By John Watson-Taylor. 47 



under John de Port and was one of the twenty knights who held 

 of ancient enfeofment under the Abbot of Hyde. In Sussex he 

 shared with three other knights one fee under the Bishop of 

 Chichester ; in Wiltshire he held of the King one fee which he 

 had in demesne and for which he owed personal service ; in 

 Gloucestershire he had half a knight's fee under William, Earl of 

 Gloucester, which probably represented the land in that county 

 that had been granted to his grandfather ; in Berkshire he held 

 a knight's fee under the Abbot of Abingdon and another of the 

 King for which he owed service and serjeanty, no doubt of the 

 office of chamberlain that his brother Eobert held before him, and 

 in addition he had two and a half fees which had been held of the 

 family since the reign of Henry I„ and half a fee which he himself 

 had created ; lastly, in Yorkshire he held the three fees under the 

 Archbishop which had first been held by his grandfather.^ It is 

 thus seen that he was well endowed with land, and yet there is no 

 part included of the inheritance that should have come to him 

 from his mother and his wife. In regard to his mother, as one of 

 only two surviving heirs to the extensive properties of Eobert 

 Corbet, she ought to have brought a large fortune in land, but it 

 appears that this was diverted by the King to the use of her 

 illegitimate son, Reginald, and that none of it came to her legal 

 heirs until after his death in 1175. His wife was Lucy, the third 

 daughter of Milo of Gloucester, Earl of Hereford, and for her 

 dower the historian of Abergavenny Priory states that he had the 

 Forest of Dene and other lands in England, but that for some offence 

 against Henry II. he had forfeited them to that King,- and it is a 

 fact that in the Inquest of Knights which has just been referred 

 to, Margaret de Bohuu, the eldest daughter, appears as the holder 

 of seventeen knights' fees in Gloucestershire, inherited from her 

 brothers, who were all dead, yet no share had come to Lucy or her 

 husband.^ That there was some disagreement between the King 



' R. B., pp. 199, 205, 207, 246, 291, 306, 307, 413. 



'^ Dug. Mon., iv., 615, No. I. ; vid. et. Cotton MS., Julius C, vii., fol. 258. 



^ The Forest of Dene was not part of their eldest son's property, for in 

 1227 the permission of the King was required for the taking of two stags 

 there, and the order to that effect was transmitted to Roger de Clifford. jRoi. 

 Lit. Glaus., ii., 190. 



