Sanders gives:
1. Isabel.
2. William III, d. 1257.
3. Alice de Newburgh.
4. Robert, d. 1222.
8. William II, d. 1195.
9. Isabel St. Liz.
16. William I, d. bef. Feb. 1158.
17. Maud de Hanslope.
He cites Eyton's article in Herald and Genealogist, but seems to totally
ignore it.
Eyton and Round give:
1. Isabel.
2. William, b. ca. 1196; d. 12 April 1257.
3. Alice de Newburgh.
4. Robert, b ca. 1172; d. June 1221/22.
5. Isabel Basset.
8. William, b. ca. 1130/35; d. after 1197.
16. William, b. ca. 1118; d. 1171.
17. Adelicia.
32. William, b. ca. 1092; d. ca. 1160.
33. Maud de Hanslope.
64. William, d. after 1086.
65. Hawise.
It would appear that Sanders has eliminated a generation, which Dugdale
also did. Isabel de St. Liz might be 9., the wife of the William d.
after 1197. However, I might caution that Sanders does not cite a source
for this marriage.
Kay Allen AG all...@pacbell.net