GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives
Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2005-09 > 1127795331
From: "Douglas Richardson " < >
Subject: Re: Evidence re. the identity of Alan Fitz Roland'as first wife, _____ de Lacy
Date: 26 Sep 2005 21:28:51 -0700
References: <9577484.1127777011386.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <1127787297.377668.180490@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <U_2_e.15757$0E5.9068@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
In-Reply-To: <U_2_e.15757$0E5.9068@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Peter Stewart wrote:
There appears to be no evidence that John de Lacy was ever called
> "John de Chester" after 1194, when his father Roger adopted the surname
> "Lacy".
Dear Peter ~
My research shows that John de Lacy (died 1240), Constable of Chester,
later Earl of Lincoln, was known as John de Chester as late as 1214:
Date: Michaelmas 1214. Sub Yorkshire.
"Johannes de Cestr' r.c. de MM et DCCC li. pro habendis terris que
fuerunt patris sui . sicut continetur ibidem. In thes. Nichil."
[Reference: Patricia M. Barnes ed. The Great Roll of the Pipe for the
Sixteenth Year of the Reign of King John, Michaelmas 1214 (Pipe Roll
Soc. n.s. 35) (1962): 93].
I should also note that John de Lacy's two brothers, Roger and Robert,
witnessed John de Lacy's charter dated before 1232 as "Roger and Robert
de Chester, knights" [Reference: Richard Holmes, ed. The Chartulary of
St. John of Pontefract (Yorkshire Arch. Soc. Record Series 25) (1899):
38-39].
So it would appear that the surname "de Chester" continued to be
employed by male members of this family for some time after the family
adopted the surname, Lacy.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www.royalancestry.net
This thread:
| Re: Evidence re. the identity of Alan Fitz Roland'as first wife, _____ de Lacy by "Douglas Richardson " < > |