Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Viking FGC23343

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . The de Rollos were in some way descended from the Bloet family whose estates clustered very near the Neel viscounts on the west coast of the Cotentin, where local toponymy suggests Hiberno-Norse colonization was most dense. And their members included a "Nigellus" or Neel Bloet, before they disappear from Norman records in the late 11th century. So maybe the Patrys and the Neels descended from a common viking settler ancestor? And that the de Rollos and Bloets before them were just a cadet branch of the Neels? STR and SNP mutation rates are still kind of controversial, so although my estimates of a MRCA born sometimes between 850 and 950 A.D. are a little more recent than those resulting from most proposed rates, they would fit in with this scenario pretty nicely. . . .
    I may have stumbled on some Y DNA data for the de Ports--including their match with a Swedish fellow who provides some context for the aging of the SNP defining the de Port clade, I-FT221948. The common ancestor with the Swede was I-Y44935.

    https://www.familytreedna.com/public...frame=yresults

    An overview of my SNP aging method is discussed incidentally here:

    https://forums.familytreedna.com/for...nce#post331465

    Unlike most aging methods that use a simple average of mutations for the calculation's base, my calculation uses a number that is derived from a binomial analysis of the observed donor array. I think it's theoretically correct, but I suppose just grabbing the simple median value might good enough for a rough calculation.

    Anyhow, the deal is that TMRCA between the de Ports and that Swedish fellow turned out to be almost identical to the TMRCA I calculated for FT372222--MRCA born about 920 A.D. at the 50% confidence level, using an assumed mutation rate of once in 57 1/3 years at the BigY700 resolution level. I inferred from that linked scientific paper that McDonald uses a rate of about 74.7 years at that resolution level, yielding a MRCA birth year estimate of about 550 A.D. The ante-quem date must be somewhere around 1000 A.D., based on the history of Western Normandy, but I don't suppose there really is any reference for a post-quem date.

    The data from the 111 STR marker analyses was a little more ambiguous. I don't have any clear basis to sort the de Port data for a multi-tiered aggregation, but throwing in a single tier anyone with at least 111 markers shows an average GD of 13 vs. the Swede, which is significantly less than the GD of 21 within the FT37222 people. On the other hand, comparing the Swede against the de Port modal haplotype, which may be more appropriate given the heighted risk of convergent mutations at this age, returns a GD of 13, whereas the FT372222 analysis returned 12.5.

    There are problems with direct comparability between the I-Y44935 and R-FT372222 analyses, but I still think it suggests that the hypothesized Neel-de Rollos-Patry explanation for FT372222 is plausible. It would be great to have a post-quem date, but the STR data suggests it's probably not too much before the beginning of the Viking age, even using Ferguson's conservative reading of McDonald's suggested rates.




    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    A couple of additional charters with circumstantial evidence that allows us to further fill out the pedigree:

    1. Richard I de Rollos, fl. 1150, lord of Roullours, Cant. Vire and La Bloutiere, Cant. Villedieu-les-Poêles
    2. Godfrey [de Rollos?], referenced in 1230 novel disseisin proceedings for Saddington
    3. Richard de Saddington fl. 1195, possibly identical with the Richard fils Godfrey from the 1229/30 A.D. novel disseisin proceedings
    4. a. John 'fils Richard' de Saddington/de Welham m. Joan de Martival, from this notice and the charter at Mowsley ~1270 A.D. published by John Nicholls in 'History and Antiquities of Leicestershire'
    4. a. 1.) Almeric de Saddington, ditto
    4. a. 2.) Roger de Saddington, from a different charter at Mowsley dated 1285 A.D.
    4. a. 3.) Sir Richard de Saddington, vicar of Weldon, Northamptonshire (a Basset property) from a charter dated 1303 A.D., w/ his grandfather perhaps erroneously given as 'Robert', unless Sir Richard should be reclassed as 4. c. 1.)
    4. b. Thomas de Welham, protagonist of the 1229/1230 A.D. proceedings and referred to once as "de Saddington" in an undated charter near Bruntingthorpe
    4. b. 1.) Roger de Saddington, in the Bruntingthorpe charters and Nicholl's ~1270 A.D. charter at Mowsley
    4. b. 2.) William de Saddington
    4. b. 2.) a.) William de Saddington, from a charter at Bruntingthorpe dated 1285 A.D., possibly identical with a clergyman of this same name mentioned in several Northamptonshire documents around this time
    4. b. 2.) b.) John de Saddington ?, ditto
    4. b. 2.) b.) i.) Lord Chancellor Robert de Saddington? d. after 1347 A.D.; some of the lands held by this branch of the family seem to have passed through Robert's daughter to the Hastings family
    4. b. 2.) c.) Thomas de Saddington, from a charter dated 1312 A.D. at Weldon, Northamptonshire? Not sure of his placement in this pedigree, but I believe that 4. b. 2.) a.) William had a brother named Thomas, also a clergyman

    http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/...1_123_36.shtml

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=us

    Not really sure which of these specifically leads to Adam de Saddington of Foxton from the 1327 A.D. lay subsidy rolls, but it's clear that there are multiple candidates contemporary with Lord Chancellor Robert. Based on the passage of the Bruntingthorpe estates to the Hastings family, maybe one of the sons of John 4. a. is more likely; they seem to be the junior, or at least less prominent lines.
    Elsewhere I hypothesized that the de Saddington presence at Welham might be attributable to Richard I de Saddington (i.e., # 3) marrying into the Basset family who became sole tenants-in-chiefs before the mid-13th century. Certainly Thomas de Welham/Saddigton (#4.b.) served as legal representative of one of the Bassets. That may be, but there is another possibility that ties in closely to the hypothesis that the Vincent family of Barningham, Yorkshire was a branch of the family of Patry de La Lande Patry, near Flers in Normandy.

    In the Leicestershire Survey of 1130 A.D., Henry de Port of Basing, sheriff of Hampshire, held 2 of the ~8 carucates reported at Welham from the Archbishop of York. It seems a bit mysterious, breaking a pretty strong geographic pattern vis-a-vis the distribution of his estates, but it is a fact.

    https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vc...vol5/pp330-336

    The de Port family were an integral party of that clannish network of Lower Norman families that included the Patrys, the de Rollos ancestors of the de Saddingtons, and their de Mowbray overlords. I just noticed now that the report of historian Colin Flight that I posted earlier indicates that a daughter of sheriff Henry de Port's brother, Hugh de Port of Kent, married as his 2nd wife, William IV Patry, who was the father of both Mabel, mother of Roger de Mowbray of Thirsk ( and at least temporarily, Saddington and Barningham) and Matilda/Maude, mother of the Raoul V Tesson who was involved in a property dispute with William de Rollos around 1204 A.D.

    http://www.durobrivis.net/survey/db-ke/09-baronies.pdf

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=us

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/43015263

    Maybe significant to the over-arcing narrative of FT372222 as a Basque clade arriving in Normandy in the late 900s A.D. along with the vikings based in Ireland who raided Aquitaine in the 800s A.D., the de Ports also married into the family of the Neel viscounts of St. Sauveur. Pretty surprising to me, because prior to their English property acquisitions after the Conquest, the de Ports were kind of a nothing sort of family, holding only a few small fiefs near Bayeux under the bishop.

    https://books.google.com/books?id=ck...gomery&f=false

    The de Rollos were in some way descended from the Bloet family whose estates clustered very near the Neel viscounts on the west coast of the Cotentin, where local toponymy suggests Hiberno-Norse colonization was most dense. And their members included a "Nigellus" or Neel Bloet, before they disappear from Norman records in the late 11th century. So maybe the Patrys and the Neels descended from a common viking settler ancestor? And that the de Rollos and Bloets before them were just a cadet branch of the Neels? STR and SNP mutation rates are still kind of controversial, so although my estimates of a MRCA born sometimes between 850 and 950 A.D. are a little more recent than those resulting from most proposed rates, they would fit in with this scenario pretty nicely.

    Maybe significant for future research, should that Channel Island Dorey guy ever confirm my projection of his SNP status, one branch of the de Ports assumed the surname St. John and became involved in Jersey politics. The St. Johns remained settled in Hampshire, but I imagine that's where a majority of English migration to the Channel Islands came from, so that could form the basis for a decent, historically grounded hypothesis of the Doreys' ancestry.

    https://www.theislandwiki.org/index....iam_de_St_Jean
    Last edited by benowicz; 15 October 2021, 07:44 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    If this is true, it could be very powerful evidence--circumstantial though it may be--that the FT372222+ Vincent family represent a branch of the Patry family of La Lande, near Flers in Normandy, and Patrixbourne in Kent.

    http://www.durobrivis.net/articles/landowners.pdf

    http://www.durobrivis.net/survey/db-ke/09-baronies.pdf

    The deal is that historian Colin Flight believes the ownership history of the estates of Banstead, Co. Surrey and Ash and Ryarsh, Co. Kent provide convincing evidence that Mabel, the wife of Nigel de Mowbray was a member of this specific Patry family. Remember, Roger de Mowbray, son of this same Nigel, held an interest in Saddington, Leicestershire and Barningham, Richmondshire (where the most prominent family named Vincent was first recorded) around the turn of the 13th century. The de Rollos ancestors of the FT372222+ Saddington family were definitely neighbors of this particular branch of the Patry family in Normandy, and even became involved in some property disputes with them. Flight believes that there is sufficient documentary evidence to show that the Banstead, Ash and Ryarsh estates, which most definitely belonged to the de Mowbrays in the early 1200s, were acquired by the Patry family after their former owner, Tirel de Manieres, forfeited during the rebellion of William Clito, around 1124 A.D.

    Unfortunately, I wasn't able to independently confirm the details regarding Tirel de Manieres. None of the sources I was able to find online go into such granular detail. They basically gloss over the period between Domesday and the de Mowbray's ownership. But Flight's work is extensively footnoted, and has been published in the journal of the Kent Archaeological Society, so on that basis alone it inspires more confidence than the numerous online pedigrees I've seen for this family, which continue to cite now-debunked theories involving the families of the Earls of Clare and Salisbury. So while I'm excited about this, it's not exactly a done deal.

    Still, it can't be denied that the pattern of associations with the ancestors of FT372222+ surnames with the de Mowbrays and Patrys grows considerably tighter and denser.
    Last edited by benowicz; 13 October 2021, 10:54 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . There seems to have been an extended scholarly article written about the origins of the Patry family in 1996, but so far I've not been able to access a copy. I've only seen some passing citations.

    Les Patry de la Lande: un lignage celto-scandinave (XIe-XIIIe s.) Louise, Gérard. (1996) - In: Le pays bas-normand vol. 222/223 (1996) p. 5-27
    Found a summary of the genealogical findings of this paper.

    http://www.geneacaux.net/RGNcd2/85-2003.pdf

    Nothing super-amazing in there, but there is a useful reminder that the Patry family were patrons of the abbaye at Savigny-le-vieux, on the border between Normandy and Brittany. Found a couple on-line abstracts of relevant charters, dated roughly to the 2nd half of the 12th century--shortly before the ancestors of the Vincent family appear in Richmondshire. Nothing special in the content.

    But it may be useful to remember that among the founders of that Abbey were the family of the Earls of Richmond, and that the Earls made frequent, large donations to the abbey. So did the Earls' kinsmen, the Bardolph family of Ravensworth, who were the immediate overlords of the Vincent family at Barningham.

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbaye_de_Savigny

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=xHs...gny%22&f=false

    The Bardolphs were also patrons of the church of St. Patrick at Patrick Brompton, so there's maybe another oblique reference to the Patry family.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=xHs...ulf%22&f=false

    So I guess there is a line of historical continuity to be drawn between the Hiberno-Norse families of the Cotentin and the FT372222 families of Vincent and Saddington whose early ancestors are documented in Richmondshire. The Bardolph and de Rollos families crossed paths many times, including the witness of Richard I de Rollos to the wedding of Ralph, son of Ribald to Agatha de Brus, kinsman of Acaris Bardolph in the 1150s A.D.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    More on the Patry family.

    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . 2. The Caen-based de Rosel family seem to have been closely intermarried with the Tesson and La Lande Patry families that William de Rollos, son of Richard II, locked horns with around 1200 A.D.

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/43015263

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=pl

    The dispute was over ownership of an hereditary interest in Chênedollé near Vire, implying that William de Rollos shared some ancestry with that particular Raoul Tesson or his wife, who as one of the La Lande Patrys. The connections among these old aristocratic families are dense and complex, so I can't vouch for the completeness or accuracy of any of the online pedigrees, but that second link must be somewhere near the truth because an abstract of yet another donation charter of the Caen-based de Rosel family mentions the marriage with a Robert Patry/Patrix in this same time frame. Page 87.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=kzl...sel%22&f=false

    3. Evidence from the Liber Niger of the English Exchequer, dated around 1166 A.D. also hints at this relationship of the La Lande Patry family with the Caen-based de Rosels specifically.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=i7U...sel%22&f=false

    This entry from Nottinghamshire shows a Patricus de Rosel as a vassal of Roger de Burun.

    The La Lande Patry family is well studied, and it seems pretty uncontroversial that they derived their name from either a place or a person named Patrick, a pretty rare name at that date in Normandy. The standard line is that this family were one of those Hiberno-Norse lineages that migrated to Normandy in the late 900's A.D., although I don't know if this name is the sole piece of evidence in support. . . .

    This seems like it could be on the right track. Patrick was a pretty unusual name for Medieval Normandy, but so was Vincent. In 1141 A.D., Guillaume "William" II Patry founded a priory at La Lande-Patry that was a satellite of the Abbey of Saint Vincent at Le Mans.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=mjt...0Patry&f=false

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=_Ks...141%22&f=false


    Of course I'm trying to draw a connection of some kind to that other FT372222+ family, the Vincents of Virginia, USA. That's kind of rough because as far as I'm aware, there is no contemporary documentation clearly stating their European home, but their common SNP status with the Saddington family, and the early association in England of the Vincent surname, as well as the Saddingtons, with the de Mowbrays and de Vassys at Barningham, Richmondshire seems like it could mean something. The earliest known ancestor of the Barningham Vincents was a Stephen, son of Vincent, who flourished some time before 1200 A.D.

    The affiliation of the Patry family with Le Mans, which is outside of the borders of Normandy, is kind of mysterious. The deep roots of FGC23343 almost certainly lie in France, but much further south than Le Mans, on the border with Spain. So it's difficult to know which scenario would be *less* improbable for the Patrys--Basques being recruited by the so-called Loire viking bands and retreating with them to Ireland before settling in Western Normandy in the late 900s A.D., or Basques wandering up to Le Mans during this same time frame without any clear historical context encouraging to do so, and only coincidentally adopting an Irish name along the way.

    As far as I can tell, the earliest known Patry was a semi-famous fellow who puts in a brief appearance during the drama that led to the Norman Conquest of England. According to the historian Wace, Guillaume "William" I Patry met Harold Godwinson when his ship crashed on the Norman coast.

    https://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/R...002/06/114.htm

    Guillaume I Patry was a close follower of William the Conqueror, and there are several contemporary charters corroborating this fact. So the idea that the Patrys first became acquainted with Le Mans in the decade of the 1070s A.D., when the Conqueror led a punitive expedition there seems very plausible.

    I'm not really aware of any confirmed use of the names Vincent or Stephen in the Patry family, so this is maybe kind of speculative. But in theory, the relative infrequency of the name Vincent, the Patry's associations with that Abbey at Le Mans, as well as the de Rollos landed interest at Rosel, Caen could mean something. The time frame works out.

    http://racineshistoire.free.fr/LGN/PDF/Patry.pdf

    The coat of arms attributed to the Patry family here is nearly identical to the primary form of the Vincent family arms--three quatrefoils argent, only on a background of gules instead of azure.

    https://archive.org/details/generala.../1058/mode/2up

    Elsewhere I've suggested that the Stoke d'Abernon Vincents may have derived their heraldry from the Bardolf family of Richmondshire, who were among the earliest overlords of the Vincent family at Barningham. Heraldic practice doesn't seem to have been very standardized at this point in history, so maybe this is reading too much into what is essentially a coincidence. But it's still a very interesting coincidence.

    Also there is the Patry fief of "Groci" mentioned on page 261 of that book discussing the St. Vincent satellite established at La Lande. Could it be another version of Gruchy, Rosel, Latinized as "Groceio", as discussed a couple posts back?

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=_Ks...141%22&f=false

    There seems to have been an extended scholarly article written about the origins of the Patry family in 1996, but so far I've not been able to access a copy. I've only seen some passing citations.

    Les Patry de la Lande: un lignage celto-scandinave (XIe-XIIIe s.) Louise, Gérard. (1996) - In: Le pays bas-normand vol. 222/223 (1996) p. 5-27
    Last edited by benowicz; 12 October 2021, 03:14 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . 2. The Caen-based de Rosel family seem to have been closely intermarried with the Tesson and La Lande Patry families that William de Rollos, son of Richard II, locked horns with around 1200 A.D.

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/43015263

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=pl

    The dispute was over ownership of an hereditary interest in Chênedollé near Vire, implying that William de Rollos shared some ancestry with that particular Raoul Tesson or his wife, who as one of the La Lande Patrys. The connections among these old aristocratic families are dense and complex, so I can't vouch for the completeness or accuracy of any of the online pedigrees, but that second link must be somewhere near the truth because an abstract of yet another donation charter of the Caen-based de Rosel family mentions the marriage with a Robert Patry/Patrix in this same time frame. Page 87.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=kzl...sel%22&f=false

    . . .
    Okay, NOW I feel I'm getting a little more clarity over this situation. The deal seems to be that around the earl/mid-1100s A.D., before the de Rollos interest in Rosel near Caen was recorded (i.e., 1180 A.D., Hugues de Clinchamps married Alix de Rosel, who must have been an heiress. True to the casual approach to surname usage at this time, Hugues and his descendants seem to have occasionally called themselves de Rosel instead.

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=pl

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=ixQ...mps%22&f=false

    http://www.corpusetampois.com/che-20...destange11.pdf

    https://archives.calvados.fr/ark:/52329/ns5pg769xljt

    The date of Hugues de Clinchamp's confirmation to the Abbey of St. Stephen isn't clear from the face of the document, but given the clear mid-1100s A.D. dates of the many donations at Rosel by Phillipine, daughter of Huges "de Rosel", I'm guessing it was the early/mid-1100s A.D., which would be consistent with that pedigree. Phillipine must have had a life interest only, as a dowry.

    So maybe score one for an internet pedigree having some factual basis after all.

    Beyond that there's all this totally unsupported speculation about whether the ultimate origin of the de Clinchamps was Normandy, Maine, Touraine or somewhere else. Clinchamps seems to be an infrequent but none the less widespread toponym, basically meaning "sloping field".

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    From way back, the first post in this thread:

    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . Y Search has a profile for a person last-name Dorey who matches the project participants. DEAGD. . . .
    To my knowledge that guy never tested for FGC23343. But he certainly matched the modal STR haplotype closely, and given his recent origins in Jersey, Channel Islands, it offered an explanation for the Norman origins of some other FGC23343+ people. Now I've found some contemporary documents that might point to a connection between the Doreys and the FT372222 people, Saddington specifically.

    https://www.theislandwiki.org/index....s_Larbalestier

    The deal is that the earliest documented Doreys in the islands were connected to a family named de Gruchy who derived their name from a fief once owned by the de Rollos ancestors of the Saddington family. Gruchy (Latin: Groceio) is a subdivision of Rosel, in the neighborhood of Caen.

    https://www.theislandwiki.org/index.php/De_Gruchy

    https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gr...88!4d-0.435777

    To date, the only direct evidence I've found for de Rollos involvement in this neighborhood is an abstract of a charter dating from the 1180's A.D., confirming a donation made to the Abbey of St. Stephen at Caen by Richard I de Rollos, husband of Emma Musard of the Constable's Fee in Richmondshire and founder of the priory at La Bloutiere, near Villedieu-les-Proles.

    https://www.british-history.ac.uk/ca...1206/pp141-163

    It only specifies a quantity of wheat at Rosel, rather than some more substantial asset like a church or its tithes, so maybe the connection seems thin on the surface, but there are some other connections worth noting. That same charter mentions Roger de Mowbray--brother of the bishop Geoffrey--making a donation of land at Grainville-sur-Odon to Saint Stephen's. As we've seen previously, later de Mowbrays shared interests with the de Rollos family in Saddington, Leicestershire as well as Vaudry and Viessoix near Vire in Normandy and the Vincent family at Barningham in Richmondshire.

    Rosel or Rozel is still the name of a fief in Jersey, part of the historical division originally held from the Earls of Chester. It seems to be named after a family called de Rosel who owned property in Jersey in the 13th century, although there isn't much evidence that they actually resided there.

    There's a lot of confusion among unrelated families with similar names, but in context I think the evidence supporting this connection to the Rosel near Caen rather than the much better known Le Rozel near Bricquebec-Cotentin, although the latter place is much closer to Jersey geographically. Points in support of this view are:

    1. Ranulf, Earl of Chester, confirmed a later donation to the priory at Le Plessis-Grimoult by the Caen-based de Rosel family as their overlord. Date must be the mid-to-late 1100's A.D. Page 88. Both the de Mowbrays and the de Rollos were also patrons of the Le Plessis priory, and an earlier Earl of Chester was overlord of the de Rollos's three small fiefs during the Domesday survey.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=kzl...sel%22&f=false


    2. The Caen-based de Rosel family seem to have been closely intermarried with the Tesson and La Lande Patry families that William de Rollos, son of Richard II, locked horns with around 1200 A.D.

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/43015263

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=pl

    The dispute was over ownership of an hereditary interest in Chênedollé near Vire, implying that William de Rollos shared some ancestry with that particular Raoul Tesson or his wife, who as one of the La Lande Patrys. The connections among these old aristocratic families are dense and complex, so I can't vouch for the completeness or accuracy of any of the online pedigrees, but that second link must be somewhere near the truth because an abstract of yet another donation charter of the Caen-based de Rosel family mentions the marriage with a Robert Patry/Patrix in this same time frame. Page 87.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=kzl...sel%22&f=false

    3. Evidence from the Liber Niger of the English Exchequer, dated around 1166 A.D. also hints at this relationship of the La Lande Patry family with the Caen-based de Rosels specifically.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=i7U...sel%22&f=false

    This entry from Nottinghamshire shows a Patricus de Rosel as a vassal of Roger de Burun.

    The La Lande Patry family is well studied, and it seems pretty uncontroversial that they derived their name from either a place or a person named Patrick, a pretty rare name at that date in Normandy. The standard line is that this family were one of those Hiberno-Norse lineages that migrated to Normandy in the late 900's A.D., although I don't know if this name is the sole piece of evidence in support.

    Also uncontroversial is the origin of Roger de Burun from Buron, less than 2 miles away from the Rosel near Caen.

    https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Buro...d49.228332!4e1


    4. The Caen-based de Rosel family, like the de Mowbray overlords of the de Rollos family, held land at Grainville-sur-Odon. Here's yet another charter showing the de Rosel family donating to the Abbey of St. Stephen, specifically mentioning both Gruchy (i.e., Groceio) and Grainville. I'm not sure of the time frame, but I think it has to be before the donations of Philippina de Rosel/Hamar/Patry discussed earlier. Either during the time of her father Hugues or maybe a grandfather of the same name. Before the mid 1100s A.D.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=r3h...roceio&f=false

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=kzl...sel%22&f=false



    On top of this all, there is also record of a Geoffrey Dore at this Rosel near Caen in 1289, shortly before the de Gruchys are supposed to have arrived in Jersey. Page 144.

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=6_V...sel%22&f=false

    I don't put too much faith in this Dore reference--the name Dorey and all its variants seem to have many independent origins, and so little is known about the first Doreys in Jersey. But in context of all this Saddington/de Rollos/de Rosel/de Gruchy stuff, it seems worth bookmarking.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Thanks.

    Most of the histories consulted in the course of genealogical work seem to focus on 18th and 19th century migration or myths of nation building. They're typically sparse or biased towards a projecting a specific image, and so ignore a lot of the real-world complexity our ancestors actually lived through. The history of FGC23343 probably isn't representative of its ancestral clade, Z209, but it certainly is an interesting chapter.

    One thing I've noticed is that almost every little coastal town in Ireland, Brittany and Normandy seems to have some oral legends of Basque settlers. I haven't spent too much time on those as their lack of documentary basis makes them impossible to adequately contextualize. Most of them are probably empty talk or exaggeration of a very brief contact without any deep, systemic impact on the community's history. But, as the evolving history of that Shetland FT351092 family seems to show, some of the more romantic legends like stranded Armada sailors just might have some factual basis after all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tomero
    replied
    I've been reading your thread for several days now with great interest. I'm especially interested in the Viking-Basque connection. You see, I am a New Mexico Hispano; and most of my ancestry goes back to colonial New Mexico, colonial New Spain, and to the Iberian Peninsula. I do have a great great grandfather that was French. His surname was Morel.

    When I first tested with FTDNA (Family Finder), My Origins showed me having 3% British Isles. In a more recent My Origins version, the British Isles disappeared and seems to have been replaced by 4% Scandinavian. I attributed that to my Morel ancestor (maybe Norman, I thought?) But with the current version of My Origins, the Scandinavian disappeared also, and now my European breakdown is 61% Iberian Peninsula and 8% Basque.

