GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2003-01 > 1043738966
From: (Brad Verity)
Subject: Re: Amie de Gaveston Rebuttal - Part 4: A Damsel's Life
Date: 27 Jan 2003 23:29:26 -0800
References: <3E356162.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
(Apsgemail) wrote in message news:
Many thanks for looking all this up, Paul.
> For what it's worth, the Grand Armorial de France, no. 16472 Gabaston (Bearn)
> "Ecartele, aux let 4 d'or, a 2 vaches de gue, accornees, onglees, coletees,
> clarinees d'az.; aux 2 et 3 d'or a 3 pieds de sab. (Pieces Originales 1260)."
What does this translate to in English?
> I wonder if there is any way three feet might be mistaken for three garbs.
> We know that Arnaud de Gabaston was buried at Winchester in 1302. Did the
> wardrobe account indicate that money was set out for a monument?
The original Wardrobe Account entry that shows Arnaud de Gaveston was
buried at Winchester in 1302, as transcribed in 'Remarks on an Effigy
of a Knight in Winchester Cathedral' by Weston S. Walford, F.S.A.
JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION (1858, xv. p. 125),
which Dodge reprints in his Appendix:
"Eidem (Johanni de Swanland) misso mense Maij de Guldeford per
preceptum Regis usque Wyntone, ad deferendum ibidem tam denarios quam
duos pannos ad aurum pro exequiis domini Arnaldi de Gavastone mortui
ibidem faciendis, pro vadis suis sic eundo ibidem morando pro negociis
dictas exequias tangentibus, et ad curiam redeuendo, per vij dies,
xvij die Maij, pro primo compotu patet, per diem xviij, quia ad
sumptus domini Johannes de Drokenesford in quibusdam necessariis;
I have no idea what the Latin translates to.
> At any rate,
> once buried at Winchester in 1302, after Piers came to prominence in 1307-12,
> one would think he might have expanded any monument of a relative to aggrandize
> or give more glory to his own image and relations.
Yes. And if he didn't bear eaglets before being created earl of
Cornwall in 1307, the tomb must certainly date to past that.
> I don't know what the medieval arms of Marsan or Lescun are. They must be
> determined. Piers definitely bore eagles in rolls of arms of that period.
I take it they weren't in the Grand Armorial de France source.
> The Grand Armorial de France gives the arms of Bearn as:
> 3564 - D'or a 2 vaches passantes de gue, colletees, accornees, clarinees,
> onglees d'az. l'une sur l'autre.
> 3565 - (Maison de Foix). - Ecartele, d'or a 3 pals de gue, et d'or a 2 vaches
> passantes de gue, colletees, accornees, clarinees, onglees d'az, l'une sur
What do the above entries translate to?
> Nobles in Bearn were frequently "ricombre de Navarre" [rico hombre], so I could
> see why the arms of England, France and Castille/Leon might have been included
> to indicate the countries in which he had interests.
That makes much more sense than Walford's 1858 explanation that they
were the arms of the English queens, mother and wife of Edward II.
> We know Piers de Gaveston/Gabaston bore as arms "Vert, 3 eagles displayed or (4
> Nob.)." or "Vert, 6 eagles or (Parl.)" [Knights of Edw. I], aside from other
> rolls of that period discussed.
> Since these unusual arms of Piers are indicated on this tomb in Winchester
> Cathedral, and we know Arnaud de Gabaston was buried at Winchester, I think one
> has to go to some extent to explain why these two facts should not be
I think the arms now prove the tomb is indeed of Arnaud.
> If an original document in 1260 (about which time Arnaud came to
> prominence) shows the Gabaston arms as quartering two cows and three feet, very
> similar to the description of arms above, and possibly confounded, it also
> bears consideration.
Was the Grand Armorial de France an original 13th century document?
> Why would we have a father of Piers de Gabaston making his way to England and
> being buried at Winchester in an elaborate tomb, in a place we know Arnaud de
> Gabaston was buried. Arnaud was a knight who served loyally and vigorously in
> Edward I's service, and had turned key castles over to Edward which might have
> been chiefly responsible for his success in Bearn and Gascony.
> Of this elder
> Piers, there is no record or his ever being in England. If Piers as a boy came
> to England with Arnaud and Arnaud's two sons, it is clear that no other elder
> Piers accompanied them, as he is not accounted for in the expenses (nor was a
> horse valued for him).
The expenses need to be looked into further. Piers' horse, status,
etc., needs to be compared to those of his elder brothers. If it was
different and/or better, why? It may be possible that historians who
looked at these expenses, not ever thinking there might have been two
Piers', assumed they all applied to Piers the future earl.
> If Piers had a father named Piers, one would conclude
> he died in Gascony, quite some ways from Winchester. Also, one would expect
> that this memorial was erected by 1312, not after Piers' great fall.
And what do you make of the inscription "Petrus Gauston" appearing on
|Re: Amie de Gaveston Rebuttal - Part 4: A Damsel's Life by (Brad Verity)|