EFFIGIES and MARKERS

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

The Little Ice Age, 1300-1800


The Fur Cloak, by Rubens, about 1636-1639.
Is history repeating itself? (Again?) Is there global cooling in our future? Scientists are predicting a period of less solar activity. See Associated Press article following.

Our ancestors survived conditions with considerably less resources than we have available. There was no central heating in their homes and shops, of course, and fuel (peat, coal, and wood) was just as expensive, or more so, as the fuels we consume today. Most people just couldn’t afford the luxury of warmth in winter. They didn’t change clothes or bathe much, especially in cold weather when they’d have to haul and heat water. They shared beds near a kitchen hearth, too. We who need our personal space would never survive that lifestyle!

This is just my observation from studying genealogy, not backed up with statistics, but it looks like family size burgeoned during the global temperature dip of the 16th and 17th centuries: maybe the long, freezing nights were not all that boring! Certainly, a number of family members of William and Mary Barrett Dyer had birthdays in September through December. So what really happened during the deep freezes back in January, February, and March?

The Little Ice Age, from about 1317-1800, began with catastrophic floods, crop failure, and domestic animal deaths (which brought on economic depression), harsh winters—and starvation. Epidemics raged unchecked, and millions died in the bubonic plague outbreak in 1348-1350. Because so many laborers (peasants tied to the land, who owed service to their landlords) died, cathedral and castle building ground to a halt for years.  

The extended Bartholomew family of Burley, early 1600s, 
with their seven surviving children. 
Two sons emigrated to colonial Massachusetts. 
The family are not among my ancestors.

Of course our ancestors knew nothing about it, but they experienced the effects of a plunge in sunspot activity in the 1600s, which corresponded with the coldest years of the Little Ice Age. Specifically during Mary Dyer’s lifetime, 1611-1660, there was the time of famines, waves of bubonic plague across Europe, the Thirty Years War, the Great Migration to America, the English Civil War, and the explosion of African slave trade to the Americas and Europe.

Iceland’s ports were ice-bound by miles for several years, and trade and passenger shipping from Europe was forced far south to avoid sea ice. Boston Harbor (sea water) froze over for two to three miles out, hard enough to walk on, for two weeks at a time.

Journal of Governor John Winthrop—January 1638: “About thirty persons of Boston going out in a fair day to Spectacle Island to cut wood, (the town being in great want thereof,) the next night the wind rose so high at N.E. with snow, and after at N.W. for two days, and then it froze so hard, as the bay was all frozen up, save a little channel. In this twelve of them gate to the Governor’s Garden [an island], and seven more were carried in the ice in a small skiff out at Broad Sound, and kept among Brewster’s Rocks, without food or fire, two days, and then the wind forbearing, they gate to Pullin Point, to a little house there of Mr. Aspenwall’s. Three of them got home the next day over the ice, but their hands and feet frozen. Some lost their fingers and toes, and one died. The rest went from Spectacle Island to the main, but two of them fell into the ice, yet recovered again. In this extremity of weather, a small pinnace was cast away upon Long Island [in Boston Harbor] by Natascott, but the men were saved and came home upon the ice.” 
The Little Ice Age “peaked” in Mary Barrett Dyer’s lifetime—the coldest years in many centuries were those she spent in colonial America. This graph shows the severity of winters in Europe and North America from 1000-2000 AD. The absolute coldest period, 1600-1675, coincides with William and Mary Dyer’s life spans.


More on the Dyers:
Mary Dyer and freedom of conscience:  http://bit.ly/kuTf4K
Article on Mary Dyer’s individualism against orthodoxy and the established church: http://bit.ly/ivWJbO
For a timeline on William and Mary Dyer’s life together, see my post here
To learn more about the Dyers’ life, join her Facebook friends.

The Dyers lived in Boston from 1635 to the spring of 1638, then co-founded Portsmouth, Rhode Island, about 60 miles away. One year later, they co-founded the city of Newport, Rhode Island, where they developed a large farm and the seaport.

When Mary Dyer was making a winter trip back to America after several years in England, her ship diverted to Barbados because of severe storms. From a letter written in Barbados on Feb 25, 1657: “A ship came in hither, which was going to New England, but the storms were so violent that they were forced to come hither, [until] the winter there was nearly over. In this ship were two Friends, Anne Burden of Bristol, and one Mary Dyer from London; both lived in New England formerly, and were members cast out of their [Puritan] churches. Mary goes to her husband who lives upon Rhode Island...”

