Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-10 > 1098921349

From: Nathaniel Taylor <>
Subject: Re: More on King's Kinsfolk
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:55:49 GMT
References: <>

In article <>,
(Douglas Richardson) wrote:

> The search turned up 164 references to the term, "king's kinswoman,"
> and two references to women who were identified as "parentela"
> (relative) to the king.

For someone who doesn't know Latin, this is an honest mistake, derived
from the misleading syntactical context of the abstracts, where the word
'relative' or 'relatives' is used as equivalent to the more complex
Latin phrases quoted in the abstracts and below.

But 'parentela' means 'kin-group' or 'kindred', not 'relative'; it
refers to a group of people, not to an individual as a relative. This
is obvious from the Latin phrases quoted in the abstracts on two of the
three pages in this searchable collection where this word appears:

Richard II vol. 4 p. 228:

'que de parentela nostra existit' ['who is of our kindred']

Edward III vol. 10, p. 636:

'plures de parentela sua' ['many from among his kindred']

(In the third hit--Edward III vol. 9 p. 235--the Latin word is used
alone, offering less of a clue as to its true role in the syntax of the
English-language abstract. Curiously, searching the word 'parentela'
only yields these three hits in the entire collection, of which only
one, not two, refers to a woman [the first one above]; perhaps the
keyword indexing is flawed and Doug noted its appearance on another page
which the word-index missed.)

Nevertheless, I think Doug's search here is interesting, and *suggests*
that the pattern of identification of king's kin in the patent rolls is
consistent enough (within five degrees) to use as evidence to place
those so designated for whom the term is used but the relation is
unknown. A while ago we asked Doug to do some systematic checking on
this, and he has: bravo.

As for the method, it will be important to supplement the search to
other incidences in the CPRs which don't appear exactly as "king's
kinswoman" in the abstract. For example, what about the men?

Nat Taylor

a genealogist's sketchbook:

This thread: