Medieval Latin.

[absque fenestris]

Hello Jon

I like your thread - and when I look at the number of visitors, I'm obviously not the only one.
I struggled here with various contributions, with Latin and of course with English ... and occasionally with French.
Of course I am happy when a certain understatement on my part reaches you or maybe the readers - but it also has to do with my limited options; a certain shortening is absolutely necessary.
Language is really a very nice thing - if only one could, in all tongues, in the grammatical form of the possibility - ironical or satirical, and sometimes skeptical - parlate ...
Perhaps with such language games, wars would be avoidable; because everyone is busy laughing right now.

I think Monty Python also had a sketch like this, telling lazy jokes across the fronts ...

[dorsetUK]

Assumption, assumption, assumption.

Hi af, I've made a huge error. Here I am, on an International forum, assuming that everyone knows my language as I do.

Of course I am happy when a certain understatement on my part reaches you or maybe the readers - but it also has to do with my limited options; a certain shortening is absolutely necessary.

Sorry, you use English fantastically, and I hadn't even thought that it wasn't your 'second' language.

When I use a bit of French or Latin, I think I've been assuming that 'everyone' will understand a couple of words. When I quote sentences, or paragraphs, that's actually a, very unsubtle, call for help! My Latin is appalling, my French has 'gone rusty' since all those young French people started talking English as well as I do. My niece, who lives in southern Germany, says that she thinks in German, and as most of the time she speaks German or Italian, English has become 'tricky'. I should understand.

Language is really a very nice thing - if only one could, in all tongues, in the grammatical form of the possibility - ironical or satirical, and sometimes skeptical - parlate ...
Perhaps with such language games, wars would be avoidable; because everyone is busy laughing right now.

J'agree - or is that 'slang'?

I think Monty Python also had a sketch like this, telling lazy jokes across the fronts ...

Youtube, here I come.

Cheers af. Jon.

[RollyShed]

Though my suggestion to dorsetUK of getting the book from the local library and from half a world away might seem "wow!!!", I'm actually "just over the garden fence" because of the internet. The difference would be, with the now virus lock-down, I'd have to wait until I could see someone over the garden fence and was in their garden if I lived next door - Hmmm... The internet allows me to leave a note on their doorstep or in their letterbox, virus free.

My mention of it seeming everyone was at war all the time - you have the choice of working in the fields all your life, as boring as it can get, or going off at someone else's expense to see the world. You might get killed but then you were going to have a short life span anyway so what did it matter?

Boredom or action? To get round this we have invented sport and on an international level, added TV and the internet plus cars. These should to some extent reduce war. Note, to some extent, only.

[dorsetUK]

Morining af, do you mean this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WboggjN_G-4

Though my suggestion to dorsetUK of getting the book from the local library and from half a world away might seem "wow!!!", I'm actually "just over the garden fence" because of the internet. The difference would be, with the now virus lock-down, I'd have to wait until I could see someone over the garden fence and was in their garden if I lived next door - Hmmm... The internet allows me to leave a note on their doorstep or in their letterbox, virus free.

Hi RollyShed, that's a lovely thought.

My mention of it seeming everyone was at war all the time - you have the choice of working in the fields all your life, as boring as it can get, or going off at someone else's expense to see the world. You might get killed but then you were going to have a short life span anyway so what did it matter?

Boredom or action? To get round this we have invented sport and on an international level, added TV and the internet plus cars. These should to some extent reduce war. Note, to some extent, only.

Thought provoking - I've now got a desire to write about medieval attitudes, where 5% of people prayed, 5% fought and the other 90% worked.

I like your sport etc comment as well. I'm a Cricket fan and there's one country that I absolutely hate when we're playing them, but not when we're not. Psst - it's not NZ.

Jon

[dorsetUK]

My mention of it seeming everyone was at war all the time - you have the choice of working in the fields all your life, as boring as it can get, or going off at someone else's expense to see the world. You might get killed but then you were going to have a short life span anyway so what did it matter?

Hi RollyShed, this is something I’m still trying to work out, but they were very different times. A huge number of people died before they were 20, and it’s estimated that 80% of of us were dead by 40. But ‘back then’, death could be a good thing.

Here, I’m just talking generally, trying to paint an outline – and I never was any good at art – but here goes.

In 1066 king William I, ‘the Conqueror’, owned all of ‘England’. To reward his followers he granted them some of his land, but he still owned it. His followers ‘held’ the land ‘from the king’. In 1086 Domesday was compiled and it shows that William kept about 20% for himself, gave the church about 25% and his followers c55%. This put the king in a good position, as if you offended him he could take back your lands, and give them to someone else. If there was a war and people died, that land ‘reverted’ to the king, so he could keep it and earn money, or reward someone else.

Because this was such a religious time and their: nurses, doctors, accountants, scientists and politicians were ‘of the church’, so they took 10% of everyones produce – money hardly existed, but if you could pay, I’m sure that the church wouldn’t mind. Then the head of the church – the Pope – taxed his churches. Not only did the church provide many crucial services, it was also getting richer and richer. The crucial thing is that everyone believed in God, and the pope was ‘Gods vicar’ and the king, although ‘appointed by God’, wasn’t allowed to tax the church. Kings found ways around this, as when a Bishop died, the pope would appoint another one and the king could say, “oh, I’m not sure about him. How about …”. Negotiations would rumble on, and whilst there was no Bishop, his income went straight to the king. Neat.

Things such as earthquakes, eclipses and diseases were signs of Gods displeasure, but God tended to stay silent when things were going well.