A NASA website says, “During the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, from 1645 to 1715, there is believed to have been a decrease in the total energy output from the Sun, as indicated by little or no sunspot activity. Known as the Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time observed only about 50 sunspots for a 30-year period as opposed to a more typical 40-50,000 spots. The Sun normally shows signs of variability, such as its eleven-year sunspot cycle. Within that time, it goes from a minimum to a maximum period of activity represented by a peak in sunspots and flare activity.”

More from NASA: “Between the mid-1600s and the early 1700s the Earth’s surface temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere appear to have been at or near their lowest values of the last millennium. European winter temperatures over that time period were reduced by 1.8 to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1-1.5 Celsius). This cool down is evident through derived temperature readings from tree rings and ice cores, and in historical temperature records, as gathered by the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and the University of Virginia.”

A Solar and Heliospheric Observatory image shows Region 486 that unleashed a record flare (lower left) November 18, 2003 on the sun. The spot itself cannot yet be seen but large, hot, gas-filled loops above this region are visible.
Photographer: Getty Images.
 
Goodnight sun: Scientists predict sunspots might disappear for years
By: Associated Press
Update as of June 15, 2011

WASHINGTON - The sun is heading into an unusual and extended hibernation, scientists predict. Around 2020, sunspots may disappear for years, maybe decades.

But scientists say it is nothing to worry about. Solar storm activity has little to do with life-giving light and warmth from the sun. The effects from a calmer sun are mostly good.

There’d be fewer disruptions of satellites and power systems. And it might mean a little less increase in global warming. It’s happened before, but not for a couple centuries.

“The solar cycle is maybe going into hiatus, sort of like a summertime TV show,” said National Solar Observatory associate director Frank Hill, the lead author of a scientific presentation at a solar physics conference in New Mexico.

Scientists don’t know why the sun is going quiet. But all the signs are there. Hill and colleagues based their prediction on three changes in the sun spotted by scientific teams: Weakening sunspots, fewer streams spewing from the poles of the sun’s corona and a disappearing solar jet stream.

Those three cues show, “there’s a good possibility that the sun could be going into some sort of state from which it takes a long time to recover,” said Richard Altrock, an astrophysicist at the Air Force Research Laboratory and study co-author.

The prediction is specifically aimed at the solar cycle starting in 2020. Experts say the sun has already been unusually quiet for about four years with few sunspots -- higher magnetic areas that appear as dark spots.

The enormous magnetic field of the sun dictates the solar cycle, which includes sunspots, solar wind and ejection of fast-moving particles that sometimes hit Earth. Every 22 years, the sun’s magnetic field switches north and south, creating an 11-year sunspot cycle. At peak times, like 2001, there are sunspots every day and more frequent solar flares and storms that could disrupt satellites.

Earlier this month, David Hathaway, NASA’s top solar storm scientist, predicted that the current cycle, which started around 2009, will be the weakest in a century. Hathaway is not part of Tuesday’s [June 14, 2011] prediction.

Altrock also thinks the current cycle won’t have much solar activity. He tracks streamers from the solar corona, the sun’s outer atmosphere seen during eclipses. The streamers normally get busy around the sun’s poles a few years before peak solar storm activity. That “rush to the poles” would have happened by now, but it hasn’t and there’s no sign of it yet. That also means the cycle after that is uncertain, he said.

Matt Penn of the National Solar Observatory, another study co-author, said sunspot magnetic fields have been steadily decreasing in strength since 1998. If they continue on the current pace, their magnetic fields will be too weak to become spots as of 2022 or so, he said.

Jet streams on the sun’s surface and below are also early indicators of solar storm activity, and they haven’t formed yet for the 2020 cycle. That indicates that there will be little or delayed activity in that cycle, said Hill, who tracks jet streams.

“People shouldn’t be scared of this,” said David McComas, a scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, who wasn’t part of the team. “This is about the magnetic field and the ionized gas coming out of the sun. It’s a reduction in that, not the light and the heat.”

