sometime around 1320 and
Robert a couple of years later.
Anketil, being the only one who left behind any strong trace in the
historical record, and the one to whose descendants Papworth St. Agnes
descended, he shall be the only one of his siblings to be discussed.
He appears to have been well-educated, possibly having spent a certain
amount of time studying at Oxford. He became a part of the entourage
of a presumed somewhat distant relative, the Archbishop of York
William la Zouche who, being pleased with him, gave him his sister in
marriage around 1245 and at least part of the Manor of Sudborough in
Northamptonshire as a type of marriage settlement. By the Archbishop's
sister, he had two children. He may have lost his wife in the Black
Death and, after the Archbishop's subsequent death, he became involved
in financial difficulties in the late 1350s. In 1360 he settles most,
if not all (the precise proportion is still unsure) of the manor he
acquired from the Archbishop on his daughter as a marriage settlement.
In the 1360s he became a servant of the royal family and, when Richard
II becomes king, he is made a king's knight and given various pensions
and sources of income, possibly because he seems to have been a second
cousin to the father of the king's half-brothers, partly because his
son-in-law is influentially placed in the government of the times and
perhaps most of all because he was educated and had a knack for
pleasing others. Based on recent information provided by S. V. Mallory
Smith, in his last years, he would appear to have married again and to
have had at least one more child, a son Anketin who was born
posthumously. He may have also had another daughter, but this, too,
needs further review.
Generation - 13
Anketil Mallory's oldest son, who would have been born sometime around
the mid to late 1340s was variously called Anketil, Anketin, and
Anthony (or Antoine in French language documents). Most commonly he
his referred to as Anketin, so that is what he will be called now.
Anketin seems to have experience financial insecurity in his youth and
it is unlikely he would have been married before the reign of Richard
II which propelled his father into court favour. In 1378 he married
Alice de Driby a very wealthy heiress, as her third husband. It seems
that they were roughly the same age. Even if his first aim was
financial security, the marriage was successful and rapidly became of
love match on not only her side, but his, too. He was knighted by 1382
and was called on to play an active role in the government of
Lincolnshire. He died in 1392.
Anketil's daughter by the sister of the Archbishop was called Ala and
married to Sir Thomas Greene, the son of Sir Henry Greene and brother
of yet another Sir Henry Greene who was Richard II's favourite
minister of state. Ala had several children by her husband. One of her
more historically important descendants, for good or bad, was
Catherine Parr, the sixth Queen of Henry VIII whose role in raising
Edward VI and Elizabeth I as protestant, ensured that England did not
return to Catholicism after his death.
Anketil, according to my interpretation of information supplied just
yesterday by S. V. Mallory Smith, may have had a posthumous son also
named Anketin like his much older brother, but would have been younger
than all but one of his older brother's children. I still don't know
enough about him though to write a coherent narrative.
Anketil is sometimes credited with a daughter who married firstly the
above-mentioned younger Henry Greene's son Ralph, then married Sir
Simon Felbrigge. However, the inquisition post mortem is said to have
shown that her next heir could not have been a descendant of Anketil.
Considering that Anketil had a second wife very late in life, it could
very possibly fit quite nicely chronologically and it is worth going
over the facts once again to determine things with more definiteness.
In addition, there is a Thomas Mallory of Bytham who cannot be a son
of Anketil's oldest son by the name of Anketin. He would, however,
most likely be a near connection of Anketil's, but in what way is not
at all clear.
Generation - 13
Sir Anketin Mallory had four children by Alice de Driby. Thomas, his
oldest son, was his rich mother's heir, but dying before his mother
did in 1412, her estates passed to his daughter Elizabeth and her
descendants. Their daughter Margery married Sir Robert Moton of
Leicestershire. Their other daughter Beatrice married Sir John Bagot
of Staffordshire. Their second son William became, through family
agreement, the designated heir of Sir William Pappeworthe II of
Papworth St. Agnes.
William's history, being covered by me in depth elsewhere, will not be
covered here. Suffice it to say that he was born in 1386 and died in
1445. He married twice, firstly in around 1408 to a woman whose name
has not yet been identified and secondly to Margaret a presumed
daughter of John Burley of Shropshire and the wife of Robert Corbet,
the lord of the manor of Corbet Moreton. His second wife died in 1439.
He married a third time to a woman by the name of Margery who survived
him. By his first wife, he seems to have had a daughter Margaret who
was the first wife of Thomas Palmer of Leicestershire. By his second
wife Margaret Burley he had a son Thomas who inherited Papworth St.
Agnes and possibly a second son Robert who, in the first years of the
reign of Edward IV was the Lieutenant of the Constable of the Tower of
London. He also had a daughter Anne whose age is impossible to judge
and who could have been a daughter of any of his three wives. He was
knighted relatively early in life and twice served in the French wars.
The Lords of Papworth St Agnes, 1086 - 1445
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Gjest
Re: The Lords of Papworth St Agnes, 1086 - 1445
On Dec 7, 1:38 am, Hickory <hkitabaya...@gmail.com> wrote:
(snip of interesting account)
Dear Hickory
It is refreshing to see someone continuing to post on-topic material.
I look forward to your having the opportunity to add the relevant
references to your work.
On this point, I would agree that your reconstruction is very likely,
and that the logic behind it is sound. However, it seems to me that
you might be better to present this as a strong likelihood, rather
than a fact, because there are other possible reconstructions which
could account for the descent of these properties. For instance,
Agnes may have been an only child, and childless herself, and have
been succeeded by a more distant relation - a cousin or remoted issue
of an uncle or aunt, for example.
Kind regards
Michael
(snip of interesting account)
Dear Hickory
It is refreshing to see someone continuing to post on-topic material.
I look forward to your having the opportunity to add the relevant
references to your work.
Generation - 3
The nature of English common law was such with regard to the
inheritance of the lands held by feudal tenure, that we can know that
Agnes de Papworth had only one surviving child, a daughter, who
married and had at least one child who was a son.
On this point, I would agree that your reconstruction is very likely,
and that the logic behind it is sound. However, it seems to me that
you might be better to present this as a strong likelihood, rather
than a fact, because there are other possible reconstructions which
could account for the descent of these properties. For instance,
Agnes may have been an only child, and childless herself, and have
been succeeded by a more distant relation - a cousin or remoted issue
of an uncle or aunt, for example.
If Agnes had had a
brother, she couldn't have inherited anything. If Agnes had had a
sister or if her sister had had a child, there would have been a co-
heir Agnes would have been forced to share her properties with. As it
is, the one record of Agnes comes at a time when we can prove that her
next heir was a man with an different surname from hers and that Agnes
was in sole possession of her properties, meaning that the man could
not have been Agnes's husband. Moreover, as this man can be shown to
have had a daughter each by two different wives and that both
daughters were considered co-heiresses at his death, it means he could
not have been a husband of a daughter or granddaughter of Agnes who
was merely holding the Pappeworthe lands in the right of his wife. He
would have held it in his own right for this to have happened. As his
family name was different from that which Agnes used, under the normal
workings of the common law of the period, this man must have been the
son of Agnes's daughter and only surviving child.
Kind regards
Michael
-
Hickory
Re: The Lords of Papworth St Agnes, 1086 - 1445
On Dec 7, 12:13 am, mj...@btinternet.com wrote:
Thank you for pointing this out. I hadn't considered that option,
though, because it dealt with people living in the Doomsday era when
most landowners were first or second generation. However, what you
mention could have happened. In terms of likelihood, though, I would
consider it somewhat less likely than a straight father to daughter
connection. In terms of possibility, though, it will always have to be
considered as being totally possible. Thank you again for taking the
time to respond.
Actually, the part that needs much more explanation is the final part
on the succession from the Pappeworthes to the Mallorys. It was based
on a very rigorous regard for the facts, but impossible to present
fully in a brief form, due to the fact it would have meant uploading
the relevant Mallory and Broket material proving that this line of
descent was the only possible option. That, by itself, would have
doubled the length of the posting.
Also, I always regret the horrid state of my prose. Having, except for
this sabbatical I am currently on, lived and worked all my adult life
in Japan, and also, due to my having a form of genetically determined
attention deficit syndrome, I am no longer capable of writing English
natively and, because of the inability to hold more than one thing at
a time in my mind, I cannot compose and correct with acceptable levels
of correctness at the same time.
The notes will eventually go in (which in my case really does have to
be a separate job) and I anticipate that eventually means no longer
than the end of my summer vacation next year. I am uploading rough
drafts of my work as I write it, however, because one never knows what
will happen even later in the day and the original nature of my work
means that, even in its current roughness, it should not be completely
lost should something happen to me. In the mean time, I thank you yet
again for your encouragement. A kind word always means something to
me.
