Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

C.P. Addition/Correction: Mortimer family of Attleborough

10 views
Skip to first unread message

Douglas Richardson royalancestry@msn.com

unread,
Aug 31, 2005, 3:19:34 PM8/31/05
to
Dear Newsgroup:

Complete Peerage, 9 (1936); 248-250 (sub Mortimer) has a good account
of the Mortimer family of Attleborough, Norfolk. It includes a record
of the life history of Sir Constantine de Mortimer (died 1358/9), of
Attleborough, and his two sons, Constantine, Knt., and Robert, the
latter of whom succeeded him at his death. In footnote "a" on page
250, Complete Peerage also mentions a younger son, William, who was
canon of Lincoln, citing Cal. Papal Letters as its source.

The Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, 2nd ser. 4 (1869):
198-199 has an interesting article by C.S. Perceval which discusses an
indenture dated 1351 issued by Sir Constantine de Mortimer, Knt., and
his three sons, Constantine, Thomas, and Robert. The document has four
seals attached to it, one for Sir Constantine and one for each of his
sons. The writer notes that the Norfolk antiquarian, Blomfield,
assigns the same three sons for Sir Constantine de Mortimer, namely
Constantine, Thomas, and Robert. Thomas is not mentioned by Complete
Peerage.

Regarding Sir Constantine de Mortimer's son, Thomas, Mr. Perceval
indicates that says it is clear that Thomas was in fact the second son:

"Any doubt as to this must be dispelled on looking at the seals.
Constantine, the first named, bears the label over his father's coat as
heir apparent; Thomas, the second named, surrounds the fleurs-de-lis
with a bordure; while the seal of the third son [Robert] is scarely
heraldic at all, being a device formed by introducing the fleurs-de-lis
on a cinquefoil. Thomas, then, must have died before 1354, and without
issue; otherwise Robert could not have been Constantine's heir."

Mr. Perceval is slightly in error as to the date 1354, as Robert de
Mortimer is known to have succeeded his father as his heir in 1358/9,
not 1354. So, it appears that Thomas died without issue sometime
before 1359. Mr. Perceval is right, however, in identifying Robert as
the 3rd but 1st surviving son and heir of Constantine, Sr. This
information corrects Complete Peerage.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: www.royalancestry.net

0 new messages