    I have several Family Finder matches that are 100% Irish and several that are high percentage British Isles and/or Scandinavian. Before this most recent version of My Origins, I attributed those matches to my Morel ancestor as well, but now that I read your thread and knowing that I have Basque ancestry, it all makes a lot more sense to me. Thank you.
    Last edited by Tomero; 21 September 2021, 01:24 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    A couple of additional charters with circumstantial evidence that allows us to further fill out the pedigree:

    1. Richard I de Rollos, fl. 1150, lord of Roullours, Cant. Vire and La Bloutiere, Cant. Villedieu-les-Poêles
    2. Godfrey [de Rollos?], referenced in 1230 novel disseisin proceedings for Saddington
    3. Richard de Saddington fl. 1195, possibly identical with the Richard fils Godfrey from the 1229/30 A.D. novel disseisin proceedings
    4. a. John 'fils Richard' de Saddington/de Welham m. Joan de Martival, from this notice and the charter at Mowsley ~1270 A.D. published by John Nicholls in 'History and Antiquities of Leicestershire'
    4. a. 1.) Almeric de Saddington, ditto
    4. a. 2.) Roger de Saddington, from a different charter at Mowsley dated 1285 A.D.
    4. a. 3.) Sir Richard de Saddington, vicar of Weldon, Northamptonshire (a Basset property) from a charter dated 1303 A.D., w/ his grandfather perhaps erroneously given as 'Robert', unless Sir Richard should be reclassed as 4. c. 1.)
    4. b. Thomas de Welham, protagonist of the 1229/1230 A.D. proceedings and referred to once as "de Saddington" in an undated charter near Bruntingthorpe
    4. b. 1.) Roger de Saddington, in the Bruntingthorpe charters and Nicholl's ~1270 A.D. charter at Mowsley
    4. b. 2.) William de Saddington
    4. b. 2.) a.) William de Saddington, from a charter at Bruntingthorpe dated 1285 A.D., possibly identical with a clergyman of this same name mentioned in several Northamptonshire documents around this time
    4. b. 2.) b.) John de Saddington ?, ditto
    4. b. 2.) b.) i.) Lord Chancellor Robert de Saddington? d. after 1347 A.D.; some of the lands held by this branch of the family seem to have passed through Robert's daughter to the Hastings family
    4. b. 2.) c.) Thomas de Saddington, from a charter dated 1312 A.D. at Weldon, Northamptonshire? Not sure of his placement in this pedigree, but I believe that 4. b. 2.) a.) William had a brother named Thomas, also a clergyman

    http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/...1_123_36.shtml

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=us

    Not really sure which of these specifically leads to Adam de Saddington of Foxton from the 1327 A.D. lay subsidy rolls, but it's clear that there are multiple candidates contemporary with Lord Chancellor Robert. Based on the passage of the Bruntingthorpe estates to the Hastings family, maybe one of the sons of John 4. a. is more likely; they seem to be the junior, or at least less prominent lines.
    Last edited by benowicz; 17 September 2021, 11:42 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . I do know that the earliest known ancestors of the Saddington DNA donors lived at Foxton in the 17th century, so I'm assuming their residence there was been continuous since the 14th century, although I guess there's no particular reason it must have been. . .
    Well, the Saddingtons didn't clear out of Foxton after that 1374 transaction. Three Saddingtons--Henry, Roger and William--appear at Foxton in the poll tax records for 1379 and 1381.

    https://books.google.com/books?id=zh...ton%22&f=false

    It was a pretty regressive flat tax, so not too much to be learned about the type or size of their holdings.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_Tax_of_1379

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . In any event, I'm pretty sure that any ordinary peasant tenure would have required this 1374 A.D. transfer to mention homage owed to any feudal lord other than the king and explicit mention of the lord's approval. . . .
    It just occurs to me that if de Foxton was the feudal lord over the land originally held by William de Saddington, no explicit mention of homage might be required either. In such a case, this transaction would essentially represent the early surrender of a long term lease before maturity, and the price quoted--20 marks of silver (i.e., 13 pounds 6 shillings 8 pence in pre-decimalization denomination)--would represent the residual, unexpired value originally paid up front by de Saddington or his predecessor in tenure. To put that in today's context, it would be like a mortgage lender forgiving the outstanding balance of a home equity loan after taking title back from the mortgagor.

    I'm used to calculating targeted property prices based on estimates of the future value of associated revenue streams, so as of today 16 September 2021, this transaction would be around 292,000 British Pounds or 403,000 U.S. Dollars. A pretty hefty sum for a Medieval peasant, I think, considering that rents were usually denominated in kind at this period, as hard cash was rather scarce.

    https://www.measuringworth.com/calcu...ar_result=2021

    I do know that the earliest known ancestors of the Saddington DNA donors lived at Foxton in the 17th century, so I'm assuming their residence there was been continuous since the 14th century, although I guess there's no particular reason it must have been. It seems that if this document of 1374 A.D. represented only a portion of land they held from de Foxton, a competent legal clerk would have been careful to note that, in order to prevent confusion over any amounts still owing on property that de Saddington may have continued to hold from de Foxton.

    All in all, I think William de Saddington probably did not hold this land originally from de Foxton, but even if he did, the magnitude of cash involved puts de Saddington solidly in the upper echelons of the yeoman class.
    Last edited by benowicz; 16 September 2021, 05:11 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . Foxton, home of the earliest currently traceable lines of the modern Saddingtons, is in the immediate neighborhood of the Langtons and Mowsley, where the Chancellor's family held land in the 1270s. 'Adam de Sadyngton' appears at Foxton in the 1327 lay subsidy rolls. . . .
    Some interesting additional color about the early tenure of the de Saddingtons at Foxton: This 1374 Fine:
    CP 25/1/125/67, number 306.
    Link: Image of document at AALT
    County: Leicestershire.
    Place: Westminster.
    Date: Two weeks from Holy Trinity, 48 Edward III [11 June 1374].
    Parties: Richard de Foxton', querent, and William de Sadyngton' of Foxton' and Maud, his wife, deforciants.
    Property: 1 messuage, 34 acres of land, 6 acres of meadow and a moiety of 1 virgate of pasture in Foxton'.
    Action: Plea of covenant.
    Agreement: William and Maud have acknowledged the tenements to be the right of Richard, as those which he has of their gift, and have remised and quitclaimed them from themselves and the heirs of William to him and his heirs for ever.
    Warranty: Warranty.
    For this: Richard has given them 20 marks of silver.
    Standardised forms of names. (These are tentative suggestions, intended only as a finding aid.)
    Persons: Richard de Foxton, William de Saddington, Maud de Saddington
    Places: Foxton
    http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/...1_125_67.shtml

    There were some odd wrinkles in early English real estate law because during the feudal period there wasn't really an open market for land. Sales and other transfers had to move through the court of record structured as fines, just a weird bureaucratic convention. What this document really records is the sale of some mixed residential/agricultural property in Foxton to Richard de Foxton by William de Saddington and his wife, Maude. It seems significant that there is no mention of any obligations owed to a superior feudal lord or the usual approval for the transfer that would be required from such a lord, suggesting that William de Saddington may have held it directly from the Crown. A little unusual, I think, for the families of simple tenant farmers.

    Some more background on the early property interests at Foxton:

    https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vc...s/vol5/pp90-96

    I think this might support my hypothesis, mentioned in an earlier post here, that Thomas de Weleham/de Saddington, father of the Roger de Saddington of Nicholls' charter of ~1270 A.D. was related to the Bassets of Weldon by marriage. Part of Foxton seems to have descended through an heiress to Alan Basset by 1224 A.D., and Thomas was mentioned as attorney for Ralph Basset of Weldon in a 1246 A.D. case from Staffordshire.

    An alternative explanation might be that this portion of Foxton was a direct inheritance of the de Saddingtons from Richard I de Rollos but that the records documenting its transfer may have been lost.

    Foxton, Welham and part of Smeeton (this last held by Richard I de Rollos in 1130 A.D.) were all properties of Robert de Bucy during the Domesday Survey of 1086 A.D. While the de Bucy family seems to have forfeited this property soon thereafter, most of it was transferred to the family of Hugh of Avranches, earl of Chester--from whom de Rollos's family also held land in and around the Wirral peninsula. It might also reflect the de Rollos' deep ties to western Normandy--de Bucy seems to have derived his surname from Boucey, near Pontorson, and the de Rollos were neighbors of the Viscounts of Avranches at La Bloutiere, if not direct vassals there. Whenever there is some kind of forfeiture in this period, relatives or feudal superiors of the outgoing lord always seem to have gotten first bite at the apple when the king re-granted it.

    In any event, I'm pretty sure that any ordinary peasant tenure would have required this 1374 A.D. transfer to mention homage owed to any feudal lord other than the king and explicit mention of the lord's approval. That all land was ultimately held from the king was a universally understood fact that didn't need to be spelled out in so many words, but any intermediate lords really should have been mentioned in any properly constructed transfer.
    Last edited by benowicz; 16 September 2021, 04:00 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post

    So there is additional evidence that the lineage of the original Richard de Sadington, 'nepos' of Richard II de Rollos, survived after the branch of Lord Chancellor Robert de Saddington daughtered out after 1340. . . In context Joan de Martival must be Joyce's sister, and married to John de Weleham. . .
    Well, further detail shows that Joan de Martival must have been an aunt or cousin of an earlier generation to Joyce, NOT a sister. So John de Weleham/de Saddington must have been uncle to Lord Chancellor Robert de Saddington.

    "Fine, Mich., 52 Henry III, 1267. Between Anketin de Martivall, plaintiff, and John de Weleham and Joan his wife, defendants, of 4 selions of land and the advowsou of a mediety of the church of Halghton. N.B.—" The heir of Walter de Martival is patron of the northern mediety of the church of Haleton." [Matriculus of Hugh Welles, Cant, and York Soc.I., p. 261.] The advowson of this mediety had descended to Joan as daughter and heir of Richard de Martivall; by the above fine she and her husband sold this advowson to Anketin de Martivall, father of Roger de Martivall (afterwards bishop of Salisbury) who presented to the mediety in 1290 and 1324. [Lincoln registers I f. 280 and IV f. 119 d.]"

    https://www.le.ac.uk/lahs/downloads/...%20Farnham.pdf


    I think this actually gives my hypothesis of the descent of the modern Saddington family more coherence. Nicholls' charter at Mowsley is dated around 1270 A.D., and this lends weight to the inference that the John fils Richard de Saddington appearing as witness therein was the brother of Roger de Saddington's father, whose surname is given as de Weleham. This Richard de Saddington must have been the 'nepos' of Richard II de Rollos, and the inclusion of a Richard fils Godfrey in the 1230 A.D. novel disseisin proceedings completes the pedigree.

