Vol 1: The Bluets - Lackham Countryside Centre
Vol 1: The Bluets - Lackham Countryside Centre
Vol 1: The Bluets - Lackham Countryside Centre
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