Hikaru
On Dec 7, 1:38 am, Hickory <hkitabaya...@gmail.com> wrote:
(snip of interesting account)
Dear Hickory
It is refreshing to see someone continuing to post on-topic material.
I look forward to your having the opportunity to add the relevant
references to your work.
Generation - 3
The nature of English common law was such with regard to the
inheritance of the lands held by feudal tenure, that we can know that
Agnes de Papworth had only one surviving child, a daughter, who
married and had at least one child who was a son.
On this point, I would agree that your reconstruction is very likely,
and that the logic behind it is sound. However, it seems to me that
you might be better to present this as a strong likelihood, rather
than a fact, because there are other possible reconstructions which
could account for the descent of these properties. For instance,
Agnes may have been an only child, and childless herself, and have
been succeeded by a more distant relation - a cousin or remoted issue
of an uncle or aunt, for example.
If Agnes had had a
brother, she couldn't have inherited anything. If Agnes had had a
sister or if her sister had had a child, there would have been a co-
heir Agnes would have been forced to share her properties with. As it
is, the one record of Agnes comes at a time when we can prove that her
next heir was a man with an different surname from hers and that Agnes
was in sole possession of her properties, meaning that the man could
not have been Agnes's husband. Moreover, as this man can be shown to
have had a daughter each by two different wives and that both
daughters were considered co-heiresses at his death, it means he could
not have been a husband of a daughter or granddaughter of Agnes who
was merely holding the Pappeworthe lands in the right of his wife. He
would have held it in his own right for this to have happened. As his
family name was different from that which Agnes used, under the normal
workings of the common law of the period, this man must have been the
son of Agnes's daughter and only surviving child.
Kind regards
Michael- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Thank you for pointing this out. I hadn't considered that option,
though, because it dealt with people living in the Doomsday era when
most landowners were first or second generation. However, what you
mention could have happened. In terms of likelihood, though, I would
consider it somewhat less likely than a straight father to daughter
connection. In terms of possibility, though, it will always have to be
considered as being totally possible. Thank you again for taking the
time to respond.
Actually, the part that needs much more explanation is the final part
on the succession from the Pappeworthes to the Mallorys. It was based
on a very rigorous regard for the facts, but impossible to present
fully in a brief form, due to the fact it would have meant uploading
the relevant Mallory and Broket material proving that this line of
descent was the only possible option. That, by itself, would have
doubled the length of the posting.
Also, I always regret the horrid state of my prose. Having, except for
this sabbatical I am currently on, lived and worked all my adult life
in Japan, and also, due to my having a form of genetically determined
attention deficit syndrome, I am no longer capable of writing English
natively and, because of the inability to hold more than one thing at
a time in my mind, I cannot compose and correct with acceptable levels
of correctness at the same time.
The notes will eventually go in (which in my case really does have to
be a separate job) and I anticipate that eventually means no longer
than the end of my summer vacation next year. I am uploading rough
drafts of my work as I write it, however, because one never knows what
will happen even later in the day and the original nature of my work
means that, even in its current roughness, it should not be completely
lost should something happen to me. In the mean time, I thank you yet
again for your encouragement. A kind word always means something to
me.
Hikaru
-
alden@mindspring.com
Re: The Lords of Papworth St Agnes, 1086 - 1445
"The next identifiable feudal tenant of both the Cambridgeshire and
Huntingdonshire properties was Agnes de Pappeworthe, a woman who was
very likely to have been the daughter of Walter of generation - 1 and
born around 1080. If not, then she would have been the wife of
Walter's son or nephew and the manor would have been entailed on her
for her life, as her single appearance in the written record is in
what would have to be her old age. An approximate year of birth,
though, at around 1080, of course, assumes a generation length of only
20 years each between the two generations after her because we are
dealing with heiresses, among whom child marriage was common. Agnes
appears in the written record as the lady of Papworth in her own right
only twice in the late 1250s, both times being listed in the Pipe
Rolls as having paid money she, for some reason or other, owed the
crown, the debt being paid off quite quickly. Her age can be roughly
estimated as can the manner of descent due to a special mention made
of the manor in the "Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis de XII
Comitatibus", a survey taken in 1285".