War seems to have been an acceptable mode of behaviour, and a ‘good death’ - dying with your sword ‘in hand’ - was something to be desired, because, if you’d been ‘good’ then you went to Heaven, for ever. That seems to be important, life was transitory, Heaven, and Hell, were for ever. Plus, if you won, that proved that God was on your side – which is neat.

On the legal side of things, trial by heat, water and battle, would prove whether you were guilty or innocent. That means that we believed that if we burnt somebody on the arm or hand, and it didn’t go septic, then that proved their innocence. The trial by battle bit had an interesting aspect in that you could have someone else do the fighting for you! If you could afford to.

As we’re in such a religious time and as many rich people did bad things, then they could buy their way out of their badness by building churches and priories and subsidising Abbeys. I won’t go into ‘Purgatory’ and other ways of buying your innocence eg, pilgrimages and crusades – but this was a good time for the church. Some, maybe many, historians say that the pope was at his most powerful in the early 1200’s.

Back then, people had very little choice, and as is said, 5% prayed, 5% fought and 90% worked, and I haven’t really mentioned the 90% yet.

We were born, and as soon as possible we started to work, both for ourselves and our Lords. As the Lords only ‘held’ their land from the king, so the few of the 90% who ‘owned’ land, didn’t really, cuz they ‘held’ their land from their Lord. The Lord had to pay his taxes to the church and the king, but he could rent you some land and you paid your taxes to him – no doubt, at an enhanced rate. But, it did at least give you some stability in matters such as, home, food and animal husbandry. This was also the ‘Medieval warm period’ and although farming techniques were, by modern standards, poor, at least the weather was good and failed harvests rare – until the 1310’s.

There were also ‘trades’, and as Purbeck was full of stone, miners and masons were needed.

Income. Late 1200’s, early 1300’s the kings yearly income was in the high £20,000’s. Around about 1250, Richard de Clare, the earl of Gloucester, the second most powerful man in the country, had an income c£6,500 and in 1264, Alfred de Lincolns declared income was about £100*. In c1320, the Earl of Lancaster, then the second most powerful man in the country was worth c£10,000. Around about 1300 a miner in Purbeck could earn up to £1.50 a year, and a mason could double that. It’s reckoned that a basic house would cost £2, and the priests in Corfe castle, Corfe town and at St Aldhelms Head were paid, £2.50 a year – actually, the wages of the priests is ‘fact’.

* I used Alfred de Lincoln cuz I’ve done a lot of research on his family, and from c1080 to 1264 they were Dorsets most powerful resident family, and fairly typical ‘knights’. Dorset was, and is, fairly sleepy and poor, but Alfred probably ‘cut quite a splash’ in his home county.

Miners and masons were in an interesting position because as there was so much building going on – churches, castles etc – they could probably stay in work for quite some time – but with Medieval H&S, I don’t know how many got nasty injuries. And when the king needed some building work done, he could just click his fingers and ‘arrest’ miners and masons and tell them where to go and what to build and how much he was going to pay them. Master masons – site architects – may have had a bit more leeway, but could still be ‘arrested’.

Another ‘trade’ was shipping, and as Wareham was a phenomenally important port until c1200, before being eclipsed by Poole, that was another option, but again, when the king needed a fleet in order to sail off and invade somewhere, so he clicked his fingers and ‘arrested’ the ships he needed.

War changed, and going back to 1066, one battle, where the losing king was killed – or captured – and that was it. That’s a bit simplistic, but, well, y’know. The Army was made up out of the 5% who fought – and possibly some mercenaries. As war ‘developed’ so victories became much more as today – oops, we lost, pull back, dig-in, we’ll ‘ave ‘em next time. But the victories gave the winner new land, income and status. This was important because, c1200, as powerful as any king, there was the pope. If you were a small king, then the pope could influence you rather a lot and not have to respond entirely favourably to your requests. BIG king, power and respect, or fear. The popes influence began to lessen c1300 due to things such as Edward I, king of England in 1270, but king of England and Wales in 1290, so had ‘a bit more clout’, and because of his many wars, finally managed to force through a tax on the church. The French king noticed this, and seems to have agreed that it was a good idea, and so the pope began to lose his ‘absolute’ power.

Kings of England also ‘held’ a big chunk of France – Gascony – and the king of England having to ‘pay his homage’ to the French king caused quite a few ego problems, for quite a few years.

Y’know ... there’d be an insult and the French king would disinherit the English king, who’d raise an army, often have a very destructive, but unproductive time, until the money ran out, so they’d sign a peace treaty. And that was before the Hundred Years War.

As armies and wars grew so more of ‘us’, the 90%, had to march off to war. Kings often put out orders for ‘all men between 16 and 60’ to be somewhere, by sometime, so they could go somewhere, and one example I looked at, Edward I issued orders that, if filled, would have raised an army of c25,000, but actually raised one of c9,000.

One thing that I hate about ‘the Medieval’ is that women are nearly invisible, and reading my ramblings, I’m just reproducing that. That’s a parlous shame, and there is a lot of good work going on concerning women https://www.bl.uk/the-middle-ages/artic ... thorBlock1 https://www.medievalists.net/2017/03/10-medieval-women/ https://www.lincoln.ac.uk/news/2017/06/1366.asp

One thing that women were very important for was improving the man – a ‘good marriage’. Sadly this meant making him richer, and bearing, preferably, male children – horrible.