    Godfrey's surname isn't explicitly stated as de Rollos, but his given name is clearly of Norman in origin. It seems like an important piece of information, because Richard II de Rollos left Skeeby, Yorkshire (which in an unlikely coincidence wound its way to the Vincents of Barningham in the 14th century) to a different 'nepos', Harold, son of Aldred, and both of those names are of Saxon origin. So Harold was apparently related to the de Rollos through a female ancestor, while it seems likely, or at least possible, that Godfrey was a direct agnatic relation. I feel that if Godfrey's father belonged to a different Norman lineage, that would have been reflected in his surname and that we'd be able to trace that lineage through other property transactions.

    These documents are pretty spare in details, but I get the feeling that Godfrey was an illegitimate son of Richard I de Rollos. There isn't a ton of literature specific to this time frame, but what I have seen suggests that the type of transactions involved here, small individual bequests of life interests, like that at Saddington, and under-tenancies arranged through church donations, like at Brompton-on-Swale, were typical of the way feudal lords provided for their illegitimate sons later on, from the 13th century onwards. Primogeniture was only gradually being introduced at this time, but experience was showing that the status of a family did tend to decline precipitously unless steps were taken to protect the integrity of the chief heir's estates.

    I guess the contrast with Skeeby also supports the conclusion that Godfrey was a de Rollos. I believe Skeeby was the only property Harold son of Alred received from Richard II de Rollos, and it was an under-tenancy. The grant to Richard fils Godfrey at Saddington was qualitatively, different as its description as a direct 'donum' (gift) in 1229 A.D. show. Plus, the fact that Saddington in Leicestershire was a part of lands acquired in his own right by Richard II de Rollos through purchase, rather than a part of his mother's inheritance in Yorkshire which was subject to reversionary interests in the Constable's Fee, must mean something.
    Last edited by benowicz; 16 September 2021, 10:52 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    One little knot in the early de Saddington story that I wish I could work out: The de Welham connection.

    It may not have an impact on the possible continuity of this name into modern times--the branch that seems most numerous is that of the Richard de Saddington of the reign of Richard I, and therefore likely of de Rollos stock--but one Roger de Saddington is mentioned as the son of an Adam de Welham in this document, probably dating from about 1270.

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us

    Quite possibly de Welham was just another ephemeral cognomen assumed by a branch of the same de Rollos stock--three apparent de Rollos Saddingtons are witnesses to that same document. . . Maybe Thomas de Welham and John fils Richard de Saddington were brothers? Maybe the original Richard de Sadington married a Basset?
    So there is additional evidence that the lineage of the original Richard de Sadington, 'nepos' of Richard II de Rollos, survived after the branch of Lord Chancellor Robert de Saddington daughtered out after 1340.

    Quote: "Martival, Anketil (d. 1274), Anketil (fl. 1329), Joan, m. John de Weleham, Joyce, m. Rob de Saddington, Ralph, Ric., Rob., Rog. de, Bp. of Salisbury, Wal., Wm. (fl. 1130), Wm. (fl. 1220), fam.,"

    https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vc...vol5/pp356-366

    That's from British History Online's transcription of Vol. 5 of the 1964 history of Leicestershire. That 'Rob de Saddington', is the Lord Chancellor, who married a sister of Robert de Martival.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sadington


    In context Joan de Martival must be Joyce's sister, and married to John de Weleham.

    Stepping back, the modern de Saddington family must descend from the de Rollos as follows:

    1. Richard I de Rollos, fl. 1150, lord of Roullours, Cant. Vire and La Bloutiere, Cant. Villedieu-les-Poêles
    2. Godfrey [de Rollos?], referenced in 1230 novel disseisin proceedings for Saddington
    3. Richard de Saddington fl. 1195, possibly the Richard fils Godfrey from 1230 A.D.
    4. John de Saddington/de Welham m. Joan de Martival, from this notice and the charter at Mowsley ~1270 A.D. published by John Nicholls in 'History and Antiquities of Leicestershire'
    5. One of probably several sons, including an Almeric, also from the ~1270 A.D. charter, who had a son named Roger
    6. Adam de Saddington of Foxton fl. 1327

    Foxton, home of the earliest currently traceable lines of the modern Saddingtons, is in the immediate neighborhood of the Langtons and Mowsley, where the Chancellor's family held land in the 1270s. 'Adam de Sadyngton' appears at Foxton in the 1327 lay subsidy rolls.

    https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vc...vol5/pp248-256

    https://books.google.com/books?id=F8...39;%22&f=false

    There's a reference at about this time to an Adam de Sadynton as bailiff, so this must mark the transition of the family from feudal/legal preoccupations to the life of an ordinary family of country yeomen.

    https://archive.org/stream/indexofpl...1newy_djvu.txt

    Before the late 1300s, families seem to treat surnames rather casually, almost as ephemeral cognomina, so this switching between de Welham and de Saddington is not so unusual.
    Last edited by benowicz; 15 September 2021, 10:37 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X