Re: Lloyd Factoid/More on FitzWarin
-
In reply to:
Re: Lloyd Factoid/More on FitzWarin
9/18/01
Barbara:
Thanks for this. I was having a good deal of difficulty reading that pedigree from the opriginal Morris material.
However, I am confused by one small point; that is the name "de la Pole." I have a good deal of information about Pole, an estate in Antrobus, Cheshire, from Alan Garner, which I am happy to share here below. I am wondering if the Lord de la Pole of Montgomeryshire and people of that name and place in Cheshire are one and the same. Since it is a place name, like Eaton, the answer could go either way, I suppose.
In any event, since we are on the subject, here is what Alan had to say... slightly expurgated:
The name is interesting but not wholly explicit.The root is Old English pal, which means a pole or a stake.Which doesn't get us far, except that stakes were used in the early mediƦval period for the marking out of land newly taken in from the waste.The area of (The) Pole fits such a description, it being marshy and until two hundred years ago a main source of peat for the immediate area, which would have involved accurate sectioning of land into"mossrooms", and the easiest way to have done that would have been by moveable stakes.But I wouldn't put money on it.It could just as easily be a local pronunciation of "pool", of which there are many thereabouts.What is pertinent is that there is a field in Pole called EATON'S FIELD (emphasis by Rick), and that would bear looking more closely at.English field names tend to be among the most ancient historical sources we have, because successive farmers need always to know precisely which piece of land is being used and/or described, and so the name does not change, even when all memory of its meaning is lost.First reaction is that there is a prima facie case for the field's suggesting that there were Eaton land owners, or important tenants, there before the recorded pedigree.On the Ordnance Survey map the grid reference is SJ 650788.
(Alan went on the say there were other Eaton Fields, but did not list them.)
Pole is a small estate in the hamlet of Antrobus, which is itself a township of Whitley (Over and Nether), and that place occurs inthe Eaton sagas. Antrobus is close to Great Budworth.
"In this hamlet [Antrobus] also is The Pole, the land and seat of George Eaton, priest, the son of George Eaton, esquire, who took that name on succeeding to the estate.The family of Eaton has held land in this parish for several centuries [how much is 'several', counting back from the date of this text?] Robert Eaton, a brief time after the monasteries were destroyed [Henry VIII], bought the Norton priory estate in Comberbach.The same estate, with other lands in Budworth, Over Walton, Lymme, and Ougthrington [so Robert was loaded], is noticed in an Inquisition Post Mortem after the death of Robert Eaton, iv and v Ph. & Mary [ 1556/7 ]"
I've found another document,which checks with these facts and is quite independent of other sources; so it's not a case of doubling an error by copying it.This reads:"John, son of Henry de Comberbach, gave to Adam, son of William de Litely in Aston-juxta-Budworth all his lands in Comberbach . . .on Monday, at the Feast ofSaint Peter-in-the-Chains, ix Edvardi III [1 August 1335], granting a moiety of Comberbach to the priory of Norton"Then another: "The King sold all those lands that belonged to the priory of Norton to John Grimsditch of London, gentleman, xxxvi Henrici VIII [1544], then in the possession of Robert Merbury, George Hulme, Randal Worral, Agnes Walker, Randle Low, Lawrence Persivall, Roger Grymshaw, and George Eaton; out of which 7s. 7d. chief rent is reserved to the King: and these were sold by Grimsditch to Robert Eaton; and lastly, bought by George Low of Hartford, from John Eaton of Over Whitley, about fourteen or fifteen years ago [1650/2]."
You have to be long-rooted Cheshire English to make the obvious connections between family names, especially those of wives marrying in.The names you've given me so far have all been North-Western.And what I have to tell you who may think nothing of driving a hundred miles to see cousins is that it doesn't happen here, and in the past it couldn't, or not without a determined and heavily guarded effort.All the places I mention, and your Shropshire sites would come into this, are close to each other.In the period when these Eaton dynasties (and all the other notable families) were staking out their claims to land and to blood kindred, they were never more than half a day's ride away from each other, largely for logistical reasons of absorbing contiguous estates.Nor could they afford to be, which is as important.Here be dragons, indeed.Remember what happened to the five brothers of William de Eaton when they left this house to go to church a mile away in 1355.Kaput.It's why I suspect that I am going to (agree) with Barbara Fitzsenry; e.g. that all Eatons are one Mafia.
I'll leave you with an Eaton anecdote:
The church of St. Chad at Over, ten miles from here, once stood in Over Square, but the Devil tore it up with foundations and everything intact, soon after the church had been bestowed on the abbot of Vale Royal Abbey in the reign of Edward I.Holding the church in his arms, the Devil was making good his escape, when the monks of Vale Royal tolled the bells of the abbey.The Devil put his hands over his ears, dropped the church, which landed unscathed in its present position.All that spoils the story is that the bases of the pillars of the church are clearly Norman, when Edward was not even a twinkle in his grandfather's eye, and there is a fragment of a Saxon cross built into the wall.
The abbot of Vale Royal had extraordinary powers.He had the power of Infangthef and Utfangthef, with the privileges of Tol and Stallagium, and the amends of bread and ale.[It's a shame to explain these wondrous words!]Infangthef was the liberty to try and to judge a thief taken within his jurisdiction.Utfangthef was the liberty to take a thief that fled and to bring him back to the place where he had committed the crime.Tol was an imposition for things bought and sold in the markets.Stallagium was payment for the privilege to have a stall at a market or at fairs.
You may imagine that Vale Royal and its abbot were not popular with the locals.The abbot made matters worse by imposing his will on recalcitrant peasants, and even gentry, who tried to stand against him, by the adoption of a particularruse.The monks were inordinately fond of playing football, but were hindered by the inadequate supply of materials with which to make the balls.However, the abbot got round that by arresting, waylaying or whatever grabbed his fancy, the miscreants and beheading them and using the severed heads for his monks athleticism.This mutual acrimony went on for centuries, but eventually the abbot chose the wrong family to mess with.In 1425, or thereabouts [the vellum is partly eaten, but the orthography and the names concur with this date], "--- the vicar of Over, with several others, secured Henry de Weryngton, abbot of Vale Royal, and, having indicted him for the abduction of Margaret Eaton, of Over, without hesitation executed him in a quiet forest coppice."
P.S. from Rick: There ends another wondrous story which can be gotten only on the ground in Cheshire and kindly preserved for us by a consumate story teller. Doesn't it make you wonder what other stories are hidden in the treasure chest of Alan's memory?
Has anyone tried to serch the keyword Eaton field? I'm going to do it right now.
Back later if I find anything of merit.
Rick
More Replies:
-
Re: Lloyd Factoid/More on FitzWarin
Rick Eaton 9/22/01