Around about 1310, Batholomew Badlesmere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartholom ... Badlesmere and Robert fitz Payn – who doesn’t even get a Wiki page - were two of the rising stars at Edward II’s court. Robert had a son, named Robert, who had a son, named Robert. Bart had a daughter named Maudn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maud_de_ ... of_Oxford. Wikipedia’s pretty close, but ignores the fact that one of two elder, maybe both, Roberts paid Bart 20,000 marcs (£13,333) so that the youngest, 12 or 13yrs old, Robert could marry Barts 6yr old daughter - yuk. In 1321 and 2 the country descended into civil war and Bart got his head cut off. The fitz Payns also rebelled and the youngest died, the other was pardoned*, so Maud married the earl of Oxford – much better for her. * the eldest Robert died in 1315.

That’s a pretty foul situation, but the fact that the fitz Payns had £13,000 lying around, is stunning. The king got nearly £30,000 a year, and had to borrow when he went to war. I’m unsure of fitz Payns income, but I think it was less than £200 a year. He - the one who died in 1315 - held a fair old chunk of land, but what made him special is that he was damn good soldier, commander, negotiator and administrator. He fought in Edward I’s Welsh and Scottish wars, he commanded fair sized companies in Scotland and Flanders, he negotiated with both John Comyn and Robert [the] Bruce, accompanied the young prince Edward over to France to pay homage to the French king, so that his dad didn’t have to, and ended up as Steward of the Royal Household, when prince Edward was Edward II. He also visited the pope in order to explain to him what the hell Edward II was up to. He was also constable of Stogursey, Winchester and Corfe castles and, finally, ‘keeper of the forest, south of the Trent’. That’s quite a remarkable career for a bloke who was the son of a Dorset ‘lass’, Margery de Lincoln, the eldest sister of the final, Alfred.

I think that as with many other successful soldiers, he managed to raise a decent amount of ‘booty’. The spoils of war. When you won, you took high value prisoners, and ransomed them back to their families, and of course, you ransacked the area you’d just won. Then you’d load up some of the wagons you’ve captured with grain and herd the livestock to the nearest market, and sell them to the – remaining – locals, who were now, your tenants, and just generally take anything of value.

Ransoming seems to be an accountants joy. If you captured an earl or a comte, then you were laughing. Ransom them back for, say, £1,000, give 10% of that to the king, 10% to the church, 10% to your ‘retinue’, and pocket the rest – neat.

This is also where Chivalry falls on its own sword. It was a way of protecting the rich so that they could live on and fight again. Killing them may be necessary, but capturing them was profitable. It was, mainly, the poor old foot soldiers who died, until new tactics put the rich in the wrong place, as at Crecy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cr%C3%A9cy and that was a tactic learnt in Scotland in the early 1330’s. Probably.

Jon.

[RollyShed]

Your description of "if the king wanted it he arrested and sent workers off to do it" sounds a lot like communist Russia. The irony being communism, "by the people for the people" is actually democracy while communism as it works over the past decades is dictatorship.

Ironical.

I noticed H&S mentioned - ha ha.

What has changed? Communication. Everyone can see what is really happening. Yes, there is still false reporting but the majority of it gives everyone a reasonable idea of what is happening and what is "real".

The church's power has dropped as real science has shown how things really happen, not superstition or airy fairy explanations. Plus sport and TV to entertain the masses.

> Robert fitz Payn – who doesn’t even get a Wiki page
OK, write one, you are allowed to or register as an editor.

Keep writing as this is history, I've not been taught anything much about the era and we're in lock-down so no interruptions. or

[dorsetUK]

What has changed? Communication. Everyone can see what is really happening. Yes, there is still false reporting but the majority of it gives everyone a reasonable idea of what is happening and what is "real".

Yep, as it seems that we 'humans' haven't changed for ages. 'Back then' they were as intelligent as us, and liked pretty much the same stuff, they just interpreted thing in a different way. Mind you, in another 700 years, I wonder how they'll look at us and wonder to themselves, "why did they believe that?".

> Robert fitz Payn – who doesn’t even get a Wiki page
OK, write one, you are allowed to or register as an editor.

Noooooooo, responsibility, nooooooooo. I have pondered over doing a 'blog' thing because then it would be my personal view, but writing something for an Encyclopedia, and hoping that it's, historically, right - noooooooooooo.

As I mentioned the lack of Women in this thread, I am thinking about doing a piece on Dorset's most powerful Woman, 1066-1080. She's part of my main project, which is the de Lincoln family, but there's so little info, I'm not sure I can. Even here https://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/GCM ... mesday.pdf she's just referred to as "the wife of Hugh son of Grip", but I know her as 'Hawise'.

jon

[absque fenestris]

Play medieval puzzle:

is this lady in demand?

Hawise de BOSQUEVILLE https://www.fabpedigree.com/s093/f383445.htm

(... at some point you end up at Baskerville - I know that as a font or as the famous dog in the novel...)

if so:
https://www.fabpedigree.com/s086/f766891.htm
https://www.geni.com/people/Nicolas-de- ... 3411958108
https://www.geni.com/people/Hawise-de-B ... 2447073430
https://www.geni.com/people/Walter-de-B ... 4029460077


To Hawise:
Hadwisa Hadwis Haouys Haoys Haueis Havisa Hawis Hawisa Hawise Hawisia Hawys Hawyse

Avelina OG Avila, derivative of Avice
Auelin Auelina Auelyna Avelyn Avila Avilina Evelina Evelyn

Avice OG Aveza infl. by Lat avis > bird
Auic Auice Auicia Auisia Auizia Aveis Aveline Avelot Averil Avice Avicia Avin Avina Avis ... etc. pp und so weiter

http://dmnes.org/name/Hawise
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bretagne-103

You have the choice ...

We could also open a shop with funny girls' names - sponsored by Mint... ...

[dorsetUK]

(... at some point you end up at Baskerville - I know that as a font or as the famous dog in the novel...)

Damning myself - The Baskerville font! Which church is that in?

Oh, the church of Adobe. Or has my assumption led to another assumption?

Your links are pretty much where I started, then I put together a spreadsheet, with so-and-so linking to so-and-so, who linked to so-and-so. Then I turned to the 'official records' and found that a few of those 'links', were in 'historian speak' - "possible", but not "likely".

That was a major jump up the learning curve for me, and began to realise that, when it comes to 'smaller' people, early Norman history is fraught with a lack of records, so many of us make 'assumptions' often based on a persons last name.

Fer instance - in Purbeck there's a guy in the 1300's who has the same last name as me. Does that 'prove' anything? No. In 'historian speak' - "well, OK, now find some evidence". That person in the 1300's didn't live in a place that I have any 'known' connection to, and it's just one record. There's no proof of that person having any kids, and 'back then' they wrote what they heard.

As I understand this, we're in the field of 'Prosopography', where a 'name', needs a 'time' and a 'place', that can be linked to the same 'name', at a similar 'time', in the same 'place'.

Another step up the learning curve for me was https://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/ENGLIS ... AL3T-Z.htm While looking for the 'forebears' of Robert fitz Payn, it's often said that Payn fitz John was one of them. Makes 'sense', Payn had a son, who would obviously be 'fitz Payn' - sorted. But by 'leaning on others', I can see in the link, that Payn fitz John had two daughters - or more accurately, there are only records of him having two daughters - could he have had a son? Yes, but there's no proof, so, bye-bye Payn fitz John.

For me to criticise the genealogy websites is unfair, as I'm sure that I make similar mistakes, but there are a few things that seem to have been 'assumed to be true', and then they get read and become 'fact'. It's almost as if I'm talking about the Internet.

'Hawise' is on her way, but still needs a bit of editing - I've got to get af's 'Hound' in it.

To Hawise:
Hadwisa Hadwis Haouys Haoys Haueis Havisa Hawis Hawisa Hawise Hawisia Hawys Hawyse

Avelina OG Avila, derivative of Avice
Auelin Auelina Auelyna Avelyn Avila Avilina Evelina Evelyn

Avice OG Aveza infl. by Lat avis > bird
Auic Auice Auicia Auisia Auizia Aveis Aveline Avelot Averil Avice Avicia Avin Avina Avis ... etc. pp und so weiter

You have the choice ...

Indeed, and I wondered if 'Hawise' would have become 'Alice' in todays 'speak'. But 'Evelyn' - why not!

We could also open a shop with funny girls' names - sponsored by Mint... ...

Couldn't we but, what's in a name https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOHPuY88Ry4

Jon

[dorsetUK]

A bit of background on Saxon Women
https://www.bl.uk/anglo-saxons/articles ... on-england

Norman women had far fewer rights.

Pre 1066 Saxon/Norman links. “The harbour of Wareham [Dorset] was more frequented than any port in southern England. This ensured the constant passage through the shire of Normans going to and from Winchester [the Saxon capital] and Westminster. King Edward [the Confessor] himself had held in demesne [home] more than a fifth of the county. Emma his mother had held Wyke, Elwell, and Weymouth. His sister, Countess Goda, married firstly to Drogo count of the Vexin ....”.

Unless they're paraphrasing 12th Century William of Malmesbury, how they knew about Wareham being the busiest port I've no idea, but with Edward the Confessor - Saxon king of England and Lord of Wareham - giving St Marys, of Wareham, to the abbey of St Wandrille, his sister having married the count of Vexin, it may suggest strong links between: the Vexin and Wareham, possibly through Normandy, via le Havre.

In 1086 Domesday was published and here’s very good article about it. https://www.historyextra.com/period/nor ... h-history/

I hate to criticise Baxter, but when he says that Domesday isn’t really about tax collecting, “The problem is that its layout makes it a spectacularly unhelpful guide to the logistics of taxation. To collect the land-tax efficiently, royal officials needed information arranged in geographical order, hundred by hundred and village by village, so they would know exactly where to go and how much to collect. But Domesday’s main organising principle is personal, not geographical”.

It’s personal because that’s how I’d collect the tax. If I was king then I’d call in the major landowners and tell them I wanted my tax in 6 months. They’d go home and raise the taxes from their tenants, and then they’d pay my officials or return to court to pay me. But then, Baxters a proper Historian and I’m just a numpty.

Oh, somewhere up above I said that money didn’t really exist back then. That was a stupid thing to say.

Although Saxons generally did pretty badly, that wasn’t entirely the case. Brictwin the reeve is a fairly rare example of a Saxon who ‘did alright’ under the Normans.
https://opendomesday.org/name/brictwin-the-reeve/

Oh, I shouldn’t do this, but ….. Reeves. “The Anglo-Saxon gerafan (reeve) was the role that became the Norman sheriff, via the scirgerafa, who was probably in place by late 10th century”.

The Reeve of a shire – or Shire Reeve – or as we’re so lazy, the Sheriff.

I wonder if his ears are burning, and he certainly “knows his English”, but ports also had reeves and we shortened to Portreeve – OK our esteemed fellow member, Portreve, only has one ‘e’ in his reeve, but ‘back then’ they often wrote what they heard.

Right, Hawise. In Domesday, ‘the wife of Hugh’, or, ‘Hugh son of Grip's wife’, was prominent in Dorset, but sadly she was never mentioned as she was christened, ‘Hawise’.
https://opendomesday.org/name/hugh-son- ... fe-hawise/

She wasn’t the wife of an earl, she was the wife of our sheriff, and he was dead. How could a woman keep her land?

Hugh fitz Grip, I much prefer ‘fitz’ to ‘son of’, was Dorsets sheriff. It isn’t known when he was appointed as in ‘Exon’ it says “Aelfric, Hugh's predecessor” but in Great Domesday it says “Alfred the sheriff, who was sheriff of Dorset before 1066” - so Hugh could have been in place pretty damn quickly, and Hawise and he were certainly married in 1070, but when the ceremony took place is unknown.

Sheriffs. For some reason William the Conquerer (WtC) trusted these people. Why, is unknown. It’s possible that they were loyal, brave and intelligent troops – maybe ‘officers’ - but there’s no proof. However, as WtC was a very busy man they were, in effect, mini-kings. The real king, or his advisors, would issue orders to the Sheriff, but on the whole they seem to have been left alone, to get on with the job of keeping the Saxons in their place and stopping the Normans from being a ‘bit naughty’. To keep the Sheriffs loyal WtC gave them fair sized chunks of land – sheriffs land – and whilst they were good boys so they kept that land.

Early sheriffs tend to have a fairly bad reputation and are often described as being tyrants, or “the dread agents of Norman monarchy”, but that may be a bit unfair. Even though WtC ruled England there were still quite a few people who weren’t happy with that and there were quite a few rebellions against him, and he responded in a very kingly, or brutal, manner. And he was the sheriffs role model. He also had to rule Normandy, which was also rather unsettled.

But, this is meant to be about Hawise. Research throws up quotes such as “Land of the wife of Hugh son of Grip. In the manuscript Hugonis filii G[rip] is written over an erasure. She was called Hawise”.

And this, “WADDON. Broad Waddon, held as Brodewaddon in Uggescombe Hundred. It is also called Friar Waddon or Waddon Monks from the holding of Netley Abbey which acquired the land from the Abbey of Montivilliers (founded 1035 by Robert the Magnificant).

Hugh son of Grip gave this land to this church. A copy of a charter granting Waddon to the church of Sainte-Marie, Montivilliers, appears in Gallia Christiana (2nd edition) vol. XI Appendix col. 329 E .

The grant is said to have been made by Hawise (Haduidis), the daughter of Nicholas de Baschelvilla and wife of Hugh of Wareham (de Varham) son of Grip, on the advice and with the consent of her husband for the sake of her soul and those of her husband and friends, with king William's assent, in the presence of various barons, including bishop Odo, earl Roger (of Montgomery), Walter Giffard, Geoffrey Martel etc”.

That record is fantastic, as it includes so much evidence, but is also rather illuminating about Norman attitudes, as Hawise had to have “the advice and with the consent of her husband”. Hawise is making the grant – that’s what matters – to me.

All historians that I’ve read agree that ‘Baschelvilla’ is ‘Bacqueville’.

Reading up on Hugh and he was a man of many names – Hugh fitz Grip, Hugh of Wareham, Hugh fitz Grip Martel, Hugh fitz Grip de Bacqueville, and that links nicely to Nicholas de ‘Bacqueville’, I assumed.

Hugh was also the brother of Geoffrey Martel and “William Martel son of Geoffrey Martel fitz Grip was lord of Bacqueville-en-Caux in the early 12th century. Wace refers to Martel of Bacqueville as among the Conqueror's army”.

But, I’m learning about my assumptions, so kept on looking, and discussing the Martels. “This family and their lordship have occasioned confusion .... because of their relationship with Hawise daughter of Nicholas of Bacqueville-en-Vexin who married Hugh fitz Grip, brother of Geoffrey Martel.

Bacqueville-en-Caux - Bacqueville-en-Vexin - that may be a small point, but when trying to do ‘History’, it’s important to get as much ‘right’ as possible – said a pedant!

And, maybe, that strengthens the link between the Vexin and Wareham further.

Bacqueville-en-Caux is still available on many map services but Bacqueville-en-Vexin seems to have disappeared. Back in 1634, Christophe Nicolas Tassin made a map of the Vexin and that contained ‘Baqueville’, close to Houville, and ‘Bachevillier’, near Sixfontaine (Serifontaine).

There used to be a good sized version of that on-line, but I couldn’t find it today.

I hope that’s enough to establish the ‘familys’, and now I want to move on to a certain Professor, at a certain University, who, when still a student, made an absolutely fascinating interpretation of Hawise and Hugh.

Typically, the man married the woman because she bought him land and the possibility of children. How about, if Hawise was the ‘powerful one’ who was forced to marry the best bloke around?

Back to Hawises father, Nicholas. The students idea is that, in 1066, Nicholas was put in charge of Wareham, but died, and having no son – and there aren’t any records of a son - so Hawise as his eldest daughter ‘took’ his land, but that’s a situation that the Normans weren’t mad keen on, so a marriage had to be arranged. A powerful, rich, woman – and then there’s Hugh ‘of Wareham’. There’s no earl of Dorset, there are no – known – important, and single, ‘knights’ in Dorset, and she’s not quite ‘good enough’ for marriage into the Royal family, so Hugh will do. Possibly.