Born around 1080 and still alive in the 1250's????
Doug Smith
Huntingdonshire properties was Agnes de Pappeworthe, a woman who was
very likely to have been the daughter of Walter of generation - 1 and
born around 1080. If not, then she would have been the wife of
Walter's son or nephew and the manor would have been entailed on her
for her life, as her single appearance in the written record is in
what would have to be her old age. An approximate year of birth,
though, at around 1080, of course, assumes a generation length of only
20 years each between the two generations after her because we are
dealing with heiresses, among whom child marriage was common. Agnes
appears in the written record as the lady of Papworth in her own right
only twice in the late 1250s, both times being listed in the Pipe
Rolls as having paid money she, for some reason or other, owed the
crown, the debt being paid off quite quickly. Her age can be roughly
estimated as can the manner of descent due to a special mention made
of the manor in the "Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis de XII
Comitatibus", a survey taken in 1285".
Born around 1080 and still alive in the 1250's????
Doug Smith
-
Hickory
Re: The Lords of Papworth St Agnes, 1086 - 1445
On Dec 8, 4:48 pm, "al...@mindspring.com" <al...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
That was a typing mistake on my part, the survey was taken in 1185.
Sometimes my hands seem to act independently of the part of my brain
which is doing the thinking. The other relevant dates should be
adjusted one hundred years down, too. Sorry for the confusion it might
have caused. Thanks for pointing it out.
wrote:
"The next identifiable feudal tenant of both the Cambridgeshire and
Huntingdonshire properties was Agnes de Pappeworthe, a woman who was
very likely to have been the daughter of Walter of generation - 1 and
born around 1080. If not, then she would have been the wife of
Walter's son or nephew and the manor would have been entailed on her
for her life, as her single appearance in the written record is in
what would have to be her old age. An approximate year of birth,
though, at around 1080, of course, assumes a generation length of only
20 years each between the two generations after her because we are
dealing with heiresses, among whom child marriage was common. Agnes
appears in the written record as the lady of Papworth in her own right
only twice in the late 1250s, both times being listed in the Pipe
Rolls as having paid money she, for some reason or other, owed the
crown, the debt being paid off quite quickly. Her age can be roughly
estimated as can the manner of descent due to a special mention made
of the manor in the "Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis de XII
Comitatibus", a survey taken in 1285".
Born around 1080 and still alive in the 1250's????
Doug Smith
That was a typing mistake on my part, the survey was taken in 1185.
Sometimes my hands seem to act independently of the part of my brain
which is doing the thinking. The other relevant dates should be
adjusted one hundred years down, too. Sorry for the confusion it might
have caused. Thanks for pointing it out.
-
alden@mindspring.com
Re: The Lords of Papworth St Agnes, 1086 - 1445
On Dec 8, 12:46 pm, Hickory <hkitabaya...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you Hikaru.
I hope to be able to read your book (with the references).
Doug Smith
On Dec 8, 4:48 pm, "al...@mindspring.com" <al...@mindspring.com
wrote:
"The next identifiable feudal tenant of both the Cambridgeshire and
Huntingdonshire properties was Agnes de Pappeworthe, a woman who was
very likely to have been the daughter of Walter of generation - 1 and
born around 1080. If not, then she would have been the wife of
Walter's son or nephew and the manor would have been entailed on her
for her life, as her single appearance in the written record is in
what would have to be her old age. An approximate year of birth,
though, at around 1080, of course, assumes a generation length of only
20 years each between the two generations after her because we are
dealing with heiresses, among whom child marriage was common. Agnes
appears in the written record as the lady of Papworth in her own right
only twice in the late 1250s, both times being listed in the Pipe
Rolls as having paid money she, for some reason or other, owed the
crown, the debt being paid off quite quickly. Her age can be roughly
estimated as can the manner of descent due to a special mention made
of the manor in the "Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis de XII
Comitatibus", a survey taken in 1285".
Born around 1080 and still alive in the 1250's????
Doug Smith
That was a typing mistake on my part, the survey was taken in 1185.
Sometimes my hands seem to act independently of the part of my brain
which is doing the thinking. The other relevant dates should be
adjusted one hundred years down, too. Sorry for the confusion it might
have caused. Thanks for pointing it out.
Thank you Hikaru.
I hope to be able to read your book (with the references).
Doug Smith