Page 13. Erratum et Addenda The Irish earldom of Llandaff (1797) is now similarly assumed, if not the barony of Cahir. Pages 126-7. Too late for insertion in the text I discovered that Jordan Fitz Alan (Fitz Flaald) and his son Alan Fitz Jordan were lords of Tuxford, etc., in Notts, and that Alan was succeeded there, as in Norfolk, by his daughter and heiress Olive. Further, Olive is there found to be identical with that Olive who was wife (1) of Robert de St. John, of St. Jean-le-Thomas (see my paper on "The Families of St. John and of Port" in Genealogist [N.S.], XVI. 45), and (2) of Roger de Monbegon, who gave 500 marcs for her and her inheritance in 1 John. This completes the pedigree of the line. Their Nottinghamshire estate consisted of Tuxford, with lands in Walesby and Kirton, together with West Markham and Warsop, all of which had formed part of the escheated fief of Roger de Busli (see Thoroton's Notts, III. 213, 214, 219, 220, 227, 354, 369), and must have been bestowed by Henry I. on this favoured family. It was as holding the 6 carucates at which these lands were assessed that Jordan had his 12 sh. of danegeld remitted in 1130. Alan Fitz Jordan enfeoffed Geoffrey de le Fremunt at Walesby and Kirton, and his daughter Olive (who occurs in the Rufford Cartulary) kept her court at Tuxford. This discovery enables us to identify two of the churches given to the abbey of Tiron by Alan Fitz Jordan as "seneschal of Dol." In my Calendar of Documents preserved in France they occur as 'Tophor' and 'Garsop' (p. 358); but they were clearly Tuxford and Warsop. The scattered character of tenures in this obscure period is illustrated by this seneschal of Dol holding land independently in the counties of Lincoln, of Norfolk, and of Notts. Page 152. The elder Eustace must, however, have been dead ERRATUM ET ADDENDA in 1088, for Florence speaks of the then count as Eustace "junior," and the Anglo-Saxon chronicle styles him "the younger." Page 169. Among the Crown lands bestowed by Stephen on his son earl William were Woking, Godalming, Gomshall, Stoke, and Walton, in Surrey, valued in all at £95 a year in 1155 (Liber Rubeus, p. 654). Page 171, line 14. For Maud read Mary (as on p. 172). Pages 385-6. With reference to Glamorgan's commission patent' of 1 April 1644,-which Mr. Gardiner insists is genuine, and which I denounce as a forgery,-Mr. Gardiner holds that Endymion Porter was concerned with Glamorgan in the sealing of it, and observes that "Endymion Porter, it will be remembered, was believed to be associated with a similar performance in affixing the great seal to a document despatched to Ireland in 1641" (Eng. Hist. Rev., II. 692). Unfortunately, this latter document is described by Mr. Gardiner himself as an undoubted forgery (History [1884], X. 92–3). Pages 454-5. Another case of assumption and subsequent recognition by the Crown is that of Powys. After the barony of that name had fallen into abeyance (1427), the title, like those of Mowbray and Segrave, was assumed by both the co-heirs, and this assumption was inadvertently recognised by the Crown in the case of Lord Tiptoft (1449), if not also in that of the Greys, the other co-heirs. This case has a direct bearing on that or Mowbray. Preface THE studies contained in this volume are intended to illustrate that new genealogy which is of comparatively recent growth, and to stimulate the movement for honesty and truth in peerage and family history. It is evident that, both in England and America, there is an increasing interest in genealogical research, and, with the rapid growth of the published materials available, it is likely to increase further. If it is conducted on the right lines, that is, on the modern system, such research is wholly praiseworthy, and is in no way liable to the taunts levelled against that older genealogy which consisted either in inventing pedigrees or in repeating without question the unsupported statements of a herald. Works, indeed, of this character, as will be shown in these pages, are still produced even now; but the efforts of the new school of genealogists are surely, if slowly, bearing fruit. The hold, however, on the public at large of the old fables and the old beliefs would seem, from the newspaper press, to be almost as strong as ever. That this is so is doubtless due to the sanction they appeared to receive from their quasi-official and persistent repetition in the pages of Burke's |