26.04.2014 Views

Vol 1: The Bluets - Lackham Countryside Centre

Vol 1: The Bluets - Lackham Countryside Centre

Vol 1: The Bluets - Lackham Countryside Centre

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>The</strong> <strong>Bluets</strong> 64<br />

he has his fee for Michaelmas term in the 34 th year as<br />

appears in this roll, and so is quit down to Michaelmas of this<br />

year 262<br />

In the transcription of the record for the fee of 1252 263 it is noted<br />

that in the margin there is a heading for the knight‘s of the king‘s<br />

household 264<br />

This shows that William was not unusual in being in the<br />

same retinue for decades, all these knights were being paid for their<br />

36 th year of service.<br />

In the same year William brought a suit against Maredudd ap Gruffudd,<br />

the grandson of Morgan of Caerleon over land in Llewenich which had<br />

been rendered to William‘s brother Roland, whose heir William was 265 .<br />

Reed points out that this suggests that Ralph IV was not a full brother<br />

to William and Roland, otherwise he would have been the heir, not William<br />

266<br />

<strong>The</strong> argument could be made that<br />

No man can be both lord and heir of the same tenement. <strong>The</strong><br />

way in which the courts actually handled this to mean, no man<br />

can be both lord and heir of the same tenement at the same<br />

time. Thus the eldest son can be heir to the second son,<br />

because he is not yet the lord as long as his father is alive<br />

267<br />

262<br />

Calendar of Liberate Rolls Henry III vol 3 1245 – 1251 p335<br />

263<br />

Calendar of Liberate Rolls Henry III vol 4 1251 – 1260 p80, dated October<br />

1252<br />

264<br />

<strong>The</strong> other knights were Hugh de Bueles, John de la Bruere, William Gacelin and<br />

Matthew Morrel. John de Busceby is also shown, although he is separated from the<br />

36th year group for some reason. From the previous list it is certain that he had<br />

also served the same length of time so this is a puzzle, although it is indicated in<br />

the transcription that this part of the roll is unclear.<br />

265<br />

Rolando ….. Willelmus cuisis heres est” Kings Bench Plea roll, quoted in Reed<br />

PC (2008) Descent of St Maur family of Co. Monmouth and Seymour family of<br />

Hatch, Co Somerset Foundation (2008) 2 (6) pp396-397 fn34<br />

266<br />

Reed PC (2008) ibid p397<br />

267<br />

http://vi.uh.edu/pages/bob/elhone/rules.html Marriage portions 7.1 (3) fn90<br />

<strong>The</strong> rules being considered here are based on Glanville, Bracton‘s source

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!