GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2009-01 > 1231558667


From: "Jared & Christina Olar" <>
Subject: Re: Edgar the Atheling's daughter, Margaret,wife of Ralph Loveland Thomas de London
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 21:39:21 -0600
References: <b1926e06-c3e4-4897-8caa-a6e1a56d0326@a26g2000prf.googlegroups.com><gk7s0g$p7j$1@news.acm.uiuc.edu><9C725963D249454BA520017F850BE782@gartnafuaran>


Correction! That should be ROBERT DE CROC, not "ROBERT DE CROS."

Jared L. Olar

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jared & Christina Olar" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: Edgar the Atheling's daughter, Margaret,wife of Ralph Loveland
Thomas de London


>I think there has been some doubt about just how Eschyne de Molle was
> connected to the London family, subsequently called Durward. For example,
> G.W.S. Barrow in his 1973 "Kingdom of the Scots," pp.353-4, says:
>
> Mow (Roxburghshire)
> Now in Morebattle parish. In view of the hilly character of the old parish
> of Mow, and its present remoteness, it is surprising that a great many
> legal
> documents related to its land have survived from the twelfth and
> thirteenth
> centuries. It must then have been relatively heavily populated and
> intensively cultivated. In the middle of the twelfth century Mow belonged
> to
> Uhtred, son of Liulf. About 1161, it was granted to Walter the Stewart by
> King Malcolm IV, along with Legerwood and Birkenside, the three estates
> forming one knight's fee.
> According to Sir Archiblad Lawre, Walter I's wife, usually called Eschina
> of
> Mow, was Uhtred's daughter. This would suggest that Mow passed into Walter
> I's possession as his wife's inheritance. But in one record, Eschina is
> called Eschina 'of London' (de Londoniis), which suggests that she was in
> fact related to the family of that name settled in southern Scotland in
> the
> reign of David I. This may be th family of the same name who can be traced
> in twelfth-century Somerset (like the Lovels and (?) Berkeleys). Eschina
> was
> perhaps Uhtred's granddaughter (see RRS, ii, no. 245, comment).
> Mow was much subinfeudated, and the descents of the various fees are
> extremely difficult if not impossible to work out. It may be noted here
> that
> Eschina, Walter I's wife, enfeoffed ROBERT CROS in a small part of Mow,
> which came with his daughter ISABEL to her husband ROBERT OF POLLOK,
> doubtless son of Robert son of Fulbert (see above, under Stenton and
> Pollok).
>
>
> G.W.S. Barrow's 1980 "The Anglo-Norman Era in Scottish History," p. 65,
> says:
>
> No doubt his [i.e. Walter son of Alan, steward to David I, Malcolm IV, and
> William I] wife also was found for him by the king: Eschina, variously
> known
> as 'de Londres' or 'of Mow,[17] styles which point to her being the
> granddaughter and heir of Uhtred son of Liulf, native lord of Mow in
> Roxburghshire,[18] her father being a member of the de Londres or London
> family.
>
> [17] Kelso Liber, nos. 146, 147, 148; Melrose Liber, i. 259.
> [18] Kelso Libert, no. 176. Uhtred son of Liulf seems to have had a son
> named Adam and a brother named Liulf who had a son William (St. Bees Reg.,
> 550-1; Kelso Liber, no. 170), so that when Malcolm IV in 1161 granted Mow
> (in marriage?) to Walter I son of Alan (RRS i, no. 183) he may have been
> overriding the rights of male heirs, for which practice see above, pp.
> 23-4.
> In the case of Mow, the problem is complicated by our ignorance of the
> identity of Eschina of London's second husband Henry, by whom she
> evidently
> had daughters Cecily and Maud who were heirs in Mow. Was he, perhaps,
> Henry
> son of Anselm, alias Henry of Carmunnock (Paisley Reg., 105) and son of
> the
> Anselm 'de Wichetune' or 'of Mow' noticed below, n. 20?
>
>
> Further on, in Appendix B, pp.183-4, Barrow discusses the "de LONDRES" or
> LONDON family (LONDONIIS, LONDONIARUM), concluding, "Another member of the
> family (a long-lived daughter of Richard I de London?) was Eschina de
> London
> who married (as her first husband) Walter son of Alan the first of the
> Stewarts (above, p.65)," and comments that "Black, Surnames, s.v. LUNDIN,
> is
> seriously misleading."
>
>
> I have seen Eschyna placed as sister of Malcolm de Londoniis, 1st
> hereditary
> Doorward, and thus daughter of Thomas de Londoniis, but I'm, practically
> speaking, unfamiliar with the London and Mow families and the primary
> sources and the arguments that support Eschyna's placement as a sister of
> Malcolm.
>
> Jared L. Olar
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <"mcdonaldREMOVE TO ACTUALLY REACH ME"@scs.uiuc.edu>
> Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
> To: <>
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 9:52 AM
> Subject: Re: Edgar the Atheling's daughter, Margaret, wife of Ralph
> Loveland
> Thomas de London
>
>
>> So now it seems that yes, Malcolm Durward was brother to Eschyna de
>> Molle.
>>
>> This is a very important connection ... since the progenitor of the
>> Stewarts Alan Fitz Walter (d. 1204) was her son, and William Bruce
>> Lord of Annandale, ancestor of Robert I, married her daughter. This makes
>> "all" of Scotland the descendants of the last of the Anglo-Saxon
>> kings of England if the Edgar connection is true! You can't get
>> more important than that.
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: