GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2009-09 > 1251930481
From: "Patricia A. Junkin" <>
Subject: Re: Mary de Bohun,the missing 4th daughter of Humphrey de Bohun (died 1275),Earl of Hereford and Essex
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 17:28:01 -0500
Most of my references refer to this William as William la (or le)
Zouche Mortimer. His brother Hugh as Hugh de Mortimer. In a 1338 Quare
impedit, William is misidentified as Walter but the form used is
Walter le Zouche Mortimer.
This may be of no help but I seem to have a consistent naming.
On Sep 2, 2009, at 4:55 PM, Doug wrote:
> On 2 Sep, 20:30, wrote:
>> On Sep 2, 2:26 am, "Doug Thompson" <> wrote:
>> < Neither usage can be condenmned as incorrect. Genealogical
>> authorities such
>> < as Weiss and Faris use the "de" as do most modern historians so I
>> would not
>> < regard this as an indication of the lack of scholarship of the
>> < author.
>> < Doug Thompson
>> Except that William la Zouche Mortimer himself condemned the other
>> form. At one point he stated that a writ addressed to him was
>> invalid as it did not use the correct form of his name which he said
>> was "la Zouche Mortimer."
>> The same is still true today. If a writ was addressed to you as
>> Thomson, it would be totally invalid.
>> Accuracy in legal matters counted back in medieval times, just as it
>> does today. I should think that accuracy should also matter to you
>> in genealogical matters.
>> If you need it, here is another reference to him being called
>> la Zouche Mortimer":
>> Papal Regs.: Letters 2 (1895): 394.
>> This may be viewed at the following weblink:
>> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
> That's an interesting point Douglas. But it was a common ploy in
> medieval (and modern) times to bring up a supposed fault in an address
> to invalidate a writ. The event actually shows that he was commonly
> addressed as William la Zouche de Mortimer (whether he liked it or
> not!). Besides the instances in the fine rolls, the close rolls
> regularly refer to him as William la Zouche de Mortimer, so, since
> that is the way he was addressed by the king, he probably had to
> accept it!
> The main point is that there is no such thing as a corrrect name for a
> medieval person; they were referred to in many ways in different
> documents and we need to recognise all of them as the same person.
> The way you choose to refer to a particular person in your files is a
> matter for your personal choice and it is sometimes interesting to
> hear your reasons for your choice, but it is not necessary to try to
> impose your idiosyncratic choices on others, especially when you are
> the one out of step with the great majority of writers.
> It would be interesting to know from the assertion you make whether he
> actually asked to be addressed as "William"? Or did he use another
> form of the name? Can you give a reference. (No citation - no weblink
> but I decided not to ignore it!)
> Doug Thompson
> 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
|Re: Mary de Bohun,the missing 4th daughter of Humphrey de Bohun (died 1275),Earl of Hereford and Essex by "Patricia A. Junkin" <>|