Blount-Ayala

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
WJhonson

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 00:17:31

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 10:50:15 Pacific Standard Time, christopheringham@comcast.net writes:
With Epiphanius, writing centuries after the events described, one has
to fall back on the refrain, "What are his sources?">>

-----------------------------
As I stated Epiphanius *may* have only known two sisters Mary and Salome. Anna as a sister may be the result of a corrupt textual descent. Epiphanius no place mentions all three sisters together, but three times he mentions Mary, twice Salome, and once this "Anna".

As to his sources, there is a reference to the "three Marys", called in one place his mother, his sister and his companion. Supposedly they were steadfastly with him from the beginning.

Salome of course is a well-known figure, just not as his sister in particular, although reading the text with that in mind, there is no contradiction that can be drawn.

gro

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av gro » 15 sep 2007 00:17:34

On Sep 14, 7:03�am, "John Briggs" <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Brian Pears wrote:
John Briggs <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
The language no longer exists, of course - it has been replaced by
Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian (possibly also Montenegrin).
"Serbo-Croat" was preferred in British usage.

As the 'languages' are completely mutually intelligible, is it
not more accurate to describe them as dialects of the same
language, Serbo-Croat, like Geordie, Scouse, Brum, American,
Australian, Cockney and Mancunian are to English?  Surely it's
just nationalism which prompts the insistence that their local
dialect is a distinct 'language'.

OK, what's the linguists definition of the difference between a language and
a dialect?
--
John Briggs

I am guessing this question is rhetorical, but will answer
nonetheless.

A language is a dialect with an army.

WJhonson

Re: Fwd: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 00:38:25

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 11:45:26 Pacific Standard Time, paulvheath@gmail.com writes:
The name Rowena is impossible for an Anglo-Saxon woman, and the whole
story is clearly just a fairy tale. >>

-------------------

Paul I know the work is not credible. But like Bertram, I'm collecting these details so I know where they come from, not as proofs of what they relate.

Will

Doug McDonald

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Doug McDonald » 15 sep 2007 00:42:42

WJhonson wrote:
In a message dated 09/14/07 12:45:16 Pacific Standard Time,
campofonensis@gmail.com writes: DNA analysis indicates that they
didn't breed together. Homo sapiens outcompeted Neanderthalensis,
which eventually died out. >> -------------------- Do we have then
dozens of DNA samples from Neanderthals to make this claim
scientific? Or is this just more of the
taking-what-scientists-say-and-making-it-extreme that we keep seeing?


We have quite a few samples. But DNA degrades badly over time, and
just how degraded is the question. Also, the pro researchers
simply don't sequence enough DNA. It's hard, what with the degradation.
But if you don't sequence at least most of the 16000 odd mtDNA bases,
you don't have enough to really tell.

Hold tight and wait for better results. They'll be here a long long long
time before the science of global warming is secure!

Doug McDonald

WJhonson

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 00:43:47

<<n a message dated 09/14/07 16:40:13 Pacific Standard Time, NOmcdonald@SPscs.AMuiuc.edu writes:
Hold tight and wait for better results. They'll be here a long long long
time before the science of global warming is secure! >>

------------------
Oh Douglas you silly. Don't you know the US government, hot on the trail of the "cause" of global warming has poured 30 billion into the search?

Obviously they took a page out of O.J.'s game book and are looking for "the real killer".

WJhonson

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 00:45:44

<<In a message dated 09/13/07 20:55:27 Pacific Standard Time, farmerie@interfold.com writes:
FILE - [no title] - ref. CR 1998/EB/6 - date: 29 Dec 1349

Contents
Pair of indentures. Thomas Durvassal of Spernore (Spernall) gives to
William the son and Sibilla the widow of John Durvassal late lord of
Spernall, property in Spernall for life. >>

------------------
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Thomas is supposed to be dead by 1328!
Stop posting this stuff you're messing up my beautiful files.

WJhonson

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 00:54:49

<<But seriously, I posted that a couple of days ago, from A2A:

THE THROCKMORTON PAPERS

FILE - [no title] - ref. CR 1998/EB/6 - date: 29 Dec 1349

Contents
Pair of indentures. Thomas Durvassal of Spernore (Spernall) gives to
William the son and Sibilla the widow of John Durvassal late lord of
Spernall, property in Spernall for life.

taf >>
----------------------
Is this the point where I bop myself in the forehead?
William Duvassal alias Spernore with a "Margaret Spernore ELDEST daughter and co-heiress" must of course be the same person as

William Durvassal with a daughter Joyce (m Sir William Swynfen).

You know what would make sense out of Rose' suit to get the inheritence for her own daughters?

What if William were second son, Nicholas eldest son, and they all lived at Spernore quite happily until Sybil and Nicholas died upon which William tries to evict Rose and her daughters?

He could claim that the whole property is his for life, although it really would have reverted to the right heirs of Thomas which would be John and then John's co-heiress daughters.

Something like that? Would everything harmonize ?

Will Johnson

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 00:55:51

<G>

Something sensible from someone who knows what he's talking about for a
change?

Saints Preserve Us...

DSH

"Doug McDonald" <NOmcdonald@SPscs.AMuiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:fcf5tp$j2l$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

We have quite a few samples. But DNA degrades badly over time, and
just how degraded is the question. Also, the pro researchers
simply don't sequence enough DNA. It's hard, what with the degradation.
But if you don't sequence at least most of the 16000 odd mtDNA bases,
you don't have enough to really tell.

Hold tight and wait for better results. They'll be here a long long long
time before the science of global warming is secure!

Doug McDonald

Dana S. Leslie

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Dana S. Leslie » 15 sep 2007 01:21:33

And top posting makes it easier to crop, as well.
--


Deae Sub Numine Viget

Dana

D. S. Leslie, née C. R. Guttman, '78
Email: DSLeslie@alumni.princeton.edu
Skype: dsleslie
Web: ÞE OL' PHILOSOPHIE SHOPPE
Your Source for Discounted Ideas
http://members.cox.net/dsleslie2/
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:kVzGi.89$H_5.368@eagle.america.net...
Indeed.

And Top Posting --The Preferred Posting Style Of The Cognoscenti.

DSH

"erilar" <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:drache-7DBCE8.12413114092007@news.airstreamcomm.net...

What we really need around here is sensible cropping of long posts.


WJhonson

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 01:22:32

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 11:01:34 Pacific Standard Time, allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
I found information about the family of Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville in the following books:

"Adlington, and Legh of Adlington," in Frank Renaud, Contributions Towards a History of the Ancient Parish of Prestbury, in Cheshire (Manchester, England: Printed for The Chetham Society, 1876), pp. 77-79; in Remains Historical & Literary Connected with the Palatine Counties of Lancaster and Chester, Vol. XCVII (Published by The Chetham Society, 1876).

James Croston, Nooks and Corners of Lancashire and Cheshire, A Wayfarer's Notes In the Palatine Counties, Historical, Legendary, Genealogical, and Descriptive (London: 1882), pp. 290-292.

Are these books considered to be reliable sources? >>

-------------------------
Nancy please post the details from the books (using quotation marks for what you're quoting). There are additional sources speaking about a Corona/Legh connection is relation to Adlington, but we need to see exactly what your books are saying.

Will

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 01:29:45

Precisely!

And Faster...

DSH

"Dana S. Leslie" <dsleslie@alumni.princeton.edu> wrote in message
news:3AFGi.304919$dA7.258772@newsfe16.lga...

And top posting makes it easier to crop, as well.
--

Deae Sub Numine Viget

Dana

D. S. Leslie, née C. R. Guttman, '78
Email: DSLeslie@alumni.princeton.edu
Skype: dsleslie
Web: ÞE OL' PHILOSOPHIE SHOPPE
Your Source for Discounted Ideas
http://members.cox.net/dsleslie2/

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:kVzGi.89$H_5.368@eagle.america.net...

Indeed.

And Top Posting --The Preferred Posting Style Of The Cognoscenti.

DSH

"erilar" <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:drache-7DBCE8.12413114092007@news.airstreamcomm.net...

What we really need around here is sensible cropping of long posts.

WJhonson

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 01:34:04

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 07:35:42 Pacific Standard Time, Maytree4 writes:
Johannes Vernon de Harlaston, (miles in one, but whether copy or oiginal I know not,) Feb. 12 1544, fepultus. Reg. Clifton. (sic).>>
-------------------
When I stated that John died 9 Feb 1545/6 I was quoting Matthew Connolly's post here in the thread "Sir William Browne of Flushing marries a Huguenot" which he posted 31 May 2007

lazy link
https://slektsforum.slektogdata.no/view ... p?p=211644

He did not *there* state what his source was for this particular death date.

Perhaps he has a good source for this?

Will

John Briggs

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av John Briggs » 15 sep 2007 01:34:32

gro wrote:
On Sep 14, 7:03?am, "John Briggs" <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Brian Pears wrote:
John Briggs <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
The language no longer exists, of course - it has been replaced by
Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian (possibly also Montenegrin).
"Serbo-Croat" was preferred in British usage.

As the 'languages' are completely mutually intelligible, is it
not more accurate to describe them as dialects of the same
language, Serbo-Croat, like Geordie, Scouse, Brum, American,
Australian, Cockney and Mancunian are to English? Surely it's
just nationalism which prompts the insistence that their local
dialect is a distinct 'language'.

OK, what's the linguists definition of the difference between a
language and a dialect?

I am guessing this question is rhetorical, but will answer
nonetheless.

A language is a dialect with an army.

And a navy, for some reason. (I suspect a mistake in the translation...)
--
John Briggs

John Briggs

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av John Briggs » 15 sep 2007 01:36:55

Dana S. Leslie wrote:
And top posting makes it easier to crop, as well.

Please don't feed the troll.
--
John Briggs

John Briggs

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av John Briggs » 15 sep 2007 01:45:43

Paul J Gans wrote:
In alt.history.british gro <gilrobison@aol.com> wrote:
On Sep 14, 7:03?am, "John Briggs" <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Brian Pears wrote:
John Briggs <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
The language no longer exists, of course - it has been replaced by
Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian (possibly also Montenegrin).
"Serbo-Croat" was preferred in British usage.

As the 'languages' are completely mutually intelligible, is it
not more accurate to describe them as dialects of the same
language, Serbo-Croat, like Geordie, Scouse, Brum, American,
Australian, Cockney and Mancunian are to English? ?Surely it's
just nationalism which prompts the insistence that their local
dialect is a distinct 'language'.

OK, what's the linguists definition of the difference between a
language and a dialect?
--
John Briggs

I am guessing this question is rhetorical, but will answer
nonetheless.

A language is a dialect with an army.

Hmm. Latin is a dialect of which language?

Faliscan.
--
John Briggs

WJhonson

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 01:46:28

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 17:45:19 Pacific Standard Time, gans@panix.com writes:
Hmm. Latin is a dialect of which language? >>
---------------------------
Atlantean.

WJhonson

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 02:34:34

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 17:50:29 Pacific Standard Time, farmerie@interfold.com writes:
This is not the same Thomas. Can't be. John was in full possession by
(I think it was) 1323. John died 1347|1349, leaving widow Joyce, and a
younger Thomas was his heir. This Thomas died shortly thereafter, but
not before granting a life-interest to Joyce and William, in so doing
bypassing Nicholas, the next heir. Then we have the heirs of Nicholas
challenging William and his heirs. >>

-------------------------------
You'll get in trouble speaking extemporaneously.
Thomas died in 1328 per http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report ... mpid=57006 although there he is called John which they correct to Thomas who was holding in 1316.

It's not clear by the way that this must be so, whose to say that Thomas didn't d.s.p. between 1316 and 1328 and John inherit from his brother?

At any rate, the next event is that John is named, living, in 1347, but dead by 1349 when somebody named Thomas Durvassal is giving to SYBIL (not Joyce) his widow and William his son a life estate.

We shouldn't be confused by the report on the Manor running together William's being mentioned living in 1397 and having a life estate. They are not saying, I don't believe that William GOT his life estate in 1397, only that he had one at some time.

We now know that Thomas gave a life estate to William, and Sybil.

Of course we don't know exactly *what* property he gave. It does not say he gave them the Manor, only "property in Spernell", so presumably, let's say, Thomas was going to d.s.p. and he knew it, so he gave his property preemptively perhaps to avoid a normal descent to someone else.

Then later Rose, the widow of Nicholas is suing for a portion for her daughters Eleanor and Elizabeth. I'm not clear if she is claiming that the entire Manor is hers, or just claiming some portion, and it doesn't say she is suing for dower or anything useful like that.

William Durvassal alias Spernore is dead by 1401 when I suppose his estate, whatever there was, was divided between his daughters and co-heiresses of which we now know he had at least two Margaret (Spernore) Heronville and Joyce (Spernore) Swynfen.

Of course this is disputed, but at least it gives a framework to work from to see if it can be proven or dis.

Will Johnson

Paul J Gans

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Paul J Gans » 15 sep 2007 02:45:05

In alt.history.british gro <gilrobison@aol.com> wrote:
On Sep 14, 7:03�am, "John Briggs" <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Brian Pears wrote:
John Briggs <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
The language no longer exists, of course - it has been replaced by
Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian (possibly also Montenegrin).
"Serbo-Croat" was preferred in British usage.

As the 'languages' are completely mutually intelligible, is it
not more accurate to describe them as dialects of the same
language, Serbo-Croat, like Geordie, Scouse, Brum, American,
Australian, Cockney and Mancunian are to English? ?Surely it's
just nationalism which prompts the insistence that their local
dialect is a distinct 'language'.

OK, what's the linguists definition of the difference between a language and
a dialect?
--
John Briggs

I am guessing this question is rhetorical, but will answer
nonetheless.

A language is a dialect with an army.

Hmm. Latin is a dialect of which language?

--
--- Paul J. Gans

Paul J Gans

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Paul J Gans » 15 sep 2007 02:51:03

In alt.history.british Dana S. Leslie <dsleslie@alumni.princeton.edu> wrote:
And top posting makes it easier to crop, as well.
--


Deae Sub Numine Viget

Dana

D. S. Leslie, n?e C. R. Guttman, '78
Email: DSLeslie@alumni.princeton.edu
Skype: dsleslie
Web: ?E OL' PHILOSOPHIE SHOPPE
Your Source for Discounted Ideas
http://members.cox.net/dsleslie2/
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:kVzGi.89$H_5.368@eagle.america.net...
Indeed.

And Top Posting --The Preferred Posting Style Of The Cognoscenti.

DSH

"erilar" <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:drache-7DBCE8.12413114092007@news.airstreamcomm.net...

What we really need around here is sensible cropping of long posts.



For most people, top posting is far more work. In top
posting one sees the response, then scrolls down to
read the post this is a response to (even if it takes
only a line or two to be reminded) and then scrolls up
to the top to post a response.

That's a lot of scrolling.

Bottom posting can be done in one swoop with no backtracking.

--
--- Paul J. Gans

WJhonson

Re: Bryan Stapleton of Wighall

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 05:06:36

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 20:52:33 Pacific Standard Time, WJhonson writes:
The one I had had, who married Joan Threlkeld, cannot possibly be in the descent of the co-heiresses St Paul (in 1557). >>

----------------
Recte: of course I meant ASCENT.

That Joan Threlkeld had been previously held to be an ancestress of the co-heiresses St Paul which can no longer hold.

Details hopefully to come.

Will

Nancy L. Allen

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av Nancy L. Allen » 15 sep 2007 05:16:56

"Adlington, and Legh of Adlington," in Frank Renaud, Contributions Towards a History of the Ancient Parish of Prestbury, in Cheshire (Manchester, England: Printed for The Chetham Society, 1876), pp. 78-79; in Remains Historical & Literary Connected with the Palatine Counties of Lancaster and Chester, Vol. XCVII (Published by The Chetham Society, 1876).

"Hugh de Corona married Amabilla the daughter of Sir Thomas de Barnville, and left issue one son, Hugh, and two daughters, Lucy and Sarah.

Hugh de Corona, the second of Adlington, married, and left a son, John, who was lord of the manor of Adlington in the reign of Edward II. 'John de Corona held the manor of Adlington and the manor of little Neston. Thomas de Corona is his son and heir' (Tower records, 22 Edward II). The Christian name of John's wife was Margaret.


Thomas de Corona died unmarried about the middle of the reign of Edward III, and so the male line failed. During his lifetime, by a deed without date, he gave to John de Lasseils all the land which Lucy de Corona held of his inheritance in the ville of Newton-in-Wirrall, and which came to him by the gift of his grandfather, Hugh de Corona, and all the land which Margaret, who was wife of John de Corona, held of his inheritance in Newton-in-Wirrall, by gift of his father, John de Corona. (MS. penes R. Wood.)


Lucy, daughter of the first Hugh de Corona, married for second husband Sir William Baggiley, and had issue by him one son, who died without issue, and two daughters named Ellen and Isabel, which last married Sir John de Hyde.

Nothing is known of Sarah, the sister of Lucy, and it seems likely that she either died single, or, if married, left no offspring.

Ellen, daughter of Lucy de Corona, married Sir John Legh, son of Sir William Venables of Bradwell, and called 'de Legh' from having been left to the care of his mother, whose maiden name was Legh, and which was also the name of the place where he was born, and where he lived till his marriage. From this marriage the Leghs of Adlington descend.

Sir John de Legh and Ellen his wife purchased Norbury Booths (28 Edward I), and there fixed their residence. Sir John died in 1323, and his wife in 1350."

Starting about page 82, it discusses the Legh family more thoroughly:

"William de Venables of Bradwell married, for his first wife, Catherine daughter of Sir Piers Thornton, knight, by whom he had issue one son, William de Venables, afterwards of Bradwell. He next married Agnes, daughter and heiress of Richard de Legh of the West Hall (then widow of Richard de Lymme, or Limm), by whom he had issue John, who, as already said, was called de Legh, and who became the first of Norbury Booths. Agnes was entitled to a moiety of the manor of High Legh, by descent from her father, Richard de Legh, and to several other estates, all of which, with the exception of a farm in High Legh, she either gave or suffered to descend to Thomas, her son by the first marriage, from whom the Leghs of High Legh are descended, as well as those of West Hall. John de Legh (or Venables) and Ellen (de Corona) his wife had four sons, viz.: John de Legh of Booths; Robert de Legh of Adlington; William de Legh of Isall in Cumberland, from whom descended Sir William Legh, bart, lord chief justice of England, and the Leghs of Rowcliffe and Eggington; and Peter de Legh of Bechton, jure uxoris, Agnes daughter and heiress of Philip de Bechton."

Note that the wife of John de Legh (or Venables) is given as Ellen de Corona instead of Ellen de Baggiley and contradicts what is given previously.

Nancy

----- Original Message -----
From: "WJhonson" <wjhonson@aol.com>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville


In a message dated 09/14/07 11:01:34 Pacific Standard Time, allennl@sbcglobal.net writes:
I found information about the family of Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville in the following books:

"Adlington, and Legh of Adlington," in Frank Renaud, Contributions Towards a History of the Ancient Parish of Prestbury, in Cheshire (Manchester, England: Printed for The Chetham Society, 1876), pp. 77-79; in Remains Historical & Literary Connected with the Palatine Counties of Lancaster and Chester, Vol. XCVII (Published by The Chetham Society, 1876).

James Croston, Nooks and Corners of Lancashire and Cheshire, A Wayfarer's Notes In the Palatine Counties, Historical, Legendary, Genealogical, and Descriptive (London: 1882), pp. 290-292.

Are these books considered to be reliable sources?

-------------------------
Nancy please post the details from the books (using quotation marks for what you're quoting). There are additional sources speaking about a Corona/Legh connection is relation to Adlington, but we need to see exactly what your books are saying.

Will

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 05:58:21

O.K.

Robert III of Scotland was at least kicked by a horse -- which led to his
troubles -- and not by a mule

How about descents from other late Lancasters and Yorkists?

DSH

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:fceuut$gem$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Hmmmmmmm...

Well, do you have descents from Edward IV

No. As to Royals, Robert III and Edward III are it.

and have you traced the Uterine Lines?

I've tried to, especially for the non-royal lines
Dungan, Lathom, Fitzhugh and Weaver, with no success.
The Rose/Grant lines have dead-end female lines that
all end in prototypical North Scottish names that
look unpromising for getting into England. This leaves
the Ironmonger female deads ends. These are more promising,
running through well known English names like Goring, Goddard,
Radmyll, Camoys, Poynings, Grey, de Courtenay, le Despencer
Carreu, Fitzpayn, Percy, and Clifford.

But no OBVIOUS connections through those names.

I'm currently working on Fitzpayn, which is most promising.

Doug

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 06:24:51

Let's not forget about the 18 secular Guarantors & Counselors of King John
from whom Doug MacDonald and many others here can no doubt find some
descents -- as well as from King John himself of course.

Here they are, although, of course, many do not have descendants living
today. Collaterals may prove interesting:

1. William The Marshal, Earl of Pembroke (who appears on both lists)

2. William, Earl of Salisbury and Wiltshire [William de Longespee]

3. William de Warenne, Earl of Warenne and Surrey

4. William d'Aubigny, Earl of Arundel and Sussex

5. Alan de Galloway, Lord of Galloway and Constable of Scotland

6. Warin Fitz Gerold, Lord of Deddington Castle

7. Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent

8. Piers Fitz Herbert

9. Matthew Fitz Herbert

10. Hugh de Neville

11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset

13. Philip Daubeney

14. Robert de Roppelay

15. John Marshal

16. John Fitz Hugh

17. Ranulph Blundeville, Earl of Chester and Lincoln

18. Henry, Earl of Cornwall

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Deus Vult

rainbow.

Re: Bryan Stapleton of Wighall

Legg inn av rainbow. » 15 sep 2007 06:40:24

Does this help the Stapleton of Wighall dilemma?

STAPYLTON of Myton

His descendants, who took the name of De Stapleton, held the
manor till the beginning of the 13th century, when it passed
to six co-heiresses all daughters - tied in with a family
surnames Beaumont and Levington

Sir William Stapleton m/d Margaret, d/o Sir James Pickering,
of Oswaldkirk.
Sir William died in 1503.

Thomas Stapleton, of Carleton, in the county of York, Esq.
claimed the barony of Beaumont

Sir Brian Stapleton, heir of Sir Thomas of Carleton.

WJhonson

Re: Bryan Stapleton of Wighall

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 06:45:20

<<In a message dated 09/14/07 22:41:13 Pacific Standard Time, rainbow.@clear.net.nz writes:
Does this help the Stapleton of Wighall dilemma?

STAPYLTON of Myton

His descendants, who took the name of De Stapleton, held the
manor till the beginning of the 13th century, when it passed
to six co-heiresses all daughters - tied in with a family
surnames Beaumont and Levington

Sir William Stapleton m/d Margaret, d/o Sir James Pickering,
of Oswaldkirk.
Sir William died in 1503.

Thomas Stapleton, of Carleton, in the county of York, Esq.
claimed the barony of Beaumont

Sir Brian Stapleton, heir of Sir Thomas of Carleton. >>

-----------------------
Thanks for this. Actually it makes it worse if the above is true.
But what is your source for this?

Normandy

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av Normandy » 15 sep 2007 06:49:40

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
gEJGi.104$H_5.495@eagle.america.net...
O.K.

Robert III of Scotland was at least kicked by a horse -- which led to his
troubles -- and not by a mule

How about descents from other late Lancasters and Yorkists?

DSH

Robert II was effectively deposed by his eldest son John, Earl of Carrick.

in November 1384. John, however, was seriously injured after being kicked by
a horse Robert II was succeeded by his son John, who confusingly took the
name Robert III.

Normandy

WJhonson

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 08:21:05

It seems to be a fairly good source, but they make some unwarranted assumptions.

You can use it as a guideline for where to look for their sources.

You might for example look at the Patent Rolls to see if any of these families show up, or possibly the property names. And the A2A documents and Procat.

The family is given in Vis Cheshire here
http://books.google.com/books?id=hlYN_L ... #PPA145,M1
Vis Cheshire 1580

but that's not a proof text, as it is several *centuries* after the fact.

The family is confused enough to be represented in all manner of ways on various internet pages, so I think you have your hands full. You might want to start a little closer to home first to make sure the more recent lines are even correct. They probably could use some work.

Will Johnson

WJhonson

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 08:21:05

It seems to be a fairly good source, but they make some unwarranted assumptions.

You can use it as a guideline for where to look for their sources.

You might for example look at the Patent Rolls to see if any of these families show up, or possibly the property names. And the A2A documents and Procat.

The family is given in Vis Cheshire here
http://books.google.com/books?id=hlYN_L ... #PPA145,M1
Vis Cheshire 1580

but that's not a proof text, as it is several *centuries* after the fact.

The family is confused enough to be represented in all manner of ways on various internet pages, so I think you have your hands full. You might want to start a little closer to home first to make sure the more recent lines are even correct. They probably could use some work.

Will Johnson

WJhonson

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 08:21:05

It seems to be a fairly good source, but they make some unwarranted assumptions.

You can use it as a guideline for where to look for their sources.

You might for example look at the Patent Rolls to see if any of these families show up, or possibly the property names. And the A2A documents and Procat.

The family is given in Vis Cheshire here
http://books.google.com/books?id=hlYN_L ... #PPA145,M1
Vis Cheshire 1580

but that's not a proof text, as it is several *centuries* after the fact.

The family is confused enough to be represented in all manner of ways on various internet pages, so I think you have your hands full. You might want to start a little closer to home first to make sure the more recent lines are even correct. They probably could use some work.

Will Johnson

WJhonson

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 08:21:05

It seems to be a fairly good source, but they make some unwarranted assumptions.

You can use it as a guideline for where to look for their sources.

You might for example look at the Patent Rolls to see if any of these families show up, or possibly the property names. And the A2A documents and Procat.

The family is given in Vis Cheshire here
http://books.google.com/books?id=hlYN_L ... #PPA145,M1
Vis Cheshire 1580

but that's not a proof text, as it is several *centuries* after the fact.

The family is confused enough to be represented in all manner of ways on various internet pages, so I think you have your hands full. You might want to start a little closer to home first to make sure the more recent lines are even correct. They probably could use some work.

Will Johnson

WJhonson

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av WJhonson » 15 sep 2007 08:21:05

It seems to be a fairly good source, but they make some unwarranted assumptions.

You can use it as a guideline for where to look for their sources.

You might for example look at the Patent Rolls to see if any of these families show up, or possibly the property names. And the A2A documents and Procat.

The family is given in Vis Cheshire here
http://books.google.com/books?id=hlYN_L ... #PPA145,M1
Vis Cheshire 1580

but that's not a proof text, as it is several *centuries* after the fact.

The family is confused enough to be represented in all manner of ways on various internet pages, so I think you have your hands full. You might want to start a little closer to home first to make sure the more recent lines are even correct. They probably could use some work.

Will Johnson

a.spencer3

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av a.spencer3 » 15 sep 2007 10:20:30

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:fXCGi.96$H_5.352@eagle.america.net...
Thoughtful.

But citation?

DSH

campofonensis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189804724.863887.127460@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

Sunlight is necessary for the synthesis of Vitamin D. As Homo sapiens
migrated into northern localities with less sunshine scientists
believe they evolved (through natural selection) paler skin with less
pigment, allowing more of the sun's rays to penetrate.


So why do Inuit etc. tend to be dark skinned?


Surreyman

Matthew Connolly

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av Matthew Connolly » 15 sep 2007 12:13:30

On Sep 15, 2:34 am, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 09/14/07 07:35:42 Pacific Standard Time, Maytree4 writes:
Johannes Vernon de Harlaston, (miles in one, but whether copy or oiginal I know not,) Feb. 12 1544, fepultus. Reg. Clifton. (sic).
-------------------
When I stated that John died 9 Feb 1545/6 I was quoting Matthew Connolly's post here in the thread "Sir William Browne of Flushing marries a Huguenot" which he posted 31 May 2007

lazy linkhttps://slektsforum.slektogdata.no/ ... p?p=211644

He did not *there* state what his source was for this particular death date.

Perhaps he has a good source for this?

Will

I think it's from his tomb- Rose, do you happen to have any photo of
the tomb, as I can't seem to find mine? The guide book just says 1545.
The engraving in Shaw's Staffordshire, from his own drawing, can be
seen here:
http://www.staffspasttrack.org.uk/churches/12to14e.htm
and you can see it says (approximating as much as this keyboard
permits) "In The Yere of ower lord god M CCCCC XL and V & in the XXXVI
yere of Kyg hery the VIII on whose Solle God have mercy", both of
those dates suggesting 1545/6 rather than 1544/5. To add to the
confusion, the HoP entry for his son Henry says the latter succeeded
his father 4 Feb 1545, apparently citing probate records, which casts
doubt on the day of the month I gave too.

John P. Ravilious

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av John P. Ravilious » 15 sep 2007 14:06:00

Dear Spencer,

This is an interesting group, although as a group they have
received less positive attention than their counterparts standing
across the field at Runnymede.

Of the 18 men you identified, I show extended descents to the
present day for 11 of them (William Marshal, etc.), and I have not
attempted below to delve into their descendants, with two exceptions
(Hugh de Neville and John Marshal). Of the others, there are 4 for
whom I have no record of either marriage or issue. The remaining 3
are well known: however, for these I show no known descendants, or
whose progeny ended in 4 generations or less.


1. William The Marshal, Earl of Pembroke (who appears on both lists)

2. William, Earl of Salisbury and Wiltshire [William de Longespee]

3. William de Warenne, Earl of Warenne and Surrey

4. William d'Aubigny, Earl of Arundel and Sussex

5. Alan de Galloway, Lord of Galloway and Constable of Scotland

6. Warin Fitz Gerold, Lord of Deddington Castle

No descendants noted after 4 generations (Aveline de Forz,
Countess
of Aumale (d. 1274) is the last I see).

7. Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent

8. Piers Fitz Herbert

9. Matthew Fitz Herbert

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

10. Hugh de Neville

of Hallingbury, Essex. Myriad descendants if only through his
granddaughter Joan de Neville, wife (1stly) of Sir Henry de la
Mare [ancestors of Montfort of Beaudesert, the Lords Montagu
incl. the Earls of Salisbury, Lisle of Rougemont, etc.).

11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset

13. Philip Daubeney

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

14. Robert de Roppelay

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

15. John Marshal

of Hingham, Norfolk; believed to have been illegitimate
half-brother to William Marshal. Ancestor of the Lords
Marshal, Marshals of Ireland, and thereby of the Lords
Morley and many more besides.

16. John Fitz Hugh

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

17. Ranulph Blundeville, Earl of Chester and Lincoln

No known descendants. His heirs were his sisters, Maud (wife
of David of Scotland, earl of Huntingdon), Mabel (wife of the
royalist William d'Aubigny, earl of Arundel), Agnes (wife of
William de Ferrers, earl of Derby) and Hawise, Countess of
Lincoln (wife of Robert de Quincy, 'rebel'). The descendants
of his sisters are widespread, to say the least.

18. Henry, Earl of Cornwall

No known descendants. His illegitimate half sisters have
many known descendants, via the Counts of Meulan and the
Vautort (Valletort) family of Trematon.

As to noticed royal descents, the first English monarch descended
from a Surety of the Magna Carta was Richard II (descendant of Saier
de Quincy, E of Winchester). His 'well-loved' cousin, Henry IV, was
the first to mix the blood of the Sureties (de Quincy) with that of
the royalists (William Marshal, and William de Warenne).

Cheers,

John




On Sep 15, 1:24 am, "D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote:
Let's not forget about the 18 secular Guarantors & Counselors of King John
from whom Doug MacDonald and many others here can no doubt find some
descents -- as well as from King John himself of course.

Here they are, although, of course, many do not have descendants living
today. Collaterals may prove interesting:

1. William The Marshal, Earl of Pembroke (who appears on both lists)

2. William, Earl of Salisbury and Wiltshire [William de Longespee]

3. William de Warenne, Earl of Warenne and Surrey

4. William d'Aubigny, Earl of Arundel and Sussex

5. Alan de Galloway, Lord of Galloway and Constable of Scotland

6. Warin Fitz Gerold, Lord of Deddington Castle

7. Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent

8. Piers Fitz Herbert

9. Matthew Fitz Herbert

10. Hugh de Neville

11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset

13. Philip Daubeney

14. Robert de Roppelay

15. John Marshal

16. John Fitz Hugh

17. Ranulph Blundeville, Earl of Chester and Lincoln

18. Henry, Earl of Cornwall

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Deus Vult

Matthew Connolly

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av Matthew Connolly » 15 sep 2007 15:24:50

On Sep 15, 1:13 pm, Matthew Connolly <mvernonconno...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
The engraving in Shaw's Staffordshire, from his own drawing, can be
seen here:http://www.staffspasttrack.org.uk/churches/12to14e.htm
and you can see it says (approximating as much as this keyboard
permits) "In The Yere of ower lord god M CCCCC XL and V & in the XXXVI
yere of Kyg hery the VIII on whose Solle God have mercy", both of
those dates suggesting 1545/6 rather than 1544/5.

In fact I think 36 Henry VIII *is* 1544/5, so there's an internal
inconsistency there if the engraving is accurate; however, the burial
record can probably be considered a more immediate source than the
inscription, so 1544/5 is currently to be favoured. I've looked
through a range of secondary sources, which vary from 1542 to 1550,
most just saying 1545 with no month or day.

taf

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av taf » 15 sep 2007 16:08:48

On Sep 15, 6:06 am, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:


2. William, Earl of Salisbury and Wiltshire [William de Longespee]

Longespee is not a place, hence not "de". (It does appear as "le".)

3. William de Warenne, Earl of Warenne and Surrey

4. William d'Aubigny, Earl of Arundel and Sussex


These titles are misleading. Arundel and Warenne were used as titles
for earls whose territorial responsibilities were equivalent to those
of Surrey and Sussex. These were not earls of two separate earldoms,
as the "and" would seem to imply. Earl of Arundel (i.e. Sussex) would
be more accurate.

taf

Nancy L. Allen

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av Nancy L. Allen » 15 sep 2007 16:13:54

Thanks, Will, for your reply. The Visitation of Cheshire of 1580 agrees with what is stated in Frank Renaud's chapter on Adlington for Baguley and Leigh/Legh, but not for Corona. On page 150 it gives Anabell de Bamvill and Lucia as wives of the second Hugh de Corona who was father of Thomas instead of Amabilla de Bamville as the wife of the first Hugh who was father of Hugh father of John father of Thomas. I have less confidence in the Visitation since it has the wrong mother for Roger de Chedle's daughters Clemence and Agnes (see your post dated 27 Aug 2007 Re: Daughters of Roger de Cheadle and Matilda Massey).

I know what you mean about the family being confused enough to be represented in all manner of ways on various internet pages. One problem is that Ormerod incorrectly stated that John de Legh's wife was Isabel de Baggiley instead of her sister Ellen de Baggiley. I had already researched Sir William Baggiley, the father of Ellen and Isabel who married John de Hyde, because I am interested in the Hyde family.

I will check the other sources you mentioned.

Nancy
----- Original Message -----
From: WJhonson
To: Nancy L. Allen ; gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 3:21 AM
Subject: Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville


It seems to be a fairly good source, but they make some unwarranted assumptions.

You can use it as a guideline for where to look for their sources.

You might for example look at the Patent Rolls to see if any of these families show up, or possibly the property names. And the A2A documents and Procat.

The family is given in Vis Cheshire here
http://books.google.com/books?id=hlYN_L ... #PPA145,M1

Vis Cheshire 1580



but that's not a proof text, as it is several *centuries* after the fact.



The family is confused enough to be represented in all manner of ways on various internet pages, so I think you have your hands full. You might want to start a little closer to home first to make sure the more recent lines are even correct. They probably could use some work.



Will Johnson

Doug McDonald

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av Doug McDonald » 15 sep 2007 16:30:57

John P. Ravilious wrote:

About King's counsellors at Runnymede

11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset


Are these brothers?


I do descend from several (6) of these:

Alan of Galloway
Alan Basset
Thomas Basset assuming they are brothers
William d'Aubigny
William de Warenne
William Longspee

Doug McDonald

John P. Ravilious

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av John P. Ravilious » 15 sep 2007 16:53:34

Dear Doug,

They were brothers. See the limited account of these Bassets and
their siblings (and immediate progeny) below.

Why would your descent from either Basset hinge on their being
brothers?

Cheers,

John

________________________________________________


1 Thomas Basset1
----------------------------------------
Death: aft 11851,2
Father: Gilbert Basset (->1153)
Mother: Edith d'Oilly

of Whitford, Devon

had wardship of his grandson Robert de Grelley at the 1185 return
(Farrer, HKF II:251)3

identified as 'of Headington, co. Oxon.' elsewhere, in
error (Headington conferred on son Thomas,
1203 [Sanders, p. 514,5]

Spouse: Alice de Dunstanville
Death: aft 11852
Father: Alan de Dunstanville (-<1157)

Children: Thomas (-1220)
Gilbert (-<1205)
Alan (-1231)
Isabel



1.1 Thomas Basset
----------------------------------------
Death: 12206

of Headington, co. Oxon 6 and Colyton and Whitford, Devon

' Thoma Basset' , witness [together with Robert de Turnham, seneschal
of Anjou, Warin fitz Gerold, Thomas Basset, Alan Basset and others] to
charter of Richard I to William de Berkeley dated at Kahagnes, 28 Jan
1198/9 [Rutland MSS.,
IV:81, no. (16[n])7]

held 1 knight's fee in Devon ca. 1210-12 as accounted in the Red Book
of the Exchequer:
'Thomas Basset, j militem in Wycheforde ' [Red Book of the Exchequer,
1210-12, 'Milites comitatus' for 'Devonesira ' II:5588]

Named in the Magna Carta, 1215 as a supporter of King John9

identified as Thomas Basset, 'my nephew' in charters of Walter de
Dunstanville;
had grant from uncle Walter de Dunstanville of the manors of Colyton
and Witeford, Devon (Eyton V:284, citing Testa de Nevill)2

he 'recovered Deddington, Oxon., which he had given to William Malet
as his daughter's maritagium, upon undertaking to answer to the King
for it (showing that there was issue of the marriage)' [CP X:672 sub
_Poyntz_6]

re: his future son-in-law Henry de Newburgh, Earl of Warwick:
'In 1205 Thomas Basset, his 2nd [sic] wife's father, paid 500 m. for
his wardship and marriage to one of his own daughters (Pipe Roll, 7
John, p. 32; 8 John, p. 4; Rot Lit. Claus., vol. i, pp. 35, 36, 37,
53, 55).' [CP XII/2:364, note g6]

also had the manor of Colyton, Devon:
'(Charter) octave of Michael+7 (29 Sept); gr[anted] 1 Sept 1207, by
K[ing] John to Thomas Basset. To be held at the manor (RCh, p.
169).'10


Spouse: Philippe Malbank
Father: William Malbank of Wich Malbank, Cheshire
Mother: Ada de Beauchamp

Children: Philippe, m. Henry de Newburgh, E of Warwick
Joan, m. Reginald de Vautort
Alice, m. 1) William Malet,
2) John Bisset


1.2 Gilbert Basset6
----------------------------------------
Death: bef 24 Dec 12051,2

of Bicester and Wretchwick, co. Oxon.11

Gilbert 'II' Basset, 'held 7 fees of the honour of Wallingford in
1166.' (DD 164, citing Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. Hall (1897), pp.
308-11)12

made gift of land in Westcott, co. Bucks. to Bicester Priory [cf VCH
Oxford VI:21]13

founder of Burchester Priory2

Spouse: Egeline de Courtenay13
Father: Renaud de Courtenay, of Okehampton
Mother: Hawise de Curci, heiress of Okehampton

Children: Eustache, m. 1) Thomas de Verdun,
2) Richard de Camville


1.3 Alan Basset
----------------------------------------
Death: 123114,15

of Wycombe, co. Bucks.

'Occurs in the Carta of Gilbert de Bolebec in 1166 holding land in
Wicumbe.
Alan Basset and Amicia his wife confirmed to Pipewell the grant of
Hugh
de Senliz in the fee of Foxton at Braybrook (BL Add. 37023, fol.
16v).' [DD 16412]

' Alano Basset' , witness [together with Robert de Turnham, seneschal
of Anjou, Warin fitz Gerold, Thomas Basset, Alan Basset and others] to
charter of Richard I to William de Berkeley dated at Kahagnes, 28 Jan
1198/9 [Rutland MSS., IV:81, no. (16[n])7]

he evidently sought to be excused from his vow to go on Crusade in
1202, due to his responsibilities in England;
Papal mandate, issued ca. Oct 1202 at Velletri:
' Mandate to the bishop of Ely and the abbot of St. Edmunds to
examine
whether G. son of Peter, H. Bardof, W. de Stoteville, W. Briewer, R.
de
Burkeleia, A. and E. Basset, are so much needed in the realm that they
should
be dispensed from their vows as crusaders. ' [Cal. Papal Reg. I:12,
cites Opp.
ed. Migne, i. 108816]


supporter of King John, named as such in Magna Carta9

acquired the manor of Winterburne from his cousin Walter de
Dunstanville, as witnessed by Geoffrey FitzPiers, Earl of Essex, and
William Marshal [Dugdale, Baronage, p. 591]17

had a grant for a market (mercatum) from King Henry III to be held at
his manor of Wootton Basset, 16 Jan 121910

made gift in alms of land in Littlecott 'at the instance of Aline de
Gay his wife', 1229 or later [Adrian Channing, 21 June 1999]18

cf. CP IX:76-77, sub _Montagu6

Spouse: Aline de Gai6
Father: Philip de Gai, of Wootton, co. Wilts.
Mother: Cecily

Children: Gilbert Basset, of Wycombe, co. Bucks.
Fulk Basset, bishop of London
Sir Philip Basset, justiciar of England
Aline, m. 1) Drew de Montagu,
2) Richard Talbot
Katherine, m. John Lovel
Alice, m. Sir John de Sanford
NN [conjectured: parent of Fulk Basset,
Archbishop of Dublin]


1.4a Isabel Basset*19
----------------------------------------

she m. lstly Albert de Grelley,3
2ndly Guy de Craon

her heir was her son Robert Grelley

Spouse: Albert de Grelley [1st husband]
Death: bef Dec 11813
Father: Albert de Grelley

Children: Robert de Grelley, of Pirton, co. Oxon.



1.4b Isabel Basset* (See above)
----------------------------------------

Spouse: Guy de Craon [2nd husband]
Death: ca 120519
Father: Maurice de Craon (-1188)
Mother: Clarice

Children: Petronilla, m. 1stly [?] Sir Oliver de Vaux,
2ndly Sir Henry de la Mare,
3rdly William Longchamps



1. "Pedigree and Progress," Sir Anthony Wagner, London: Phillimore &
Co., Ltd., 1975.
2. "Antiquities of Shropshire," The Rev. R. W. Eyton, London: John
Russell Smith, 1855, Vol. 5 - p. 242 (Ludlow), pp. 132 (Banaster) and
133-142 (Barony of Hastings), Vol. 6 - pp. 350-359 (Meole Brace and de
Bracy).
3. William Farrer, Litt.D., "Honors and Knights' Fees," London:
Spottiswoode, Ballantyne & Co., Ltd., 1924 (3 vols.), Vol I:, Vol II:
Chester; Huntingdon, Vol III: Arundel, Eudes the Sewer, Warenne.
4. Rosie Bevan, "Origins of the Arden Family," Jul 10, 2000, GEN-
MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com.
5. I. J. Sanders, "English Baronies: A Study of Their Origin and
Descent, 1086-1327," Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960.
6. G. E. Cokayne, "The Complete Peerage," 1910 - [microprint,
1982 (Alan Sutton) ], The Complete Peerage of England Scotland Ireland
Great Britain and the United Kingdom.
7. Historical Manuscripts Commission, "The Manuscripts of His Grace
the Duke of Rutland, K.G. Preserved at Belvoir Castle," "Vol. IV,"
London: Printed for His Majesty's Stationery Office by Mackie & Co.,
LD., 1905, ed. by J. Horace Round (p. 3).
8. "Liber Rubeus de Scaccario," "(Red Book of the Exchequer)," images
provided by Ancestry.com.
9. Frederick L. Weis, Th. D., "The Magna Carta Sureties, 1215,"
Baltimore: Gen Pub Co., 5th ed., 1997 (W. L. Sheppard Jr & David
Faris).
10. "Gazetteer of Markets and Fairs to 1516," http://www.histparl.ac.uk/cmh/gaz/,
extracted 5 Nov 2001, Wiltshire [Bassett], Yorkshire [Salvain] - North
Duffield.
11. Douglas Richardson, "Longespee," September 8, 2002, paper copy:
library of John Ravilious, text, line of descent from William
Longespee, Earl of Salisbury (d. 7 Mar 1225/6).
12. K. S. B. Keats-Rohan, "Domesday Descendants," The Boydell Press,
Woodbridge, 2002, cited by Rosie Bevan, 'Re: de Stuteville' Jul 2,
2002, p. 723 (Osmund de Stuteville), full title: Domesday Descendants:
A Prosopography of Persons, Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166:
Pipe Rolls to Cartae Baronum.
13. Richard Borthwick, "Egeline, wife of Gilbert Basset," Apr 20,
1997, GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com.
14. Frederick L. Weis (add/corr, Walter L Sheppard Jr.), "Ancestral
Roots of Certain American Colonists," Baltimore: Genealogical Pub.
Co., connection of Isabel de Condet and Hugh Bardolf, as cited by E.
Mann, Line 132D-27,-28 in AR7, also, Descendants of Henry I of
Germany (10/30/98), Line 157 (Gerberga of Burgundy to Emperor Henry
III).
15. "Henry III Fine Rolls Project," URL
http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/conte ... l_009.html.
16. W. H. Bliss, B.C.L., ed., "Calendar of Entries in the Papal
Registers Relating to Great Britain and Ireland," Papal Letters, Vol.
I (A.D. 1198-1304), London: Printed for Her Majesty's Stationery
Office, by Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1893.
17. William Dugdale, Norroy King of Arms, "The Baronage of England,"
Tho. Newcomb [reprint Georg Verlag, New York], London, 1675 [reprint
New York, 1977].
18. Douglas Richardson, "Sir Philip Basset," Jun 20, 1999, GEN-
MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com, see followup, June 22, 1999 (Re: Philip
Basset).
19. Kay Allen, AG, "Vaux Genealogy," Feb 23, 1999, GEN-MEDIEVAL-
L@rootsweb.com, followup on 'Re: DeVaux', December 29, 1998.


On Sep 15, 11:30 am, Doug McDonald <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu>
wrote:
John P. Ravilious wrote:

About King's counsellors at Runnymede



11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset

Are these brothers?

I do descend from several (6) of these:

Alan of Galloway
Alan Basset
Thomas Basset assuming they are brothers
William d'Aubigny
William de Warenne
William Longspee

Doug McDonald

Doug McDonald

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av Doug McDonald » 15 sep 2007 17:15:34

John P. Ravilious wrote:
Dear Doug,

They were brothers. See the limited account of these Bassets and
their siblings (and immediate progeny) below.

Why would your descent from either Basset hinge on their being
brothers?


Because otherwise my identification of "Thomas Basset" in my file
with the Magna Carta counselor would depend solely on his date and name,
with no indication that he was actually the right person. It's
not the descent, its the identification as being at Runnymede that
was in question, as I did not have a father for him.

Doug

taf

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av taf » 15 sep 2007 17:57:34

On Sep 15, 8:53 am, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:


1.3 Alan Basset
----------------------------------------

Spouse: Aline de Gai6
Father: Philip de Gai, of Wootton, co. Wilts.
Mother: Cecily

Children: Gilbert Basset, of Wycombe, co. Bucks.
Fulk Basset, bishop of London
Sir Philip Basset, justiciar of England
Aline, m. 1) Drew de Montagu,
2) Richard Talbot
Katherine, m. John Lovel
Alice, m. Sir John de Sanford
NN [conjectured: parent of Fulk Basset,
Archbishop of Dublin]

Fulk, Archbishop of Dublin, appears in early records as Fulk de
Sandford, and witnesses a family document immediately after Sir
Gilbert de Sandford, son of John de Sandford and Alice Basset. Thus
his placement seems obvious, and I don't see why his placement has
been such a puzzle (several sources make him illegitimate son of
Gilbert or Fulk, for no other reason I can tell than that he used the
Basset name, later in life, was (it is said) nephew to Philip, and
Gilbert and Fulk were Philip's brothers. Google "Fulk de Sandford"
for some examples, and a discussion from the archives.

taf

Paul J Gans

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Paul J Gans » 15 sep 2007 19:03:04

In alt.history.british John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Paul J Gans wrote:
In alt.history.british gro <gilrobison@aol.com> wrote:
On Sep 14, 7:03?am, "John Briggs" <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Brian Pears wrote:
John Briggs <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
The language no longer exists, of course - it has been replaced by
Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian (possibly also Montenegrin).
"Serbo-Croat" was preferred in British usage.

As the 'languages' are completely mutually intelligible, is it
not more accurate to describe them as dialects of the same
language, Serbo-Croat, like Geordie, Scouse, Brum, American,
Australian, Cockney and Mancunian are to English? ?Surely it's
just nationalism which prompts the insistence that their local
dialect is a distinct 'language'.

OK, what's the linguists definition of the difference between a
language and a dialect?
--
John Briggs

I am guessing this question is rhetorical, but will answer
nonetheless.

A language is a dialect with an army.

Hmm. Latin is a dialect of which language?

Faliscan.

Well, that clears it up then.

--
--- Paul J. Gans

Gjest

Re: Sinclairs in England before conquest

Legg inn av Gjest » 15 sep 2007 19:08:04

In a message dated 9/15/2007 9:10:19 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
farmerie@interfold.com writes:

Look at Holy Blood, Holy Grail. This was written and marketed as
history (admittedly, secret hidden alternative history), based on the
documents of the Priory of Sion, yet the priory documents were
forgeries.


---
Small caveat. Only *part* of HBHG is based on documents from the fictional
Piory of Sion. There are also actual historical persons and events related
in that book. The problem of course is weeding out one from the other. They
do give copious footnotes.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Gjest » 15 sep 2007 19:16:02

In a message dated 9/15/2007 2:25:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
a.spencer3@ntlworld.com writes:

So why do Inuit etc. tend to be dark skinned?


-----------
They are newly Northern. Also they eat raw fish.



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Gjest » 15 sep 2007 19:35:58

On Sep 15, 5:20 am, "a.spencer3" <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote in messagenews:fXCGi.96$H_5.352@eagle.america.net...> Thoughtful.

But citation?

DSH

campofonen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189804724.863887.127460@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

Sunlight is necessary for the synthesis of Vitamin D. As Homo sapiens
migrated into northern localities with less sunshine scientists
believe they evolved (through natural selection) paler skin with less
pigment, allowing more of the sun's rays to penetrate.

So why do Inuit etc. tend to be dark skinned?

Surreyman

One good possibility is that the Inuit had plenty of fish (and fish-
oil) in their diet. Fish-oil is one of the few natural foods that has
a good supply of Vitamin D. (Most other modern foods, such as milk,
are artificially supplemented with Vitamin D).

Another possibility is genetic drift. The gene for reduced skin
pigment (slc24a5) is most common among northern Europeans and their
descendants. Scientists estimate that the original mutation occurred
around 20,000 to 50,000 years ago. Possibly through generations of
natural selection it became well-established in that population.

The climate of northern Europe is overcast and cloudy, and the
original land was mostly forested allowing less sunlight to penetrate.
The Inuit live in the Arctic far north of the Equator where the days
of sunlight are also reduced. But the Artic is mostly open
(unforested) and perhaps a fair amount of sunlight is to penetrate.

Gjest

Re: Petition from Eleanor de Bohun, widow of Robert de Ferre

Legg inn av Gjest » 15 sep 2007 19:37:03

In a message dated 9/15/2007 10:05:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:

As presented by Will in his post below, he has implied that either
Roger le Strange or Master Richard de Clifford of his first enty was
the person who was granted Chartley Castle in 1276 in his second
entry. However, the second entry dated 1276 indicates that the grant
in that year was to Edmund, the king's brother, not to Roger le
Strange or Master Richard de Clifford.


-------------------------
The first entry is not a "grant" its more of a seizure right? Roger
leStrange must have been in the role of some sort of Sheriff to come evict whoever
is holding Certele, and deliver it to the king's clerk Richard Clifford. This
is so the king can *then* grant it to whomever he chooses.

Which he does a few years later. So either it took a while to get custody,
or the king was in no hurry to re-grant it. It does appear likely that
*something* had occurred in 1273 or shortly before to make it available. Probably
Thomas had just died.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Petition from Eleanor de Bohun, widow of Robert de Ferre

Legg inn av Gjest » 15 sep 2007 19:42:04

In a message dated 9/15/2007 10:36:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
WJhonson@aol.com writes:

Which he does a few years later. So either it took a while to get custody,

or the king was in no hurry to re-grant it. It does appear likely that
*something* had occurred in 1273 or shortly before to make it available.
Probably
Thomas had just died.


--------
By the way. It appears that the person *holding* Certele was most likely to
be Eleanor, who probably re-entered it when Thomas died (so he must have
d.s.p. or d.s.p.m.), assuming it would come to her holdings, although her
husband had forfeit his lands. Interesting claim. So the king seizes it upon the
pretext that there *is* no lawful heir let's say, due to the forfeit, then
later, after some cooling-off period decides to re-grant it back to Eleanor
again anyway. Perhaps after his brother Edmund had died.



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 20:00:38

Dear John et Alii,

Vide infra pro interscriptibus.

DSH

"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189861560.253516.77030@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...

Dear Spencer,

This is an interesting group, although as a group they have
received less positive attention than their counterparts standing
across the field at Runnymede.

Precisely!

Of the 18 men you identified, I show extended descents to the
present day for 11 of them (William Marshal, etc.), and I have not
attempted below to delve into their descendants, with two exceptions
(Hugh de Neville and John Marshal). Of the others, there are 4 for
whom I have no record of either marriage or issue. The remaining 3
are well known: however, for these I show no known descendants, or
whose progeny ended in 4 generations or less.


1. William The Marshal, Earl of Pembroke (who appears on both lists)

2. William, Earl of Salisbury and Wiltshire [William Longespee]

3. William de Warenne, Earl of Warenne and Surrey

4. William d'Aubigny, Earl of Arundel and Sussex

5. Alan de Galloway, Lord of Galloway and Constable of Scotland

6. Warin Fitz Gerold, Lord of Deddington Castle

No descendants noted after 4 generations (Aveline de Forz,
Countess of Aumale (d. 1274) is the last I see).

The estates of the Fitz Gerolds eventually allegedly passed to the
Courtenays (successors to the Reviers as Earls of Devon) and to the de
I'sles.

7. Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent

8. Piers Fitz Herbert

9. Matthew Fitz Herbert

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

They were brothers reportedly descended from a thegn of Edward The
Confessor, named Herbert, who held the Manor of Crookham, near Reading in
Berkshire.

Piers Fitz Herbert was lord of fifteen knights' fees in Berkshire and
Hampshire. Matthew Paris calls him one of "the evil Counsellors of King
John". He died 1235 and was buried in Reading Abbey. I have parents, wives
and other data on him.

Piers had, among others, a son, Reynold Fitz Piers who carried on the line.

Nothing further seems to be recorded about Matthew -- although, as noted
above, I have his parents.

10. Hugh de Neville

of Hallingbury, Essex. Myriad descendants if only through his
granddaughter Joan de Neville, wife (1stly) of Sir Henry de la
Mare [ancestors of Montfort of Beaudesert, the Lords Montagu
incl. the Earls of Salisbury, Lisle of Rougemont, etc.).

11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset

Yes, these two were brothers, sons of Thomas Basset of Headington,
Oxfordshire. Many details about them.

13. Philip Daubeney

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

He was one of the tutors to Prince Henry, later Henry III. He came directly
from the town of Aubigny, in Normandy, close to Brittany -- and was not
related to the Earls of Arundel.

He held high office under Henry III -- Warden of the Channel Islands,
Seneschal of the Honour of Wallingford and Sheriff of Berkshire. He died in
the Holy Land 1235/6 and was buried there.

He reportedly died sine prole.

His nephew inherited Philip's estate of Petherton and was ancestor of a long
line of Daubeneys. The last male died sine prole in 1548.
14. Robert de Roppelay

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

His name appears as noted in Magna Carta but seems to have actually been
Robert de Rokkeley. A bit of fun with the deciphering perhaps. He was a
justice in the reign of Henry III and died about 1248, leaving two sons,
Henry and Richard.

15. John Marshal

of Hingham, Norfolk; believed to have been illegitimate
half-brother to William Marshal. Ancestor of the Lords
Marshal, Marshals of Ireland, and thereby of the Lords
Morley and many more besides.

Actually, he seems to have been a nephew of William Marshal, being the son
of his brother, Anselm.

16. John Fitz Hugh

Not identified in my database; career and descendants not noted.

John Fitz Hugh was Constable of Windsor Castle, close by Runnemede. King
John had taken up residence there during the Magna Carta proceedings. He
had descendants.

17. Ranulph Blundeville, Earl of Chester and Lincoln

No known descendants. His heirs were his sisters, Maud (wife
of David of Scotland, earl of Huntingdon), Mabel (wife of the
royalist William d'Aubigny, earl of Arundel), Agnes (wife of
William de Ferrers, earl of Derby) and Hawise, Countess of
Lincoln (wife of Robert de Quincy, 'rebel'). The descendants
of his sisters are widespread, to say the least.

18. Henry, Earl of Cornwall

No known descendants. His illegitimate half sisters have
many known descendants, via the Counts of Meulan and the
Vautort (Valletort) family of Trematon.

His mother seems to have been Beatrice de Vannes. He was Constable of
Totnes Castle and Sheriff of Cornwall. In 1215, the very year of Magna
Carta, he was granted the County of Cornwall to farm until the realm should
be at peace. He resigned the County to King Henry III in 1220

As to noticed royal descents, the first English monarch descended
from a Surety of the Magna Carta was Richard II (descendant of Saier
de Quincy, E of Winchester). His 'well-loved' cousin, Henry IV, was
the first to mix the blood of the Sureties (de Quincy) with that of
the royalists (William Marshal, and William de Warenne).

Cheers,

John

One of my principal sources here is:

_Magna Carta, King John and the Barons, Arthur Edward Bye, The Baronial
Order of Magna Carta, 1966 -- which is certainly NOT without some errors.

Cheers,

Spencer

On Sep 15, 1:24 am, "D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote:

Let's not forget about the 18 secular Guarantors & Counselors of King
John from whom Doug MacDonald and many others here can no doubt
find some descents -- as well as from King John himself of course.

Here they are, although, of course, many do not have descendants living
today. Collaterals may prove interesting:

1. William The Marshal, Earl of Pembroke (who appears on both lists)

2. William, Earl of Salisbury and Wiltshire [William de Longespee]

3. William de Warenne, Earl of Warenne and Surrey

4. William d'Aubigny, Earl of Arundel and Sussex

5. Alan de Galloway, Lord of Galloway and Constable of Scotland

6. Warin Fitz Gerold, Lord of Deddington Castle

7. Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent

8. Piers Fitz Herbert

9. Matthew Fitz Herbert

10. Hugh de Neville

11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset

13. Philip Daubeney

14. Robert de Roppelay

15. John Marshal

16. John Fitz Hugh

17. Ranulph Blundeville, Earl of Chester and Lincoln

18. Henry, Earl of Cornwall

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Deus Vult

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 20:02:45

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:fcgtsd$7cp$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

John P. Ravilious wrote:

About King's counsellors at Runnymede


11. Thomas Basset

12. Alan Basset


Are these brothers?

Yes, they are.

I do descend from several (6) of these:

Alan of Galloway
Alan Basset
Thomas Basset assuming they are brothers
William d'Aubigny
William de Warenne
William Longspee

Doug McDonald

taf

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av taf » 15 sep 2007 20:20:08

On Sep 15, 9:57 am, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:
On Sep 15, 8:53 am, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:

1.3 Alan Basset
----------------------------------------
Spouse: Aline de Gai6
Father: Philip de Gai, of Wootton, co. Wilts.
Mother: Cecily

Children: Gilbert Basset, of Wycombe, co. Bucks.
Fulk Basset, bishop of London
Sir Philip Basset, justiciar of England
Aline, m. 1) Drew de Montagu,
2) Richard Talbot
Katherine, m. John Lovel
Alice, m. Sir John de Sanford
NN [conjectured: parent of Fulk Basset,
Archbishop of Dublin]

Fulk, Archbishop of Dublin, appears in early records as Fulk de
Sandford, and witnesses a family document immediately after Sir
Gilbert de Sandford, son of John de Sandford and Alice Basset. Thus
his placement seems obvious, and I don't see why his placement has
been such a puzzle (several sources make him illegitimate son of
Gilbert or Fulk, for no other reason I can tell than that he used the
Basset name, later in life, was (it is said) nephew to Philip, and
Gilbert and Fulk were Philip's brothers. Google "Fulk de Sandford"
for some examples, and a discussion from the archives.

Let me just add that in that earlier discussion I presented the
following children for John and Alice:

1. John (Sir John was the second witness, after Fulk Basset, of the
grant to Gilbert Basset of the right to name the 'Basset canon', while
the text indicates that Alan's father was now deceased, suggesting
that
the witness was son and current senior representative of the family)
2. Alan (deceased a bit before the granting of the Basset canon, which
explicitly names his parents)
3. Gilbert (witness of Basset canon grant, as well as several Basset
charters, eventual heir)
4. Nicholas (names father as John in grant to Laurence, co-witness
with
Gilbert)
5. Roger (witnesses grant from Nicholas to Laurence)
6. Laurence (named as brother by Nicholas, Philip Basset took direct
interest in his estate)
7. Fulk, Archbishop (called nephew of Philip Basset, witnessed Philip
Basset charter along with Gilbert)
8. Aline, m. Henry de Bathe
9. Cecilia m. William de Gorham

Some of these were tentative, specifically Roger and Fulk, while the
daughters were poorly documented. Well, I can now solidify Roger, and
add:

10. Thomas

Roger was placed due solely to one appearance in a Basset/Sandford
document as witness. I have now found two more. In one, a grant to
Philip Basset, the first witnesses are:

Sirs Gilbert de Saunford, Ralph de Arderne, Nicholas de Saunford,
Roger de Saunford, Laurence de Saunford . . .

and in another:

Roger de Samford and Laurence his brother, knights

Thus Roger is confirmed as a brother, and I would also feel safe in
concluding that the elder brother, John, was dead by the time of the
first of these (unfortunately, the date range, 1100-1603, is
unhelpful) and that Gilbert, Nicholas, Roger, and Laurence were
probably born in that order.

There is also a similar grant, from William de Monte Acuto, son of
Drogo de M A, to Philip Basset witnessed by:

Ralph de Ardern, Thomas and Nicholas de Sanford, brothers

and elsewhere we find:

Gilbert Basset John Biset William Maudut Alan lochowche John de Burc'
William de Mutagu Gilbert de Saunford Thomas de Saunford Alan Basset
Thomas White (Albo)

Thus we can add Thomas as yet another brother (like several siblings,
named for a Basset uncle), and I wonder if there isn't an Arderne
connection as well.

taf

taf

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av taf » 15 sep 2007 20:20:08

On Sep 15, 9:57 am, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:
On Sep 15, 8:53 am, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:

1.3 Alan Basset
----------------------------------------
Spouse: Aline de Gai6
Father: Philip de Gai, of Wootton, co. Wilts.
Mother: Cecily

Children: Gilbert Basset, of Wycombe, co. Bucks.
Fulk Basset, bishop of London
Sir Philip Basset, justiciar of England
Aline, m. 1) Drew de Montagu,
2) Richard Talbot
Katherine, m. John Lovel
Alice, m. Sir John de Sanford
NN [conjectured: parent of Fulk Basset,
Archbishop of Dublin]

Fulk, Archbishop of Dublin, appears in early records as Fulk de
Sandford, and witnesses a family document immediately after Sir
Gilbert de Sandford, son of John de Sandford and Alice Basset. Thus
his placement seems obvious, and I don't see why his placement has
been such a puzzle (several sources make him illegitimate son of
Gilbert or Fulk, for no other reason I can tell than that he used the
Basset name, later in life, was (it is said) nephew to Philip, and
Gilbert and Fulk were Philip's brothers. Google "Fulk de Sandford"
for some examples, and a discussion from the archives.

Let me just add that in that earlier discussion I presented the
following children for John and Alice:

1. John (Sir John was the second witness, after Fulk Basset, of the
grant to Gilbert Basset of the right to name the 'Basset canon', while
the text indicates that Alan's father was now deceased, suggesting
that
the witness was son and current senior representative of the family)
2. Alan (deceased a bit before the granting of the Basset canon, which
explicitly names his parents)
3. Gilbert (witness of Basset canon grant, as well as several Basset
charters, eventual heir)
4. Nicholas (names father as John in grant to Laurence, co-witness
with
Gilbert)
5. Roger (witnesses grant from Nicholas to Laurence)
6. Laurence (named as brother by Nicholas, Philip Basset took direct
interest in his estate)
7. Fulk, Archbishop (called nephew of Philip Basset, witnessed Philip
Basset charter along with Gilbert)
8. Aline, m. Henry de Bathe
9. Cecilia m. William de Gorham

Some of these were tentative, specifically Roger and Fulk, while the
daughters were poorly documented. Well, I can now solidify Roger, and
add:

10. Thomas

Roger was placed due solely to one appearance in a Basset/Sandford
document as witness. I have now found two more. In one, a grant to
Philip Basset, the first witnesses are:

Sirs Gilbert de Saunford, Ralph de Arderne, Nicholas de Saunford,
Roger de Saunford, Laurence de Saunford . . .

and in another:

Roger de Samford and Laurence his brother, knights

Thus Roger is confirmed as a brother, and I would also feel safe in
concluding that the elder brother, John, was dead by the time of the
first of these (unfortunately, the date range, 1100-1603, is
unhelpful) and that Gilbert, Nicholas, Roger, and Laurence were
probably born in that order.

There is also a similar grant, from William de Monte Acuto, son of
Drogo de M A, to Philip Basset witnessed by:

Ralph de Ardern, Thomas and Nicholas de Sanford, brothers

and elsewhere we find:

Gilbert Basset John Biset William Maudut Alan lochowche John de Burc'
William de Mutagu Gilbert de Saunford Thomas de Saunford Alan Basset
Thomas White (Albo)

Thus we can add Thomas as yet another brother (like several siblings,
named for a Basset uncle), and I wonder if there isn't an Arderne
connection as well.

taf

taf

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av taf » 15 sep 2007 20:20:08

On Sep 15, 9:57 am, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:
On Sep 15, 8:53 am, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:

1.3 Alan Basset
----------------------------------------
Spouse: Aline de Gai6
Father: Philip de Gai, of Wootton, co. Wilts.
Mother: Cecily

Children: Gilbert Basset, of Wycombe, co. Bucks.
Fulk Basset, bishop of London
Sir Philip Basset, justiciar of England
Aline, m. 1) Drew de Montagu,
2) Richard Talbot
Katherine, m. John Lovel
Alice, m. Sir John de Sanford
NN [conjectured: parent of Fulk Basset,
Archbishop of Dublin]

Fulk, Archbishop of Dublin, appears in early records as Fulk de
Sandford, and witnesses a family document immediately after Sir
Gilbert de Sandford, son of John de Sandford and Alice Basset. Thus
his placement seems obvious, and I don't see why his placement has
been such a puzzle (several sources make him illegitimate son of
Gilbert or Fulk, for no other reason I can tell than that he used the
Basset name, later in life, was (it is said) nephew to Philip, and
Gilbert and Fulk were Philip's brothers. Google "Fulk de Sandford"
for some examples, and a discussion from the archives.

Let me just add that in that earlier discussion I presented the
following children for John and Alice:

1. John (Sir John was the second witness, after Fulk Basset, of the
grant to Gilbert Basset of the right to name the 'Basset canon', while
the text indicates that Alan's father was now deceased, suggesting
that
the witness was son and current senior representative of the family)
2. Alan (deceased a bit before the granting of the Basset canon, which
explicitly names his parents)
3. Gilbert (witness of Basset canon grant, as well as several Basset
charters, eventual heir)
4. Nicholas (names father as John in grant to Laurence, co-witness
with
Gilbert)
5. Roger (witnesses grant from Nicholas to Laurence)
6. Laurence (named as brother by Nicholas, Philip Basset took direct
interest in his estate)
7. Fulk, Archbishop (called nephew of Philip Basset, witnessed Philip
Basset charter along with Gilbert)
8. Aline, m. Henry de Bathe
9. Cecilia m. William de Gorham

Some of these were tentative, specifically Roger and Fulk, while the
daughters were poorly documented. Well, I can now solidify Roger, and
add:

10. Thomas

Roger was placed due solely to one appearance in a Basset/Sandford
document as witness. I have now found two more. In one, a grant to
Philip Basset, the first witnesses are:

Sirs Gilbert de Saunford, Ralph de Arderne, Nicholas de Saunford,
Roger de Saunford, Laurence de Saunford . . .

and in another:

Roger de Samford and Laurence his brother, knights

Thus Roger is confirmed as a brother, and I would also feel safe in
concluding that the elder brother, John, was dead by the time of the
first of these (unfortunately, the date range, 1100-1603, is
unhelpful) and that Gilbert, Nicholas, Roger, and Laurence were
probably born in that order.

There is also a similar grant, from William de Monte Acuto, son of
Drogo de M A, to Philip Basset witnessed by:

Ralph de Ardern, Thomas and Nicholas de Sanford, brothers

and elsewhere we find:

Gilbert Basset John Biset William Maudut Alan lochowche John de Burc'
William de Mutagu Gilbert de Saunford Thomas de Saunford Alan Basset
Thomas White (Albo)

Thus we can add Thomas as yet another brother (like several siblings,
named for a Basset uncle), and I wonder if there isn't an Arderne
connection as well.

taf

taf

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av taf » 15 sep 2007 20:20:08

On Sep 15, 9:57 am, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:
On Sep 15, 8:53 am, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:

1.3 Alan Basset
----------------------------------------
Spouse: Aline de Gai6
Father: Philip de Gai, of Wootton, co. Wilts.
Mother: Cecily

Children: Gilbert Basset, of Wycombe, co. Bucks.
Fulk Basset, bishop of London
Sir Philip Basset, justiciar of England
Aline, m. 1) Drew de Montagu,
2) Richard Talbot
Katherine, m. John Lovel
Alice, m. Sir John de Sanford
NN [conjectured: parent of Fulk Basset,
Archbishop of Dublin]

Fulk, Archbishop of Dublin, appears in early records as Fulk de
Sandford, and witnesses a family document immediately after Sir
Gilbert de Sandford, son of John de Sandford and Alice Basset. Thus
his placement seems obvious, and I don't see why his placement has
been such a puzzle (several sources make him illegitimate son of
Gilbert or Fulk, for no other reason I can tell than that he used the
Basset name, later in life, was (it is said) nephew to Philip, and
Gilbert and Fulk were Philip's brothers. Google "Fulk de Sandford"
for some examples, and a discussion from the archives.

Let me just add that in that earlier discussion I presented the
following children for John and Alice:

1. John (Sir John was the second witness, after Fulk Basset, of the
grant to Gilbert Basset of the right to name the 'Basset canon', while
the text indicates that Alan's father was now deceased, suggesting
that
the witness was son and current senior representative of the family)
2. Alan (deceased a bit before the granting of the Basset canon, which
explicitly names his parents)
3. Gilbert (witness of Basset canon grant, as well as several Basset
charters, eventual heir)
4. Nicholas (names father as John in grant to Laurence, co-witness
with
Gilbert)
5. Roger (witnesses grant from Nicholas to Laurence)
6. Laurence (named as brother by Nicholas, Philip Basset took direct
interest in his estate)
7. Fulk, Archbishop (called nephew of Philip Basset, witnessed Philip
Basset charter along with Gilbert)
8. Aline, m. Henry de Bathe
9. Cecilia m. William de Gorham

Some of these were tentative, specifically Roger and Fulk, while the
daughters were poorly documented. Well, I can now solidify Roger, and
add:

10. Thomas

Roger was placed due solely to one appearance in a Basset/Sandford
document as witness. I have now found two more. In one, a grant to
Philip Basset, the first witnesses are:

Sirs Gilbert de Saunford, Ralph de Arderne, Nicholas de Saunford,
Roger de Saunford, Laurence de Saunford . . .

and in another:

Roger de Samford and Laurence his brother, knights

Thus Roger is confirmed as a brother, and I would also feel safe in
concluding that the elder brother, John, was dead by the time of the
first of these (unfortunately, the date range, 1100-1603, is
unhelpful) and that Gilbert, Nicholas, Roger, and Laurence were
probably born in that order.

There is also a similar grant, from William de Monte Acuto, son of
Drogo de M A, to Philip Basset witnessed by:

Ralph de Ardern, Thomas and Nicholas de Sanford, brothers

and elsewhere we find:

Gilbert Basset John Biset William Maudut Alan lochowche John de Burc'
William de Mutagu Gilbert de Saunford Thomas de Saunford Alan Basset
Thomas White (Albo)

Thus we can add Thomas as yet another brother (like several siblings,
named for a Basset uncle), and I wonder if there isn't an Arderne
connection as well.

taf

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 20:55:59

It's important, I think, to stress the role of William Marshal, Earl of
Pembroke, in the World Historical Event we call Magna Carta.

William Marshal was the man most responsible for making Magna Carta
happen -- and deserves most of the credit.

Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury also deserves kudos.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 15 sep 2007 21:07:33

I was misleading and unclear here.

William Marshal was not officially a surety for Magna Carta, although his
son, William, was.

However William did have great credibility with the barons and was "on their
side" in many ways because he was an Earl and great landholder himself and
was not just a "King's man".

Because of his great prestige and long service to the Realm he was "above
the fray" in many ways and could bring the contending parties together -- in
concert with Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

> 1. William The Marshal, Earl of Pembroke (who appears on both lists)

Hovite

Re: Fwd: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Hovite » 15 sep 2007 21:17:06

It is also worth noting that Hengest himself is also fictional:

"... Hengest and Horsa were mythical founding figures, divine twins
like Romulus and Remus, rather than real people. ... the first sixty
years of Kentish history, from the landing in about 449 to Æsc's death
in 512, carefully recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, are
completely fictitious. ..."

http://www.anglo-saxons.net/hwaet/?do=s ... ry=450-550

Real history begins with the arrival of Christianity and writing.

Hal Bradley

RE: The surnames Longespee and Botetourt

Legg inn av Hal Bradley » 15 sep 2007 21:46:21

Douglas,

You should also inform the editors of Complete Peerage that Botetourt should
be used without the "de". See CP 2:233-235 where they fall into the same
error.

Hal Bradley

-----Original Message-----
From: gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-medieval-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of Douglas
Richardson
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 12:46 PM
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com
Subject: The surnames Longespee and Botetourt


Dear John ~

Neither Longespie or Botetourt for that matter takes a "de."
Regardless, on very rare occasions, you see both surnames with a "de"
in contemporary records. I'm not sure why this happened, other than
the clerks were a little sloppy at times. I suppose the same is true
today. Regardless, the correct form is without the "de."

I note that Will Johnson's website, English families of note
1000-1660, shows entries for BOTH Longespie and Botetourt with a "de."

http://awt.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi ... recno=2655

http://awt.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi ... jroyals&re
cno=11472


I also note that Hal Bradley's database and the van de Pas' database
show various entries for Botetourt with a "de."

http://awt.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi ... ecno=10025

http://www.genealogics.org/search.php?t ... ontains&my
lastname=Botetourt&fnqualify=contains&myfirstname=&idqualify=equals&myperson
id=&bpqualify=contains&mybirthplace=&byqualify=&mybirthyear=&cpqualify=conta
ins&myaltbirthplace=&cyqualify=&myaltbirthyear=&dpqualify=contains&mydeathpl
ace=&dyqualify=&mydeathyear=&brpqualify=contains&myburialplace=&bryqualify=&
myburialyear=&mybool=AND&nnqualify=contains&mynickname=&tqualify=contains&my
title=&sfqualify=contains&mysuffix=&cfq5=contains&cef5=&cpq5=contains&cep5=&
cyq5=&cey5=&cfq1=contains&cef1=&cpq1=contains&cep1=&cyq1=&cey1=&cfq2=contain
s&cef2=&cpq2=contains&cep2=&cyq2=&cey2=&cfq3=contains&cef3=&cpq3=contains&ce
p3=&cyq3=&cey3=&cfq8=contains&cef8=&cpq8=contains&cep8=&cyq8=&cey8=&offset=0

However, both of these databases correctly ltheir Longespie entries
without a "de."

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah


On Sep 15, 9:08 am, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:
< On Sep 15, 6:06 am, "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote:
<
< > 2. William, Earl of Salisbury and Wiltshire [William de
Longespee]

Christopher Ingham

Re: Fwd: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Christopher Ingham » 15 sep 2007 23:50:13

On Sep 15, 4:17 pm, Hovite <paulvhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
It is also worth noting that Hengest himself is also fictional:

"... Hengest and Horsa were mythical founding figures, divine twins
like Romulus and Remus, rather than real people. ... the first sixty
years of Kentish history, from the landing in about 449 to Æsc's death
in 512, carefully recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, are
completely fictitious. ..."

http://www.anglo-saxons.net/hwaet/?do=s ... ry=450-550

Real history begins with the arrival of Christianity and writing.

Would anyone be aware as to whether there have been any recent
substantive inroads in verifying the supposed and very tenuous descent
of Egbert from Charibert via the Kentish kings?

Christopher Ingham

Volucris

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Volucris » 16 sep 2007 00:41:33

Hi Will,

An interesting post you made here. Friday, dusting the bookshelves, I
came across an English book I bought in Canada in 2000:

Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd with John Baldock, 'The Keys to Avalon. The
true location of Arthur's kingdom revealed' (2000).; HB ISBN 1 86204
735 9 and PB ISBN 1 86204 723 5. Published in the USA in 2000 by
Element Books, Inc., 160 North Washington Street, Boston, MA 02114.

It seems that Geoffrey translated a book in the Welsh language into
Latin, that Walter the archdeacon of Oxford brought with him from his
travels to Wales. In translating the text Geoffrey interpretated
wrongly the geographical names with the consequense that (his-)stories
happening in the past of Wales were situated in Great Brittain (England
+Wales+Scotland). These stories as Geoffrey related them have been
long regarded long as real. They have even been politically exploited
but as time went by and new generations of reseachers and historians
found faults, Geoffreys work has been categorised as a fancyfull mix
of facts and fiction.

'Brittain' in 1136 should be read as Wales. The authors deduced that
as Geoffrey was translating a Welsh book there may have been more
Welsh versions of the text he had in front of him. Those versions do
indeed exist. There are over 70 surviving manuscripts of a Welsh text
known as Brut Y Brenhinedd (Chronicle of the Kings). These manuscripts
have been thought versions of a Welsh translation of the Latin
translation of Geoffrey. The Brut has details that Geoffrey's
translation does not have:

"within Geoffrey's translations there are numerous instances where the
name is still to be found in its original Welsh form alongside the
'corrected' location provided for the book's Norman audience." "These
corrections - or 'explanations' - were absent from nearly all of the
Welsh copies of the Brut, presumably because because the latter were
intended for a Welsh audience who would have known where these places
were."

So Geoffrey kind of corrupted the Welsh text and provided all who just
read his work a wrong track for study, research and debate. It is not
my intention to claim the work of Geoffrey is factual, but it seems
that in the Welsh versions of the Brut there may be more real facts
and hints that meet the eye than in Geoffreys work. So anyone quoting
"The History of the kings of Britain" should stop doing that. Try the
above mentioned book as an eye opener and for some new research
tracks.

I can say no more on the subject as I just started reading it again in
my spare time.

Hans Vogels




On 14 sep, 02:15, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 09/13/07 16:44:24 Pacific Standard Time, Jwc1870 writes:
I seem to recall reading in the forward of my penguin
paperback edition of Geoffrey of Monmouth`s " History of the Kings of Britain" that
Geoffrey copied a lot of his material from earlier work written by Welsh monks
which doubtless came from the lips of Welsh poets and genealogists who had
it from the lips of their teachers, et cetera.

--------------------

Geoffrey states that he got his material from an old book. The accepted wisdom is either that he made it all up which seems hardly likely if you read it; OR that he was relating actual stories mixed in with some of his own fiction.

Certainly it seems pretty odd that he would believe that King Arthur (who per the loose chronology I've built based on Geoffrey, must have reigned around 500) had actually conquered Paris and all of Gaul, etc, Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark....

That part, I can certainly believe, Geoffrey very greatly exaggerated. Arthur it seems, based simply on the *amount* of material he gives him and his exploits, was the main point of the work, although we don't get *to* Arthur until the last few "books" (12 books in all).

He mentions Merlin here and there, but quite a lot of the book is very dry detailing of genealogies, apparently stretching back to perhaps 1500 to 2000 BC, not all of which obviously connect to each other. If this is a work of pure fiction is a very boring one, and judged by the things he says about Arthur he certainly *could* have made up a lot more about everyone else. If you're going to write a whopper of fiction pretending to be fact, why make parts of it dreadfully dull?

In particular, although he claims British lineage for Constantine the Great among others, he doesn't really dwell on what Constantine exactly did. Seems a bit odd to just skip merrily past one of the greatest leaders of the past if your main point is to show how amazing the British were.

Will Johnson

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Magna Carta Sureties, Et Alii ... Was Hastings

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 16 sep 2007 00:53:13

"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189861560.253516.77030@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...

Dear Spencer,

This is an interesting group, although as a group they have
received less positive attention than their counterparts standing
across the field at Runnymede.

Precisely!...

Because, in the popular and academic image, they are seen as the Black Hats,
the "evil counsellors of King John".

Realists Know Better...

'Nuff Said.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Volucris

Fictive British history set in real Welsh past?

Legg inn av Volucris » 16 sep 2007 01:36:14

Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd work as historical consultants for the North
Wales tourist board.
John Baldock is a teacher, art historian and pubished author.

Some of the catching phrases from the back cover:
Avalon exists. It is a real place with geographical boundaries and a
turbulent history. It is the treasure house of Arthurian legend. It is
the secret location in which the identity of an entire nation has lain
buried. Until now ... Intertwining the mystery and romance of ancient
myth with the exitement of modern historical discovery, The Keys to
Avalon:
- exposes the rewriting of history and the olitical intrigue which
robbed a people of their heritage and cultural identity,
- is the first book to establish a viable setting for the Arthurian
legacy,
- challenges the accepted theories about early British history and
Arthur, providing a solution to the mystery of Avalon,
-substanciates its claims with detailed references to original Welsh
textual sources, maps and genealogical charts,
goes beyond well-known Arthurian texts to their roots in ancient
Welsh manuscripts ande the history of the land.
The Keys to Avalon is the first work to unlock the doors to a past
that has been swathed in myth and legend, revealing a landscap which
is as real as it is hauntingly magical.

Hans Vogels



On 16 sep, 01:41, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:
Hi Will,

An interesting post you made here. Friday, dusting the bookshelves, I
came across an English book I bought in Canada in 2000:

Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd with John Baldock, 'The Keys to Avalon. The
true location of Arthur's kingdom revealed' (2000).; HB ISBN 1 86204
735 9 and PB ISBN 1 86204 723 5. Published in the USA in 2000 by
Element Books, Inc., 160 North Washington Street, Boston, MA 02114.

It seems that Geoffrey translated a book in the Welsh language into
Latin, that Walter the archdeacon of Oxford brought with him from his
travels to Wales. In translating the text Geoffrey interpretated
wrongly the geographical names with the consequense that (his-)stories
happening in the past of Wales were situated in Great Brittain (England
+Wales+Scotland). These stories as Geoffrey related them have been
long regarded long as real. They have even been politically exploited
but as time went by and new generations of reseachers and historians
found faults, Geoffreys work has been categorised as a fancyfull mix
of facts and fiction.

'Brittain' in 1136 should be read as Wales. The authors deduced that
as Geoffrey was translating a Welsh book there may have been more
Welsh versions of the text he had in front of him. Those versions do
indeed exist. There are over 70 surviving manuscripts of a Welsh text
known as Brut Y Brenhinedd (Chronicle of the Kings). These manuscripts
have been thought versions of a Welsh translation of the Latin
translation of Geoffrey. The Brut has details that Geoffrey's
translation does not have:

"within Geoffrey's translations there are numerous instances where the
name is still to be found in its original Welsh form alongside the
'corrected' location provided for the book's Norman audience." "These
corrections - or 'explanations' - were absent from nearly all of the
Welsh copies of the Brut, presumably because because the latter were
intended for a Welsh audience who would have known where these places
were."

So Geoffrey kind of corrupted the Welsh text and provided all who just
read his work a wrong track for study, research and debate. It is not
my intention to claim the work of Geoffrey is factual, but it seems
that in the Welsh versions of the Brut there may be more real facts
and hints that meet the eye than in Geoffreys work. So anyone quoting
"The History of the kings of Britain" should stop doing that. Try the
above mentioned book as an eye opener and for some new research
tracks.

I can say no more on the subject as I just started reading it again in
my spare time.

Hans Vogels

On 14 sep, 02:15, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:



In a message dated 09/13/07 16:44:24 Pacific Standard Time, Jwc1870 writes:
I seem to recall reading in the forward of my penguin
paperback edition of Geoffrey of Monmouth`s " History of the Kings of Britain" that
Geoffrey copied a lot of his material from earlier work written by Welsh monks
which doubtless came from the lips of Welsh poets and genealogists who had
it from the lips of their teachers, et cetera.

--------------------

Geoffrey states that he got his material from an old book. The accepted wisdom is either that he made it all up which seems hardly likely if you read it; OR that he was relating actual stories mixed in with some of his own fiction.

Certainly it seems pretty odd that he would believe that King Arthur (who per the loose chronology I've built based on Geoffrey, must have reigned around 500) had actually conquered Paris and all of Gaul, etc, Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark....

That part, I can certainly believe, Geoffrey very greatly exaggerated. Arthur it seems, based simply on the *amount* of material he gives him and his exploits, was the main point of the work, although we don't get *to* Arthur until the last few "books" (12 books in all).

He mentions Merlin here and there, but quite a lot of the book is very dry detailing of genealogies, apparently stretching back to perhaps 1500 to 2000 BC, not all of which obviously connect to each other. If this is a work of pure fiction is a very boring one, and judged by the things he says about Arthur he certainly *could* have made up a lot more about everyone else. If you're going to write a whopper of fiction pretending to be fact, why make parts of it dreadfully dull?

In particular, although he claims British lineage for Constantine the Great among others, he doesn't really dwell on what Constantine exactly did. Seems a bit odd to just skip merrily past one of the greatest leaders of the past if your main point is to show how amazing the British were.

Will Johnson- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -

- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -

Paul J Gans

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Paul J Gans » 16 sep 2007 01:53:03

In alt.history.british campofonensis@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 15, 5:20 am, "a.spencer3" <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote in messagenews:fXCGi.96$H_5.352@eagle.america.net...> Thoughtful.

But citation?

DSH

campofonen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189804724.863887.127460@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

Sunlight is necessary for the synthesis of Vitamin D. As Homo sapiens
migrated into northern localities with less sunshine scientists
believe they evolved (through natural selection) paler skin with less
pigment, allowing more of the sun's rays to penetrate.

So why do Inuit etc. tend to be dark skinned?

Surreyman

One good possibility is that the Inuit had plenty of fish (and fish-
oil) in their diet. Fish-oil is one of the few natural foods that has
a good supply of Vitamin D. (Most other modern foods, such as milk,
are artificially supplemented with Vitamin D).

Another possibility is genetic drift. The gene for reduced skin
pigment (slc24a5) is most common among northern Europeans and their
descendants. Scientists estimate that the original mutation occurred
around 20,000 to 50,000 years ago. Possibly through generations of
natural selection it became well-established in that population.

The climate of northern Europe is overcast and cloudy, and the
original land was mostly forested allowing less sunlight to penetrate.
The Inuit live in the Arctic far north of the Equator where the days
of sunlight are also reduced. But the Artic is mostly open
(unforested) and perhaps a fair amount of sunlight is to penetrate.

A perhaps equally if not better possibility is that the Inuit
and other Arctic peoples are newcomers. Inuit seem to derive
from groups in Siberia whose skin is about the same shade.

It is entirely possible that the Inuit have only been living in
the far north for a very few thousand years. Evolution would not
have had much time to work in that case.

Further, conditions of sunlight are very different for the Inuit
than they are for the peoples north of the Sahara. Very different.

--
--- Paul J. Gans

Tim

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Tim » 16 sep 2007 02:44:35

On Sep 15, 7:50 pm, Paul J Gans <g...@panix.com> wrote:
In alt.history.british campofonen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 15, 5:20 am, "a.spencer3" <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote in messagenews:fXCGi.96$H_5.352@eagle.america.net...> Thoughtful.

But citation?

DSH

campofonen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189804724.863887.127460@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

Sunlight is necessary for the synthesis of Vitamin D. As Homo sapiens
migrated into northern localities with less sunshine scientists
believe they evolved (through natural selection) paler skin with less
pigment, allowing more of the sun's rays to penetrate.

So why do Inuit etc. tend to be dark skinned?

Surreyman
One good possibility is that the Inuit had plenty of fish (and fish-
oil) in their diet. Fish-oil is one of the few natural foods that has
a good supply of Vitamin D. (Most other modern foods, such as milk,
are artificially supplemented with Vitamin D).
Another possibility is genetic drift. The gene for reduced skin
pigment (slc24a5) is most common among northern Europeans and their
descendants. Scientists estimate that the original mutation occurred
around 20,000 to 50,000 years ago. Possibly through generations of
natural selection it became well-established in that population.
The climate of northern Europe is overcast and cloudy, and the
original land was mostly forested allowing less sunlight to penetrate.
The Inuit live in the Arctic far north of the Equator where the days
of sunlight are also reduced. But the Artic is mostly open
(unforested) and perhaps a fair amount of sunlight is to penetrate.

A perhaps equally if not better possibility is that the Inuit
and other Arctic peoples are newcomers. Inuit seem to derive
from groups in Siberia whose skin is about the same shade.

It is entirely possible that the Inuit have only been living in
the far north for a very few thousand years. Evolution would not
have had much time to work in that case.

Further, conditions of sunlight are very different for the Inuit
than they are for the peoples north of the Sahara. Very different.

--
--- Paul J. Gans- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The ancestors of the Inuit (Eskimos) of Alaska are believed to have
crossed over the Bering Strait from Siberia. The Yupik people on the
Asiatic Russian side of the Bering Strait are biologically similar to
the Inuit and speak a similar language. The ancestors of the Amerinds
(American Indians) also crossed the Bering Strait thousands of years
ago and their descendants spread out and populated North and South
America. The Inuit seem to be the tail-end of that migratory movement.

taf

Re: Fwd: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av taf » 16 sep 2007 03:09:05

On Sep 15, 3:50 pm, Christopher Ingham <christophering...@comcast.net>
wrote:

Would anyone be aware as to whether there have been any recent
substantive inroads in verifying the supposed and very tenuous descent
of Egbert from Charibert via the Kentish kings?

Nothing has been found to overcome the most substantive stumbling
block, the lack of single documentary source that links Egbert to the
Kentish kings.

af

taf

Re: Fictive British history set in real Welsh past?

Legg inn av taf » 16 sep 2007 03:12:25

On Sep 15, 5:36 pm, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:
Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd work as historical consultants for the North
Wales tourist board.
John Baldock is a teacher, art historian and pubished author.

Some of the catching phrases from the back cover:

.. . .

The Keys to Avalon is the first work to unlock the doors to a past
that has been swathed in myth and legend, revealing a landscap which
is as real as it is hauntingly magical.

This would all be more believable if the same claim wasn't made
several times a year on the jacket of every new book on Arthur, and
each one giving a different "key" to the past.

taf

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Fictive British History Set In Real Welsh Past?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 16 sep 2007 03:33:08

So the past should only have ONE magical key?

Hilarious!

DSH

"taf" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:1189908745.604073.58290@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...

On Sep 15, 5:36 pm, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:

Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd work as historical consultants for the North
Wales tourist board John Baldock is a teacher, art historian and
pubished [sic] author.

"Pubished" Indeed...

Some of the catching phrases from the back cover:

The Keys to Avalon is the first work to unlock the doors to a past
that has been swathed in myth and legend, revealing a landscap [sic]
which is as real as it is hauntingly magical.

This would all be more believable if the same claim wasn't made
several times a year on the jacket of every new book on Arthur, and
each one giving a different "key" to the past.

taf

Gjest

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 03:34:56

On Sep 12, 9:34 am, WJhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 9/12/2007 9:30:24 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

PIPPHILLIP...@aol.com writes:

you are not very well read, are you?; or at least have never research
this subject

--------------------------
I tend to stay away from connections based on fantasy, conspiracy theories
and lizards.

************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com

Lizards?

Christopher Ingham

Re: Fwd: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Christopher Ingham » 16 sep 2007 04:51:34

On Sep 15, 10:09 pm, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:
On Sep 15, 3:50 pm, Christopher Ingham <christophering...@comcast.net
wrote:

Would anyone be aware as to whether there have been any recent
substantive inroads in verifying the supposed and very tenuous descent
of Egbert from Charibert via the Kentish kings?

Nothing has been found to overcome the most substantive stumbling
block, the lack of single documentary source that links Egbert to the
Kentish kings.

Drats!

Not to be begging the issue, but what is the probability, in your
informed opinion, that one or more of the genealogical schemes posited
by reputable scholars (this excludes internet genealogy sites, except
perhaps [can I mention it?] "Medieval Lands") is plausible? More
specifically, do you think that the main body of_dramatis personae_has
been correctly determined, and only awaits fine tuning pending future
discoveries and research?

Christopher Ingham

taf

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av taf » 16 sep 2007 05:06:07

On Sep 15, 8:54 pm, WJhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 9/15/2007 4:45:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

voluc...@kpnplanet.nl writes:

It seems that Geoffrey translated a book in the Welsh language into
Latin, that Walter the archdeacon of Oxford brought with him from his
travels to Wales.

=============
Hans I'd say a more accurate way to express this is "he SAID that he was
translating a book....". Other historians, perhaps most if not all, have argued
the possibility that he was lying through his teeth, i.e. that there was no
such book and Geoffrey just took some old legends and spun a support
structure around it.

Along these lines, Dumas makes a claim not so dissimilar when
introducing The Three Musketeers, and Edgar Rice Burroughs with A
Princess of Mars. It is such a commonly used literary artifice that
Eco begins The Name of the Rose with the words, "Naturally, a
manuscript."

taf

taf

Re: Fwd: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av taf » 16 sep 2007 05:20:26

On Sep 15, 8:51 pm, Christopher Ingham <christophering...@comcast.net>
wrote:

Not to be begging the issue, but what is the probability, in your
informed opinion, that one or more of the genealogical schemes posited
by reputable scholars (this excludes internet genealogy sites, except
perhaps [can I mention it?] "Medieval Lands") is plausible?

Well, "plausible" is an entirely different standard. Anyone with a
set of regnal tables could come up with any number of plausible
genealogies, but you are no further ahead having done it, as it is
unsubstantiated speculation that any connection exists to begin with.

More
specifically, do you think that the main body of_dramatis personae_has
been correctly determined, and only awaits fine tuning pending future
discoveries and research?

I am perfect willing to accept the possibility (high probability,
even) that there remain no miracle smoking-gun discoveries out there
to be made, an that any connection between Ecgberht and the Kings of
Kent will forever remain a mystery. I know - not what you wanted to
hear.

taf

Gjest

Re: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 05:43:03

How can we be so sure that Hengist is fictional?

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 05:47:03

In a message dated 9/15/2007 7:35:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
lostcooper@yahoo.com writes:

Lizards?


------------
Yes google for David Icke.
You're out-of-the-loop if you don't already know that all positions of power
in the world are, and always have been controlled by shape-shifting lizards.

The Bush's are lizards also. Icke never really explains how the lizards can
be related to non-lizards through all the elaborate genealogy we've built
up, but then again HBHG never explained why Pierre Plantard should be singled
out among the millions of Merovingian descendents for special attention, or
why the rest of us weren't invited to join the Piory.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Sinclairs in England before conquest

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 05:51:02

In a message dated 9/15/2007 7:35:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
A.Windemere@gmail.com writes:

One Wikipedia genealogy lists Charlemagne's mother as Bertha
(Broadfoot) of Laon, daughter of Charibert of Laon, son of Bertha
(Bertrada) of Prum (Merovingian princess), daughter of Merovingian
King Theuderic III. However, an alternate genealogy, also on
Wikipedia, lists Bertha (Bertrada) of Prum as the daughter of Hugobert
(one of King Theuderic III's palace officials).


==============
They are *possible* reconstructions of Bertha's ancestry, but you always
have to ask "based on what SOURCE"? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia built by, and
only as good as, the multitude of contributors to any particular article.
Some articles have only had a half-dozen editors, other articles have had
hundreds of different editors.

So, edit the articles, add a tag like {{fact}} to those lines discussing her
parentage, and then SAVE the page. This will force any other editors to try
to find sources. If no sources are forthcoming in say, a week or a month,
then the offending passage can and should be excised, or moved to the Talk
page for that article.

Give me the page citations and I'll do it myself if you don't want to do it.

Will Johnson



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 05:58:03

In a message dated 9/15/2007 4:45:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
volucris@kpnplanet.nl writes:

It seems that Geoffrey translated a book in the Welsh language into
Latin, that Walter the archdeacon of Oxford brought with him from his
travels to Wales.


=============
Hans I'd say a more accurate way to express this is "he SAID that he was
translating a book....". Other historians, perhaps most if not all, have argued
the possibility that he was lying through his teeth, i.e. that there was no
such book and Geoffrey just took some old legends and spun a support
structure around it.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: The surnames Longespée and Boteto urt

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 06:14:04

In a message dated 9/15/2007 12:50:48 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:

Neither Longespée or Botetourt for that matter takes a "de."


==========Evidently a rule largely dependent on time and location.
See
_http://books.google.com/books?id=HPIJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA89&dq=%22de+botetourt%22_
(http://books.google.com/books?id=HPIJAA ... g=PA89&dq="de+botetourt")


_http://books.google.com/books?id=-H0BAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA368&dq=%22de+botetourt%22_
(http://books.google.com/books?id=-H0BAA ... =PA368&dq="de+botetourt")

_http://books.google.com/books?id=hImeNRdVeiUC&pg=PA322&dq=%22de+botetourt%22_
(http://books.google.com/books?id=hImeNR ... =PA322&dq="de+botetourt")

_http://books.google.com/books?id=p_yzpuWi4sgC&pg=PA136&dq=%22de+botetourt%22&
sig=0tkVUnkImvdKek5nwGFO9RyoYcQ_
(http://books.google.com/books?id=p_yzpu ... =PA136&dq="de+botetourt"&sig=0tkVUnkImvdKek5nwGFO9RyoYcQ)
See the sources cited for "de Botetourt"

I wonder if Douglas is willing to go on the record that the examples of "de
Botetourt" in the CPR are all scribal errors ? Of course this could be
another example of a rule which isn't a rule at all.

See for example 3E3, part 1, page 321
1329, May 23 "...Matilda late the wife of John de Botetourt...."

Will Johnson



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Ian Wallace

Re: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Ian Wallace » 16 sep 2007 09:11:26

On 16 Sep, 04:41, WJhon...@aol.com wrote:
How can we be so sure that Hengist is fictional?

Will

Well there is a road near me named after him, surely that shows he is
real?
It is next to Horsa Road, they are connected by Ethelbert Road and I
don't think anyone doubts that King Ethelbert I was a real person...

Ian.

Gjest

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 09:29:45

Hmm after reading a later reviewer's comment that Tysilio ALSO records a
daughter of Claudius marrying Arviragus, now I shall have to read Tysilio and
co-relate it to what I've built from Geoffrey of Monmouth....

Here I thought this whole Cladius to- Britain connection was wholely
Geoffrey's invention.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 09:29:45

Hmm after reading a later reviewer's comment that Tysilio ALSO records a
daughter of Claudius marrying Arviragus, now I shall have to read Tysilio and
co-relate it to what I've built from Geoffrey of Monmouth....

Here I thought this whole Cladius to- Britain connection was wholely
Geoffrey's invention.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 09:29:45

Hmm after reading a later reviewer's comment that Tysilio ALSO records a
daughter of Claudius marrying Arviragus, now I shall have to read Tysilio and
co-relate it to what I've built from Geoffrey of Monmouth....

Here I thought this whole Cladius to- Britain connection was wholely
Geoffrey's invention.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Gjest

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 09:29:45

Hmm after reading a later reviewer's comment that Tysilio ALSO records a
daughter of Claudius marrying Arviragus, now I shall have to read Tysilio and
co-relate it to what I've built from Geoffrey of Monmouth....

Here I thought this whole Cladius to- Britain connection was wholely
Geoffrey's invention.

Will



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

a.spencer3

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av a.spencer3 » 16 sep 2007 10:38:04

"Paul J Gans" <gans@panix.com> wrote in message
news:fchr3j$8j6$2@reader1.panix.com...
In alt.history.british campofonensis@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 15, 5:20 am, "a.spencer3" <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote in
messagenews:fXCGi.96$H_5.352@eagle.america.net...> Thoughtful.

But citation?

DSH

campofonen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189804724.863887.127460@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

Sunlight is necessary for the synthesis of Vitamin D. As Homo
sapiens
migrated into northern localities with less sunshine scientists
believe they evolved (through natural selection) paler skin with
less
pigment, allowing more of the sun's rays to penetrate.

So why do Inuit etc. tend to be dark skinned?

Surreyman

One good possibility is that the Inuit had plenty of fish (and fish-
oil) in their diet. Fish-oil is one of the few natural foods that has
a good supply of Vitamin D. (Most other modern foods, such as milk,
are artificially supplemented with Vitamin D).

Another possibility is genetic drift. The gene for reduced skin
pigment (slc24a5) is most common among northern Europeans and their
descendants. Scientists estimate that the original mutation occurred
around 20,000 to 50,000 years ago. Possibly through generations of
natural selection it became well-established in that population.

The climate of northern Europe is overcast and cloudy, and the
original land was mostly forested allowing less sunlight to penetrate.
The Inuit live in the Arctic far north of the Equator where the days
of sunlight are also reduced. But the Artic is mostly open
(unforested) and perhaps a fair amount of sunlight is to penetrate.

A perhaps equally if not better possibility is that the Inuit
and other Arctic peoples are newcomers. Inuit seem to derive
from groups in Siberia whose skin is about the same shade.

It is entirely possible that the Inuit have only been living in
the far north for a very few thousand years. Evolution would not
have had much time to work in that case.

Further, conditions of sunlight are very different for the Inuit
than they are for the peoples north of the Sahara. Very different.

Agreed re Siberia etc., obviously, but why therefore are the local Siberians

also dark skinned?
It wasn't really a serious question, but it seems to be becoming so! :-))

Surreyman

a.spencer3

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av a.spencer3 » 16 sep 2007 10:38:58

"Tim" <A.Windemere@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189907075.849270.225050@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 15, 7:50 pm, Paul J Gans <g...@panix.com> wrote:
In alt.history.british campofonen...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 15, 5:20 am, "a.spencer3" <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote in
messagenews:fXCGi.96$H_5.352@eagle.america.net...> Thoughtful.

But citation?

DSH

campofonen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189804724.863887.127460@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

Sunlight is necessary for the synthesis of Vitamin D. As Homo
sapiens
migrated into northern localities with less sunshine scientists
believe they evolved (through natural selection) paler skin with
less
pigment, allowing more of the sun's rays to penetrate.

So why do Inuit etc. tend to be dark skinned?

Surreyman
One good possibility is that the Inuit had plenty of fish (and fish-
oil) in their diet. Fish-oil is one of the few natural foods that has
a good supply of Vitamin D. (Most other modern foods, such as milk,
are artificially supplemented with Vitamin D).
Another possibility is genetic drift. The gene for reduced skin
pigment (slc24a5) is most common among northern Europeans and their
descendants. Scientists estimate that the original mutation occurred
around 20,000 to 50,000 years ago. Possibly through generations of
natural selection it became well-established in that population.
The climate of northern Europe is overcast and cloudy, and the
original land was mostly forested allowing less sunlight to penetrate.
The Inuit live in the Arctic far north of the Equator where the days
of sunlight are also reduced. But the Artic is mostly open
(unforested) and perhaps a fair amount of sunlight is to penetrate.

A perhaps equally if not better possibility is that the Inuit
and other Arctic peoples are newcomers. Inuit seem to derive
from groups in Siberia whose skin is about the same shade.

It is entirely possible that the Inuit have only been living in
the far north for a very few thousand years. Evolution would not
have had much time to work in that case.

Further, conditions of sunlight are very different for the Inuit
than they are for the peoples north of the Sahara. Very different.

--
--- Paul J. Gans- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The ancestors of the Inuit (Eskimos) of Alaska are believed to have
crossed over the Bering Strait from Siberia. The Yupik people on the
Asiatic Russian side of the Bering Strait are biologically similar to
the Inuit and speak a similar language. The ancestors of the Amerinds
(American Indians) also crossed the Bering Strait thousands of years
ago and their descendants spread out and populated North and South
America. The Inuit seem to be the tail-end of that migratory movement.


We know that. But, still, why the dark skin from Siberia?

Surreyman

Volucris

Re: Fictive British history set in real Welsh past?

Legg inn av Volucris » 16 sep 2007 10:43:40

On 16 sep, 04:12, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:
On Sep 15, 5:36 pm, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:

Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd work as historical consultants for the North
Wales tourist board.
John Baldock is a teacher, art historian and pubished author.

Some of the catching phrases from the back cover:

. . .

The Keys to Avalon is the first work to unlock the doors to a past
that has been swathed in myth and legend, revealing a landscap which
is as real as it is hauntingly magical.

This would all be more believable if the same claim wasn't made
several times a year on the jacket of every new book on Arthur, and
each one giving a different "key" to the past.

taf

Hi Todd,

True. A book title can make the difference between taking it in the
hand or looking further. The cover text makes you decide to open it or
put it back. Many a book is of the category HBHG and DVC. Even then it
can be amusing to read how authors can spin a story out of nothing.

The 'claims with detailed references to original Welsh textual
sources, maps and genealogical charts, goes beyond well-known
Arthurian texts to their roots in ancient
Welsh manuscripts ande the history of the land' made me curious enough
to browse through.

I can't say that I regretted buying the book. As I remember I read it
from start to finish. But then again so many things are interesting
and others are more near the field that one can contribute to, so in
the end it ends up on the bookshelve. Summer 2000 was an expensive
year as I went home again with several extra kilograms literature. On
the subject I had bought 'The Holy Kingdom. The quest for the real
king Arthur '(Alan Wilson, Baram Blackett, Adrian Gilbert) and 'King
Arthur. The truth behind the legend' (Rodney Castleden). Of these
three books 'The Keys to Avalon' made made the most impression.

From what I have reread so far the content and argumentation makes
sense (to an interested foreigner). In the end it is the factual

content that counts and not the cover. It certainly provides a deeper
understanding of the time before 1136 and on the quality of research.

Hans Vogels

Volucris

Re: Fictive British History Set In Real Welsh Past?

Legg inn av Volucris » 16 sep 2007 10:44:41

Muggezifter.

HV

On 16 sep, 04:33, "D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote:
So the past should only have ONE magical key?

Hilarious!

DSH

"taf" <farme...@interfold.com> wrote in message

news:1189908745.604073.58290@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...

On Sep 15, 5:36 pm, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:
Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd work as historical consultants for the North
Wales tourist board John Baldock is a teacher, art historian and
pubished [sic] author.

"Pubished" Indeed...



Some of the catching phrases from the back cover:

The Keys to Avalon is the first work to unlock the doors to a past
that has been swathed in myth and legend, revealing a landscap [sic]
which is as real as it is hauntingly magical.

This would all be more believable if the same claim wasn't made
several times a year on the jacket of every new book on Arthur, and
each one giving a different "key" to the past.

taf- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -

- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -

Hovite

Re: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Hovite » 16 sep 2007 11:09:54

On Sep 16, 4:41 am, WJhon...@aol.com wrote:
How can we be so sure that Hengist is fictional?

Will

************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com

As Sisam demonstrated (Anglo-Saxon Royal Genealogies, 1953), the
earlier portions of Anglo-Saxon genealogies are nothing more than
random lists of gods and heroes. In the Kentish genealogy, Octa is the
son (or father) of Œric (or Œsc), son (or grandson) of Hengest, a
descendant of Woden. But none of these were ever people. Woden is the
King of the Gods, the All Father. Hengest and his brother Horsa are
horse deities (both hengest and hors mean horse), Œsc is the sacred
ash tree (the usual form is æsc).

Volucris

Re: Anna of Arimathea - who is HER husband?

Legg inn av Volucris » 16 sep 2007 11:27:43

On 16 sep, 05:54, WJhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 9/15/2007 4:45:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

voluc...@kpnplanet.nl writes:

It seems that Geoffrey translated a book in the Welsh language into
Latin, that Walter the archdeacon of Oxford brought with him from his
travels to Wales.

============> Hans I'd say a more accurate way to express this is "he SAID that he was
translating a book....". Other historians, perhaps most if not all, have argued
the possibility that he was lying through his teeth, i.e. that there was no
such book and Geoffrey just took some old legends and spun a support
structure around it.

Will

That's the point Will.
Who said what en when, and what was his/their interest in the matter.

The Historia Regum Britanniae was written in the early 1130. It was
adapted in later editions as Tintagel (so called birthplace of Arthur)
was introduced after 1140 at the request of Robert, earl of
Gloucestor. In 1155 it was translated as 'Roman de Brut' into Norman
French in 1155 by Robert Wace and that too started an embellishmant by
poets and chroniclers. Historians and scientific scholars were not yet
invented in the time period.

In 1151 Geoffrey of Monmouth was made Bishop of St. Asaph in North
Wales and died in the year 1155. Robert de Torigny, the Abbot of Mont
St Michel, referred to ´Geoffrey of Monmouth who translated The
History of the Kings of Britain from British into Latin, who is the
bishop of Saint Asaph in North Wales´. So Geoffrey was already known
in his own time to have translated a book.

Hans Vogels

Gjest

Re: The surnames Longesp?e and Botetourt

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 12:25:04

On 15/09/2007 Douglas Richardson wrote:-

<Neither Longespée or Botetourt for that matter takes a "de."
<Regardless, on very rare occasions, you see both surnames with a "de".
<I'm not sure why this happened, other than the clerks were a little sloppy
at times


As for Botetourt, anyone who cares to take a few minutes searching the
online Patent Rolls for the numerous alternative spellings of the name will find
that the name is often given with the prefix "de" in four consecutive reigns.
I would suppose that the name derives from a place: if so the usage "de
Botetourt" is not sloppy but perfectly appropriate, even though the name is much
more usually given without the prefix. Several centuries were to elapse
before hapless clerks could benefit from one of Douglas' rules of thumb.
"Very rare occasions" is an unusually sloppy phrase for Douglas to use, is
it not?.
By contrast Longespee was not a place name, so William, Earl of Salisbury,
was not "of" Longespee.

taf

Re: Fictive British history set in real Welsh past?

Legg inn av taf » 16 sep 2007 13:01:48

On Sep 16, 2:43 am, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:
On 16 sep, 04:12, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:







On Sep 15, 5:36 pm, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:

Steve Blake, Scott Lloyd work as historical consultants for the North
Wales tourist board.
John Baldock is a teacher, art historian and pubished author.

Some of the catching phrases from the back cover:

. . .

The Keys to Avalon is the first work to unlock the doors to a past
that has been swathed in myth and legend, revealing a landscap which
is as real as it is hauntingly magical.

This would all be more believable if the same claim wasn't made
several times a year on the jacket of every new book on Arthur, and
each one giving a different "key" to the past.

taf

Hi Todd,

True. A book title can make the difference between taking it in the
hand or looking further. The cover text makes you decide to open it or
put it back. Many a book is of the category HBHG and DVC. Even then it
can be amusing to read how authors can spin a story out of nothing.

The 'claims with detailed references to original Welsh textual
sources, maps and genealogical charts, goes beyond well-known
Arthurian texts to their roots in ancient
Welsh manuscripts ande the history of the land' made me curious enough
to browse through.


Yeah, but I have a different one on my bookshelf that also goes beyond
the well-known texts into the other manuscript sources and also
presents a convincing argument, but reaches a completely different
conclusion. And there are many others besides yours and mine. About
once a year, some legitimate, serious scholar or scholars come out
with a revolutionary new insight that solves the problem, and they all
reach different solutions. I am sure yours and mine won't be the last,
either.

taf

Gjest

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 14:00:05

Re-reading Shaw's Staffs I do think this date is the burial date, not the
date of death.

Kind Regards,

Rose
Surrey / UK

Gjest

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 14:01:03

Yes, I did take a lot of pictures inside Clifton Campville church. I'll
take a look and seee if I have the one we need.

Kind Regards,

Rose
Surrey / UK

Gjest

Re: Maud de Camville's daughter, Isabel de Vernon, wife of S

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 14:02:03

Unfortunately, no I did not take a picture of this tomb.

Kind Regards,

Rose
Surrey / UK

Nancy L. Allen

Re: Hugh de Corona and Amabilla de Bamville

Legg inn av Nancy L. Allen » 16 sep 2007 16:44:29

I think I've figured out why some pedigrees incorrectly show Ellen Corona as the wife of John Legh, the son of William Venables and Agnes Legh daughter of Richard - instead of - Ellen Baggiley, the daughter of William Baggiley and Lucy Corona.

It all started with the Visitation of 1533 which states under "Pyers Leyghe of Bradley" that John de Legh married "Ellen, the heiress of the family de Corona." It doesn't say that she was a Corona, but that she was an heiress of the family.

The Visitation of Cheshire in 1580 has the correct name for the wife of John Legh. It states under "Leigh of High Leigh, of the Westhall," that the wife of John Leigh of Bouthes, the son of William Venables and Agnes Legh, was "Ellin, d. & heire to Sr Wm Baguley."

Burke's Peerage and Barontage Genealogical and Heraldic Dictionary p. 666 states that John Leigh of Booths, the son of William Venables and Agnes Leigh, married second Ellen daughter of Thomas Corona of Adlington. According to Frank Renaud's "Adlington, and Legh of Adlington," quoted in my earlier post, Thomas Corona never married. He gave his lands in Adlington to John Legh and his wife Ellen. Ellen was the heir of William Baggiley and Lucy Corona since Ellen's brothers died without issue. Lucy Corona was the sister of Thomas Corona's grandfather, Hugh II.

Magna Carta Sureties, line 129-6, probably using the incorrect information from Burke, states that Matilda de Arderne married John de Legh of Booths, the son of John de Legh and Ellen Corona.

Nancy

Hovite

Re: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Hovite » 16 sep 2007 17:22:16

On Sep 16, 4:26 pm, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
Dear Will,
Given that Hengist apparently meant meant "stallion" and
Horsa "horse" on the surface it seems very likely they were fictional.

"... Hengest and Horsa were mythical founding figures, divine twins
like Romulus and Remus, rather than real people. (Pairs of brothers
with alliterating names also led migrations in accounts of the
Lombards and Vandals; see Turville-Petre, p.274.) ... The history of
Kent that we can actually recover begins not with Hengest and his son
Æsc in the mid-5th century, but with Irminric and his son Æthelberht
in the mid-6th ..."

http://www.anglo-saxons.net/hwaet/?do=s ... ry=450-550

Hence, (using the Kentish spellings) Eormenric and Ethelbert are
earliest historical Kentish kings.

Gjest

Re: Anglo-Saxon kings in England

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 sep 2007 17:30:09

Dear Will,
Given that Hengist apparently meant meant "stallion" and
Horsa "horse" on the surface it seems very likely they were fictional. On the
other hand We have Egyptian pharoahs known as " He who smites" and " the Moon
has begotten him" , likewise James / Jacob means " He who assumes the place of
another" , William means " Will protect". Everything has it`s meaning and if
someone were named to honor a deity of whatever religion it doesn`t follow
that if no contemporary record can be found that They are fictious. It Also
unfortunately doesn`t mean they were not.

As to Horsa Road which Ian mentioned somehow making someone a real
person, the refer the list to Tarzana , California named for Edgar Rice Burroughs
noble ape man , Tarzan. (AKA John Clayton, Earl of Greystoke), an enormously
popular fictional character.
Sincerely,
James W
Cummings
Dixmont,
Maine USA



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Hovite

Re: Fictive British history set in real Welsh past?

Legg inn av Hovite » 16 sep 2007 17:34:33

On Sep 16, 10:43 am, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:

'King
Arthur. The truth behind the legend' (Rodney Castleden).

"... Current scholarship on the early Welsh sources is virtually
ignored. The dating of early Welsh texts is often ill founded and the
descriptions are confusing, misleading or simply wrong. These
criticisms are not quibbles over details, for these texts are among
the Arthurian documents cited and used as sources for the arguments
put forward. For example, had the author been in closer touch with
modern Welsh scholarship, he would have known better than to venture
to use the impossible "translation" of the poem, Marwnad Uthr Ben
(here Marwnad Uthyr Pendragon), still less to base any conclusion upon
it. The lack of knowledge of Welsh scholarship and thus of the status
of certain texts becomes particularly important in the closing section
of the book, when the "truth" behind Arthur's death is to be revealed.
The basis for the proposal that Arthur died at Whithorn is a triad in
one of the bogus documents forged in the eighteenth century by the
remarkable Iolo Morganwg. His so-called Third Series of triads has
been shown to be spurious since the early years of the last century
(it was suspect even to his contemporaries) and the text, together
with Iolo's "translation," has been discussed and annotated by Dr
Rachel Bromwich. Without this triad and the assumptions made, there is
no justification for associating Whithorn with Arthur or with the
location of his grave, and the elaborate scenario proposed here
collapses. ..."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_79548489

Hovite

Re: Fictive British history set in real Welsh past?

Legg inn av Hovite » 16 sep 2007 17:42:18

On Sep 16, 10:43 am, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:

the subject I had bought 'The Holy Kingdom. The quest for the real
king Arthur '(Alan Wilson, Baram Blackett, Adrian Gilbert)

"... With this point proved the rest of their argument falls to bits.
I could go on for pages, but this is not the place. The rest of the
book contains inaccuracies and leaps of faith based on the works of
South Wales antiquarians from the 19th century. These works where some
of the earliest attempts to look at welsh history, but are woefully
inadequate by today's standards. The Holy Kingdom may appear a good
story to those not familiar with Welsh manuscripts, but by ignoring
most of the modern academic works on Welsh history the authors have
achieved very little. ..."

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/custom ... W3GWOUT3P5

Hovite

Re: Fictive British history set in real Welsh past?

Legg inn av Hovite » 16 sep 2007 17:49:38

On Sep 16, 10:43 am, Volucris <voluc...@kpnplanet.nl> wrote:

'The Keys to Avalon' made made the most impression.

"... The authors need to locate all the geographical names of the Brut
in Wales, so they actively seek candidates, based partly on the
similarity of modern names and partly on the hints given in the Middle
Welsh sources. They state that there is only one possibility for
identifying a Temys in Wales: the River Teme, a tributary of the
Severn. Whilst the modern name certainly contains the element *tam-
that would produce Tem- in Middle Welsh, the ­-ys ending of Temys
requires some sort of suffix in Brittonic, either *- s or *- ss . In
fact, the River Thames contains such an element, as it derives from
Brittonic *Tam ss , and there are Old English forms of the name with
the spellings Temis and Temes that parallel the Middle Welsh form
Temys precisely.

Their search for Llundain takes them back to Geoffrey of Monmouth,
where the name Kairlud is translated Londinium in Latin, but they
argue that the name is preserved in Ludlow, on the River Teme.
However, Ludlow is recorded in the twelfth century as Ludelaw, a name
containing Old English -hlæw ('hill') and a prefix that appears to be
Old English hl d ('loud'), probably a reference to the River Teme.

Kairlud is apparently an invention of Geoffrey, as it is not found in
earlier writers. Llundain, however, has a clear derivation that,
despite the most superficial of similarities, cannot be connected with
Ludlow. Llundain occurs as Cair Lundein in Old Welsh (the Harleian MS
of the Historia Brittonum Chapter 66a has Lundem in error, which has
made its way into the printed editions, while others have Lunden).
This Old Welsh form gives Old English Lunden and itself derives from a
Brittonic *L ndonion, attested as the Late Latin form Lundinium in
Ammianus Marcellinus's Res Gestae (xxvii.8, xxviii.3 and xx.1), the
earlier Londinium, London. ..."

http://www.kmatthews.org.uk/arthuriana/ ... valon.html

Normandy

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av Normandy » 16 sep 2007 18:07:28

I don't really know. But it would be interesting to know
how long they'd been in northern Siberia.

My guess is that all these peoples arrived *after* the last
ice age. There have been humans down in warmer areas for
far longer than that.

--
--- Paul J. Gans

Mr Gans have you ever seen the aboriginals of Taiwan? They look remarkable
like the Inuit peoples.

Normandy

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Who Really Came With William The Conqueror In 1066?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 16 sep 2007 18:12:57

<G>

DSH

"Normandy" <aabbcc@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:46ed62ef$0$25933$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr...

Mr Gans have you ever seen the aboriginals of Taiwan? They look
remarkable [sic] like the Inuit peoples.

Normandy

Tim

Re: Sinclairs in England before conquest

Legg inn av Tim » 16 sep 2007 18:22:31

On Sep 15, 11:49 pm, WJhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 9/15/2007 7:35:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

A.Windem...@gmail.com writes:

One Wikipedia genealogy lists Charlemagne's mother as Bertha
(Broadfoot) of Laon, daughter of Charibert of Laon, son of Bertha
(Bertrada) of Prum (Merovingian princess), daughter of Merovingian
King Theuderic III. However, an alternate genealogy, also on
Wikipedia, lists Bertha (Bertrada) of Prum as the daughter of Hugobert
(one of King Theuderic III's palace officials).

==============
They are *possible* reconstructions of Bertha's ancestry, but you always
have to ask "based on what SOURCE"? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia built by, and
only as good as, the multitude of contributors to any particular article.
Some articles have only had a half-dozen editors, other articles have had
hundreds of different editors.

So, edit the articles, add a tag like {{fact}} to those lines discussing her
parentage, and then SAVE the page. This will force any other editors to try
to find sources. If no sources are forthcoming in say, a week or a month,
then the offending passage can and should be excised, or moved to the Talk
page for that article.

Give me the page citations and I'll do it myself if you don't want to do it.

Will Johnson

************************************** See what's new athttp://www.aol.com

The Wikipedia article that lists Bertrada as the daughter of Theuderic
III is entitled "Bertrada of Prum". It lists "Royal Ancestry of Bible
Royal Ancestors of 300 Colonial American Families" by Michel L. Call
as a reference. The article that lists Bertrada as the daughter of
Hugobert is entitled "Hugobert".

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»