Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 2.djvu/381

s. VIIL NOV. s, 1913.] NOTES AND QUERIES.

375 I venture to think that, with Lord Walter's "De Riddlesford" pedigree, the problem of the identity of Emeline de Reddesford is solved, but I am afraid the parentage of Lesceline, the first wife of Hugh de Laci, still requires elucidation, as positive proof is at present lacking.

P.S.—The above had already left my hands when 's second communication appeared in your columns. The suggestion he makes, and for which I beg to thank him, is of so important a character that I have endeavoured to obtain such additional evidence as I could in support of it, or, in the alternative, in favour of the statement I submitted that Bertram de Verdon was married, secondly, in c. 1140.

Unfortunately, I find that I have mislaid my note giving the reference for the date quoted for this marriage, but as Langford, in his 'Staffordshire Past and Present,' i. 300, stated that Maud de Ferrers, Bertram's first wife, died "s.p. 1139," I saw no reason to doubt the correctness of the date of the second marriage.

According, however, to 'Sketches of the Earlier Verduns' in Lynam's 'The Abbey of St. Mary, Croxden, Staffordshire,' as will be seen from the following extracts, neither of the above dates would appear to be reliable:—

"Bertram II. was of age, and but little more, in 1159" (p. vi); "Maud, born more or less about 1140, who was the first wife of Bertram II. de Verdon" (p. ix), married "before 1166 " (p. xi), and was dead without issue ante 1179, because

Tabulated, the position is as follows:—

Maud, dau. of Robert Ferrers, second Earl of Derby, b. c. 1140; = before 1166; † s.p. before 1179. 1st wife.

Bertram II. de Verdon, b. c. 1138, †1192.

Rohais, b. c. 1165 [see below]; = in or by 1179; †1215, "no older, actually, than c. 50." [. C. B. at p. 254]. 2nd wife.

It will thus be seen that your correspondent's suggestion is as near accurate as no matter regarding the dates of Bertram's birth and second marriage.

In my above remarks I have referred to two matters upon which some light is thrown by Lynam in his before-mentioned work, namely, (1) regarding the identity of Lesceline de Verdon, Countess of Ulster; and (2) respecting the date at which Nicholas de Verdon acquired, and from whom, the Irish estates, some of which formed a portion of Lesceline's dowry.

As regards the first our author says:

And he adds that

He concludes:—

With reference to the second matter Lynam writes:—

He proceeds:—

From this it would appear, as the castles of Rathour and Le Nobcr formed part of the estates of Bertram in Ireland, and were only acquired by Nicholas in 1203, that Leseeline's marriage to Hugh de Lacy would be more correctly assigned to c. 1203 than to 1192, as suggested by your correspondent.

(11 S. viii. 262, 318).—The "position" of Dr. Spinks in "the legal world" was that of an advocate of Doctors' Commons, not a member of the Temple; and when the Probate and Divorce Court was established in 1858 at