So why did that student think that was so? Nicholas is recorded as holding ‘Winterborne Guarham’ [or Guaram]. This has confused historians – and me – for years. Guarham? Where, or what the hell, is Guarham?

Those of you that speak one of those ‘foreign’ languages may be sniggering, but ‘William’ the Conqueror, would have been christened, Guillaume.

Guarham – Warham – Wareham.

So simple, so obvious – but not until a student – maybe with ‘fresh eyes’ - saw it.

I really like that, but I have sceptical streak that raises its head in such circumstances. I jumped on Google and there’s a French record of “Torneguerde dans le comte de Dorset".

I can imagine two French monks, sitting in their scribery, with one saying, ''ey, Pierre, where's Torneguerde near to'?

'Ah, mon chere, ... Dorset, er, ah oui, Guarham'.

'Merci, mon ami'.

So he goes on to write "Tornguerde, situĕe a pres de Guarham".

My sceptic sat down and said 'oh, yeah, OK'.

Tornguerde – now Turnworth.

https://www.persee.fr/search?ta=article ... +Dorset%22

Rightteeho – In my eyes – Hawise is a very rare person. She inherited her fathers lands and had to – wouldn't it be great if she'd wanted to – marry Hugh fitz Grip.

Hugh can be seen in some records eg, at Bloxworth and Affpuddle. “When ... Grip ... & q[ua]ndo abbas recepit ualebāt c. solidos plus p[re]dictę due mansiones q[ui]a p[ro] h. filio grip fuer[unt] dep[re]dati .…

(Nope, lost on me) Luckily the historian providing that record went on to say “It would seem by the use of pro ('on behalf of') that Hugh son of Grip got his henchmen to do the plundering for him”.

So that’s the Sheriff up to ‘Sheriffy’ things, but seen to be ‘plundering’.

Hugh also took lands from the Saxon church of Cerne. “It had also lost 2 hides in Tatton to Hugh son of Grip. The primary notion is that of a battle or contest, fair or unfair, in which Hugh 'wins' and the abbot 'loses'”.

When Hugh died is unknown, but it was before 1080 as some land that he’d been granted by the queen had ‘reverted’ to her by then. However, Hawise seems to have carried on his ‘good work’ as at Poxwell, “The widow of Hugh Fitz Grip, the Norman sheriff, held, we are told, 1 carucate in Poxwell formerly belonging to the demesne of the monks”.

And from Shaftesbury, as at “Farnham ... Aiulf and Hugh son of Grip’s wife. The hide is divided between Aiulf the chamberlain and the wife of Hugh .... The abbey succeeded in recovering Aiulf's 1⁄2 hide”.

But not Hawises – how was a woman doing that? Also interesting is that Aiulf was one powerful dude and sheriff of Dorset from c1082.

Hawise also took land from Abbotsbury where “the monks complained at the same time that a hide belonging to the manor of Abbotsbury .… had been unjustly reft from them by the Norman sheriff Hugh Fitz Grip, and that his widow had taken six”.

That shows the power of the sheriff and his wife, my guess is that they were establishing their control by creating their own power base, and ‘warning’ Saxon churches that there was a new power ‘in town’. Or, should you prefer, were being corrupt.

That last record also shows the power of the translator as six is ‘vi’ in Latin but in Domesday it's actually ‘ui’, so instead of ‘taken six’, it should have read ‘taken by force’.

Hugh took care of Hawise, as it's recorded that he gave the church of St Mary, Cranborne, “a hide of land in Orchard [E of Bradle] for the good of her soul, and that it was worth 20s”.

Another place that Hugh flexed his muscles was in Wareham. Edward the Confessor had a ‘residence’ in the SW corner of the town and one of Hughs jobs was to ‘upgrade’ it, and so was responsible for knocking down many houses, ready for the building of a castle.

It is possible that someone rebelled and burnt the houses in Wareham, but there’s no evidence that that happened, and there is evidence of houses being pulled down to ensure a ‘field of fire’ around new castles in other places.

Wareham castle. From kings residence, to wooden motte and bailey, to a red and white banded stone keep. But Hugh was responsible for the motte and bailey, not the stone one. As the kings representative in Dorset, it’s possible that Hugh also had oversight of Corfe castle, but there is no proof, either way.

So Hugh was a busy guy, and in a time of very limited evidence, I hope I’ve provided enough to show that Hawise ‘bucked the trend’ of the traditional passive Norman wife.

Hawise is also the first, recorded, example of a Dorset tradition, that of dying ‘without issue’ or having ‘female issue’ - horrible phrases. In this case it's generally assumed to be the former, but she could have had a daughter who was too young, or too female, to inherit.

Then, in 1086, along comes a man. Another man of many names; Alfred of Wareham, Alfred de Lincoln (Alured, Alvredi, Alvredus, Lin, Linc, Nichole etc*).

Hawise possibly married Alfred, because his heirs ‘held’ almost the same land as she did. However, it is possible that the new king, William II, or Rufus, just disinherited her giving her lands to Alfred, but as Hugh and Hawise were endowing churches and Hugh was ‘of Wareham’, and that on his death she continued to hold her land from the king - ‘tenant in chief’ - suggests that they were in favour with the new broom. The de Lincolns also had the new brooms favour and so a beneficial marriage was swept in ....... sorry, arranged.

But the timing is tricky. Did Alfred de Lincoln come to Wareham under WtC’s orders, or, his son, William II? Was it in response to Domesday when they ‘realised’ that a woman was running Dorset and had to be ‘tamed’ by a man, or was she just disinherited, or did she give up her land and go and live in a nunnery, or did she die?

When you read on t’internet that they married, there is no proof of that and plenty of other options. In my heart I hope they did and had a great time - but.

Also ‘with a new man in town’ so Hawise just disappeared from the records, such a shame.

* Alfred of Wareham, Alfred de Lincoln (Alured, Alvredi, Alvredus, Lin, Linc, Nichole etc*).

I rely on real Historians who have far better skills than I do, and far better resources. They say that Alfred of Wareham is important because Hugh was ‘of Wareham’ and as there was only one Hugh there was only one Alfred. And that the various spellings of his first name are more indicative of the author. Had they learnt ‘Alfred’ from Saxon times, or were they French and so used the French spelling, or, I wonder could they have been partially deaf and misheard?

Abbreviations were common and Lin = Linc which = Lincoln – in Latin – and Nichole, in medieval French = Lincoln. I have no reason to doubt that.

As pointed out by af, Nicholas de Baschelvilla was the son of Baldric the Teuton and the Baschelvilla family, who hailed from Bacqueville-en-Vexin, may have gone on to become the British, awoooooooohhhhhhhhh, Baskervilles. I think he may be right. http://www.finerollshenry3.org.uk/conte ... ba-bh.html

Hawise, I love you.

[RollyShed]

Just a quick bit on fonts, printing and religion, the religious (churches, Moem) being about the time being discussed -

Baskerville is a serif typeface designed in the 1750s by John Baskerville in Birmingham, England, and cut into metal by punchcutter John Handy.

Eardisley is a charming little church....Of the original Norman church of around 1100 little remains,... The church is associated with the Baskerville family.... in 1127 Sir Ralph de Baskerville fought a duel in Hereford
http://www.greatenglishchurches.co.uk/h ... isley.html

And now to copy Jon's latest into a doc and read it at lunchtime......

As an aside, it is hard to remove religion out of a discussion such as this as it drove the society. Who was really in charge, the King or the Pope? It actually looks like a business model or how to run countries, religion, dictatorship, democracy or communism. Each works depending on the society, how wealthy are the average, how well schooled are the average. Wealth covers food, clothing and accommodation availability. The change today is an added item, global communication.

[RollyShed]

For those who have been following this and might want to know -

hide - a unit of 120 acres
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hide

nef - carrick, 3 masted sailing vessel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrack

bailey - the outer wall of a castle or any of several walls surrounding the keep
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bailey
The meaning changed later to - a courtyard within the external wall or between two outer walls of a castle

[dorsetUK]

Baskerville is a serif typeface designed in the 1750s by John Baskerville in Birmingham, England, and cut into metal by punchcutter John Handy.

Eardisley is a charming little church....Of the original Norman church of around 1100 little remains,... The church is associated with the Baskerville family.... in 1127 Sir Ralph de Baskerville fought a duel in Hereford

Morning RollyShed. Wowser, Baskerville is a font with quite a history, and Eardisley has a font with quite some beauty.
http://www.greatenglishchurches.co.uk/h ... isley.html

You’ve also found the Baskervilles much earlier than I have.

For those who have been following this and might want to know -

hide - a unit of 120 acres
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hide

nef - carrick, 3 masted sailing vessel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrack

bailey - the outer wall of a castle or any of several walls surrounding the keep
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bailey
The meaning changed later to - a courtyard within the external wall or between two outer walls of a castle

Imagine - NZ versus England in a three test series. Hang on, if it was Rugby, you’d win, so this is Cricket – played at a neutral venue.

In the first Test, England get off to a good start because a ‘hide’ was an amount of land needed to support a family. In a lush and verdant area it might be less than 120 acres, but on Dorset’s heathland it could be more, e.g Rushton* (Ristone).

Containing ½ hide and held by [Hawise] the wife of Hugh Fitz Grip as chief tenant. Two Knights, one of them named Turold, were sub-tenant and 3 thanes had held it before the conquest. There is land for half a plough. There are 20 acres of meadow and 200 acres of pasture. It is worth 10s.

½ a hide and ½ a plough – that works - but it appears to cover 220 acres.

To be fair, the ‘acre’ wasn’t a standardised measure until some time later – but I’m appealing for that one – and the third umpire (me) gives me the benefit of the doubt.

With England one – nil up in the series, we move on to the second Test, can NZ avoid a humiliation?

With cunning wizardry NZ throw a curved ball right into England’s arrogance. Surely, a googly to behold.

nef - carrick, 3 masted sailing vessel.

At one – all, the series moves on to its tense denouement, nails are nibbled, who can triumph in this clash of the titans?

Oh, my God, how tense, and …… it’s a draw – how can that happen?

Bailey - the outer wall of a castle or any of several walls surrounding the keep.

I KNEW THAT, of course I did …. I did.

Motte and Bailey – for years I thought that, as ‘Motte’ sounds a bit like ‘Moat’, it must be ‘Moat and Bailey’, so the Bailey is the bit inside the Moat – which it is, kind of – if they’d never bothered to build the hill - and then put a castle on top of it.

And so, as the series comes to an end, both sides played well, and finding themselves evenly matched, hands were shaken, and beer was quaffed.

* Rushton.
https://www.google.com/maps/search/rus ... a=!3m1!1e3

If that doesn’t ‘zoom in’ automatically, then Rushton isn’t tagged, so zoom in, keeping your eyes on, to the east, ‘Wareham’ and to the west, Wool. ‘Holmebridge’ and ‘East Holme’ should appear. Zoom in again, and ‘Binnegar’ should appear. Just to the west of that is the “Kemp Wareham Resataurant” tag and an inverted ‘T’ shaped lane. Zoom in again, and the houses and farm are Rushton.

