GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2003-01 > 1043904307


From: "Todd A. Farmerie" <>
Subject: Re: Amie de Gaveston Rebuttal - Part 4: A Damsel's Life
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:25:07 -0700
References: <105.260316cb.2b68d24d@aol.com>


wrote:
> As Arnaud-Guillaume de Marsan was certainly son and heir of Arnaud de
> Gabaston by his wife Claramonde, daughter of Arnaud-Guillaume de Marsan (d.
> 1272); that makes Piers a younger son, as has been put forward all along.

OK, so now let's carry this one more step. After all, the claim
that was being put forward was that Amy was daughter of 'Piers
the Elder'. Does Piers the Elder disappear into the ether at
this point, or does this just mean we don't have to invent two
marriages for him, since he didn't have to be father of both Earl
Piers and Amy, just Amy? Certainly the chronicle source that
says Piers was son of a man of the same name can be safely
rejected. With the removal of this source, what then of the
tomb? Is there any reason to think the stiff had the name Piers
if there is no other documented Piers at the time, and the
inscription was never completed?

taf


This thread: