Subj : Re: C.P. Addition: Isabel de Gressenhall, wife of William de To : All From : celticprince51@gmail.com Date : Tue Sep 04 2018 11:59 pm From: celticprince51@gmail.com Dear Andrew ~ You've correctly analyzed the problem with the various lineages which have = been set forth for Isabel de Gressenhall. Myself I believe I originally re= lied on Brown, whose work I consulted many years ago. I just checked Rye, Norfolk Families 1 (1911): 386=E2=80=93387, which work = I also consulted many years ago. I see he identifies Isabel, wife of Will= iam de Huntingfield, as the "d[aughter] of Henry de Gressenhall." So we ha= ve yet another proposed parentage for Isabel de Gressenhall. Here is the evidence Rye cites to document Isabel's parentage: Nothing. Rye may be consulted at the following weblink: https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid IE4043048 Having reviewed the evidence anew this week, I don't think it is as cut as = dried as citing Brown, Farrer, Keats-Rohan, Rye, or Blomefield, as good as = all of them are. All five of them were working from a lack of evidence whi= ch invariably create problems for us historians. As I've noted, there is a= n obvious chronological problem with the Keats-Rohan version. Is there any available record which might indicate Isabel de Gressenhall's = immediate ancestry? Actually yes there is. In 1195 the Abbot of St. Edmunds granted William de Huntingfield and Isabel= his wife and her heirs the whole vill of Wendling, Norfolk in return for a= rent of 50s. a year. References: 1. Placitorum in Domo Capitulari Westmonasteriensi Asservatorum Abbrevatio = (1811): 3, which may be viewed at the following weblink: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id umn.31951002064556u;view 1up;seq= 31 2. Blomefield, Essay towards a Topog. Hist. of Norfolk 10 (1807): 87=E2=80= =9391 quotes the actual fine involved in this transaction: "In the sixth year of Richard I. a fine was levied on the day after St. Alp= hege's, before Hubert Walter Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Nigel Bishop= of London, Gilbert Glanvile Bishop of Rochester, Herbert, son of Hervey, W= illiam de Warren, Richard de Wiat, and Thomas de Husseburn, the King's just= ices, between William de Huntingfeld and Isabel his wife, and the abbot of = Bury, whereby Will. and Isabella quitclaimed all their right in this town, = and advowson of the church, to the abbot, on which the abbot conveyed to hi= m and his wife, and their heirs, the whole township of Wendling, to be held= of the said abbot and his successours, by the service and payment of 60s r= ent per ann. and they were to hold the men and tenants of the town, by the = same services and customs which they performed to the abbot's predecessors,= before William, son of Roger de Gressinghale, held the same." END OF QUOT= E. Blomefield cites the following source for the above fine: Regist. Bury, Pin= cebek, fol. 186. The fine states the rent involved with the transaction wa= s 60s. but I have seen it stated elsewhere (perhaps by Brown) that the rent= was 50s. Although Wendling is located in Norfolk, for some reason, the above fine is= not included in Rye, Short Calendar of Feet of Fines for Norfolk 1 (1885). Be that as it may, the fine implies that "William, son of Roger de Gressing= hale" was the predecessor to Isabel de Gressenhall. I assume it is for thi= s reason that Blomefield states in his Wendling account that Isabel de Gres= senhall was the "daughter and sole heir of William de Gressinghale, lord of= Gressinghale." It may be that Blomefield jumped to a faulty conclusion. The best interpre= tation one can make of the fine and other evidence is that Isabel was the d= escendant and heiress of William son of Roger de Gressenhall. She was not = necessarily his daughter. I can live with that interpretation. While the fine isn't as exact as one would like, it is still a helpful reco= rd in identifying Isabel de Gressenhall's forebearer. Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah --- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2 * Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4) .