To get there, there’s the only – that I know of - ‘manual’ railway crossing in Dorset, and please, bear in mind, this is the mainline from Weymouth to London. The theory seems to be that as it’s a ‘dead end’ then the ‘locals’ understand how to open two gates, drive across, close both gates, return to their cars and drive on, when the trains aren’t coming! There’s a road just to the east and one to the west, that both have automatic barriers, but because those roads ‘go somewhere’, then they might be used by ‘non-locals’ – who don’t understand gates.

Sorry, ‘the theory’ is probably traffic flow.

http://www.greatenglishchurches.co.uk Good site – and sight – that.

Two of my favourite places http://www.greatenglishchurches.co.uk/h ... dland.html and http://www.greatenglishchurches.co.uk/h ... omson.html

Both really ‘hark back’ to former times, but in different ways.

Jon

Edit - RollyShed, I'm not ignoring your 'aside', it's just much harder to create a response.

[RollyShed]

.
https://www.google.com/maps/search/rush ... a=!3m1!1e3

The first thing I saw was the Kemp Wareham Restaurants, came up in the middle of my picture when opening that link. Do they serve a good ale there? Especially after our long game of cricket.

We'll probably put our tent up at the Luckford Camping Park beside the rental car, a way we often travel. It used to be touring by bicycle but age has made us lazy.

[dorsetUK]

Testing.



That's the imgur web address in rimg tags.

By clicking on it, then clicking on it again, I get what I hoped, so is it just 'the wrong size' for the forum - or have I done something wrong?

Anyway, that's the first map of Purbeck with any accuracy, done by Ralph Treswell c1600, after queen Elizabeth I had sold Corfe to sir Christopher Hatton.

It's much too modern for me, but it helps - and raises a few questions.

Jon - who's learning about picture sharing websites.

[lsemmens]

This is a fascinating thread. If I ever get some more time, I'd love to do it justice and read it "in toto". I've only scanned most of the replies. I studied Latin in high School. At the end of my first year I was asked if I cared to study something else, I took up music, and the rest is history. (My Latin was/is atrocious - but I do appreciate it's influence on the English language.

[dorsetUK]

I studied Latin in high School. At the end of my first year I was asked if I cared to study something else, I took up music, and the rest is history.

Hi lsemmens

I had to study Latin for 3 years, and I just didn't 'get it'. Actually, it's probably better to say that I had to attend Latin classes for 3 years. I swapped to French and didn't feel as if I 'got that' either, but when I started to visit France, I was surprised how much must have 'sunk in'.

Quick, build me a time machine, I need to pop back 2,000 years and test my Latin.

RollyShed, hmmm, Pope vs King - still pondering on that one.

Jon

[dorsetUK]

.
https://www.google.com/maps/search/rush ... a=!3m1!1e3

The first thing I saw was the Kemp Wareham Restaurants, came up in the middle of my picture when opening that link. Do they serve a good ale there? Especially after our long game of cricket.

We'll probably put our tent up at the Luckford Camping Park beside the rental car, a way we often travel. It used to be touring by bicycle but age has made us lazy.

Hi RollyShed

You may have heard about something called "the internet" - I think it's something those young people use rather a lot. Psst - don't trust it.

Not only have 'they' put Kemps on the wrong side of the road, it's no longer a restaurant. I'm told that it was a pretty good hotel and restaurant at one time, but now it's a B&B. (Bed & Breakfast).

If I were you, I'd bring your bicyles as you'll be in the Frome Valley - nice and flat. We could meet up in Wool for a beer or two. Slurp, hic, burp.

An interesting point about Wool - for some unknown reason we have this little drinking ditty that runs - "be I Dorset, be I buggery, I comes down from WOOL". And we have absolutely no idea why.

Jon

[RollyShed]

If Wool = Woolich? Google shows it by the Thames. A bit far from Dorset. We stayed in Deptford for a few days before our Europe trip. Visited the National Maritime Museum and that area plus a trip up the Thames.

Our last time in England, after visiting a friend in Barnstable and then staying at Minehead for the night, drove across country to Exeter and then east. We possible, probably passed through Wareham. I need to look at our maps and photos. Stayed in Christchurch. Up to Ringwood(?) to drop off one of our 3 and then to Yeovilton, an air display with a couple of Spitfire waltzing around and the airforce museum. We flew out of Heathrow a few days later.

[dorsetUK]

If Wool = Woolich? Google shows it by the Thames. A bit far from Dorset.

Woolich nope, humble old Wool in Dorset. If you go back to this one https://www.google.com/maps/search/rush ... a=!3m1!1e3 and zoom out twice, 'thar she blows'. Famous for being confused with sheep https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 48176.html

We stayed in Deptford for a few days before our Europe trip. Visited the National Maritime Museum and that area plus a trip up the Thames.

Our last time in England, after visiting a friend in Barnstable and then staying at Minehead for the night, drove across country to Exeter and then east. We possible, probably passed through Wareham. I need to look at our maps and photos. Stayed in Christchurch. Up to Ringwood(?) to drop off one of our 3 and then to Yeovilton, an air display with a couple of Spitfire waltzing around and the airforce museum. We flew out of Heathrow a few days later.

That sounds like a good few days. I always liked the Exeter, Barnstable, Minehead area, and took different routes through there when I went to see friends in Launceston. Although thinking about that - that was in the last Century.

Jon