So sunspot reduction is to blame?
There are questions about what this means for Earth’s climate. Three times in the past the regular 11-year solar cycle has gone on an extended vacation -- at the same time as cool periods on Earth.

OK, maybe not
Skeptics of man-made global warming from the burning of fossil fuels have often pointed to solar radiation as a possible cause of a warming Earth, but they are in the minority among scientists. The Earth has warmed as solar activity has decreased.

Andrew Weaver, a climate scientist at the University of Victoria, said there could be small temperature effects, but they are far weaker than the strength of man-made global warming from carbon dioxide and methane. He noted that in 2010, when solar activity was mostly absent, Earth tied for its hottest year in more than a century of record-keeping.

Hill and colleagues wouldn’t discuss the effects of a quiet sun on temperature or global warming.

“If our predictions are true, we’ll have a wonderful experiment that will determine whether the sun has any effect on global warming,” Hill said.

*********************************
Christy K Robinson is the author of five-star nonfiction and fiction historical books, as well as author of Discovering Love, Rooting for Ancestors and William and Mary Barrett Dyer websites. You will find her books at http://bit.ly/RobinsonAuthor.


·          We Shall Be Changed (2010)
·          Mary Dyer Illuminated (2013)
·          Mary Dyer: For Such a Time as This (2014)
·          The Dyers of London, Boston, & Newport (2014)
·          Effigy Hunter (2015)
·          Anne Marbury Hutchinson: American Founding Mother (2018)

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Mary Dyer and freedom of conscience


 “It is not the glorious battlements, the painted windows, the crouching gargoyles that support a building, but the stones that lie unseen in or upon the earth. It is often those who are despised and trampled on that bear up the weight of a whole nation.” ~John Owen, English Puritan minister, 1616–1683.

June 1, 1660 was a landmark date in American history. Its relation to civil rights guaranteed by the US Constitution's Bill of Rights should be noted, specifically the 1st Amendment regarding freedom of religion (to worship or not, as your own conscience dictates), and freedom of speech and assembly.

Mary Barrett Dyer, hanged in Boston on June 1, 1660, was martyred for liberty of conscience that Americans enjoy under the Constitution's Bill of Rights.  Other countries have modeled their constitutions and rights on those of the United States, so these liberties have become global.

In 2010, on the 350th anniversary of Mary Dyer’s martyrdom, there was no mention of her in newspapers or online. No events in Boston, Rhode Island, or Washington, DC. No political or religious movements made mention of the sacrifice of the only female religious martyr in America.

Torture and persecution
In the late 1650s, Quakers had been persecuted for their nonconformism by having their tongues bored with a hot awl; men and women were stripped bare to the waist and flogged with up to 30 strokes of the thrice-knotted lash, to add more injury to each stroke; they had their ears either nailed to a post, or sliced off altogether; without a trial, they were thrown in earthen-floored jail cells, sometimes for months, with no candle or heat in New England’s harsh winters; prisoners were beaten several times a week. Even non-Quakers whose consciences were pricked by this harsh treatment were jailed, whipped, heavily fined, and disfranchised (lost their civil rights and vote) for harboring or sympathizing publicly with Quakers.

Contrary to popular opinion in genealogy sites, Mary Barrett Dyer wasn't hanged “for the crime of being a Quaker.” It wasn’t a crime to be a Quaker! However, they didn’t attend Puritan worship or teaching services or pay required tithes, didn’t keep the Sabbath holy, and criticized the government leaders for their cruelty. Mary Dyer provoked her own trials and execution for what we'd call civil disobedience, by repeatedly defying the totalitarian Puritan regime headed by Massachusetts Governor John Endecott. The Massachusetts Bay founders believed that religious error or dissent from their dogma was treasonable.

Endecott, a religious zealot, had a checkered past, leaving an illegitimate son in England before he emigrated to Salem, Massachusetts in 1629; treasonably cutting the “idolatrous” cross from the British flag; a Massachusetts committee reported in 1634 “that they apprehend [Endecott] had offended therein many ways, in rashness, uncharitableness, indiscretion and exceeding the limits of his calling;” acting in ways that endangered the patent that was their title to land in New England; creating a mint in Boston that made unauthorized—and therefore counterfeit—coins with a 1652 imprint for 30 years (so if the English government confiscated the minting, Boston could claim the coins were all from 1652 when they had little oversight during the English political upheaval); and punishing his indentured servant girl with 32 lash-stripes and public humiliation for fornication, bearing a child out of wedlock, and insistently naming his son as the predatory father (which, of course, would make John Endecott the father of a rapist and grandfather of a lowly servant’s bastard—can’t have that!).

The colony and later state of Rhode Island was founded by Roger Williams in the 1630s as a haven for freedom of conscience, and that’s where Mary and her husband and children made their home after being ejected from Massachusetts in 1637 over a religious matter prosecuted by the church state. Mary studied Quaker beliefs in England for several years, and returned to Boston only to be thrown into jail for 10 weeks with no notice to her husband in nearby Rhode Island.

Though Mary could have lived out her life in safety, she believed she was called by God to try the bloody religious laws of Connecticut and Massachusetts, and she boldly entered their territory to both preach, and support her Friends in the faith by visiting them in prison.

Prepared to die
Her letters written from Boston prison to Governor Endecott, her actions, and her statements at trial demonstrate to us that she willingly sacrificed her life to stop the torture and persecution of people who were obeying the voice of God in their hearts. She wrote, “Be not found Fighters against God, but let my Counsel and Request be accepted with you, To repeal all such Laws, that the Truth and Servants of the Lord, may have free Passage among you and you be kept from shedding innocent Blood…My life is not accepted, neither availeth me, in Comparison of the Lives and Liberty of the Truth and Servants of the Living God… yet nevertheless, with wicked Hands have you put two of them to Death, which makes me to feel, that the Mercies of the Wicked is Cruelty. I rather choose to die than to live, as from you, as Guilty of their innocent Blood… Therefore I leave these Lines with you, appealing to the faithful and true Witness of God, which is One in all Consciences, before whom we must all appear; with whom I shall eternally rest, in Everlasting Joy and Peace, whether you will hear or forebear: With him is my Reward, with whom to live is my Joy, and to die is my Gain.”

Knowing that there was a death sentence hanging over her, she deliberately avoided her husband who would have stopped her, and returned to Boston, where she was arrested and jailed. She was convicted and condemned on May 31, 1660, and was hanged the next day, on June 1.

The shock over Mary Dyer’s death crossed the Atlantic immediately, and King Charles II put an end to the New England death penalty for religious practice, requiring that capital cases be tried in England. Public outrage in New England over Mary’s death actually consolidated sympathy for Quakers, Baptists, Jews, and others who refused to conform to Puritanism. Even some of the New England Puritans demonstrated their opposition to the harsh treatment of people of conscience, and suffered imprisonment, banishment, confiscation of property, and heavy fines. A number of those who’d suffered persecution converted to the Quaker faith. Gradually, the torture and persecution slowed. 

William Dyer’s name appears on the 1663 royal charter granting rights of freedom of religion to Rhode Island colony. He and several others had worked closely with Dr. John Clarke of Newport, the architect of the document, to preserve the separation of church and state, and promote the freedom of conscience. One hundred thirty years later, the concept became concrete in the US Constitution's Bill of Rights, Amendment I.


*********************
MARY DYER ILLUMINATED, a fact-based novel by Christy K Robinson, is now available:

Article on Mary Dyer’s individualism against orthodoxy and the established church: http://rootingforancestors.blogspot.com/#ixzz1O67URZcQ
For a timeline on William and Mary Dyer's life together, see my post here
To learn more about the Dyers' life, join her Facebook friends.

Monday, May 30, 2011

Memorial to military ancestors

Considering that practically every medieval male ancestor of name was a knight, baron, earl, prince, or king, it was inevitable that they'd be military-minded. Below are a few representatives of hundreds of warrior ancestors!
Also, I've included a few more-recent pictures of direct ancestors. Their captions explain their names and roles in making history. 

Andrew Anson, 1913-1999, my maternal grandfather. US Navy, WW II, Pacific theater. 
Leonard Robinson, 1886-1975, paternal grandfather, US Army, WW I in France.

George Washington Stewart Anson, maternal great-great-grandfather, 1830-1891, Union Army, United States Civil War. 

Colonel Augustine Moore, Sr., 7x grandfather, ~1685-1743. Born Yorkshire, died Chelsea Plantation, Virginia. 

My 9x-grandfather, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Spottswood, 1676-1740, royally-appointed Governor of Virginia 1710-1722. Spotsylvania County is named after this man. He commissioned the capture and execution of Blackbeard the Pirate, Edward Teach. His father, Dr. Robert Spottswood, was the surgeon to the British military post in Tangiers; his grandfather Sir Robert Spottswood, a royalist, was executed by Parliamentarians after his capture at the Battle of Philipaugh in England's Civil War; and his great-grandfather John Spottiswoode was the Archbishop of Scotland.  
Photo by Christy K. Robinson
Catherine Mortimer, Countess, and her husband Thomas Beauchamp, 1314-1369, 3rd Earl of Warwick, Knight of the Garter. Thomas died at Calais of either typhoid fever, or from being poisoned by Humphrey de Bohun VII (not my ancestor--probably an uncle or cousin). 

Photo by Christy K. Robinson
 William Longespee "Longsword," 1176-1226. Earl of Salisbury, illegitimate son of Henry II, Duke of Anjou and Normandy, and King of England, and Ida de Tosny (mistress of Henry II, later wife of Roger Bigod, 2nd Earl of Norfolk). William Longespee's ancestor through great-grandmother Sybil de Chaworth and his father King Henry II, was William I "Longespee" of Normandy, 2nd Duke of Normandy, ~900-942. William's tomb is at Salisbury Cathedral in the center aisle of the nave.
Photo by Christy K. Robinson
 Humphrey de Bohun (VIII of that name), Earl of Hereford and Essex, 1276-1322. "[The 4th Earl of] Hereford led the fight on the bridge [Boroughbridge], but he and his men were caught in the arrow fire. Then one of de Harclay's pikemen, concealed beneath the bridge, thrust upwards between the planks and skewered the Earl of Hereford through the anus, twisting the head of the iron pike into his intestines. His dying screams turned the advance into a panic."  
Humphrey de Bohun's effigy (and probably remains) are at Exeter Cathedral in the South Choir aisle. 
Photo by Christy K. Robinson
Margaret Peverel and husband Robert de Ferrers, 2nd Earl of Derby, 1100~1159. He founded Merevale Abbey in Warwickshire during the civil war between Empress Matilda and King Stephen. The effigies are in the gatehouse chapel of that abbey.

Sunday, April 17, 2011

John Marshal's iron anvil, a guest post by Elizabeth Chadwick

Today, my blog has been elevated from blogosphere to stratosphere by the literary contribution of one of my absolutely-favorite authors, Elizabeth Chadwick. She supplied several of the photos, too. Many of the names in the article are those of my ancestors—and probably yours, or you wouldn’t have found this article in a search!

John FitzGilbert Marshal is 32 generations removed from most of us. The Marshal clan married to the families of, and were “in-laws” of de Clare, Llewellyn Prince of Wales, John King of England, Quincy, Bigod, Tosny, Ferrers, de Braose, de Bohun, Salisbury, Gloucester, FitzWalter, Mortimer, de Lacy, Percy, Neville—to name a few. Take us back to the twelfth century, please, Elizabeth!


John FitzGilbert Marshal's iron anvil
Guest author Elizabeth Chadwick
Guest post by Elizabeth Chadwick

Many thanks to Christy for inviting me along to talk on her blog.

I want to tell you about a mediaeval nobleman called John Marshal. His fourth son, William, is justly famous among medievalists and those in the know, for being the greatest knight of the Middle Ages and with a reputation that still resonates today.

John Marshal’s reputation has considerably less burnish than his illustrious son’s and has suffered at the hands of modern novelists and due to a mindset among modern readers that frequently does not allow for the rules and realities of life in the difficult mid-12th century. To understand John Marshal, his deeds, dilemmas, and decisions, one needs to view him through the lens of that period, and only then does the living, breathing man emerge with energetic clarity.

Professor David Crouch, historian and senior authority on the Marshals in the academic community, says of John Marshal:

“John Marshal was a formidable model for his son: astute, politically powerful, and easy companion in the Royal Chambers, and a called warrior in the field… He was no coarse bandit and played the great game of politics with talent and perception… John Marshal was a definitive man of standing in his son's eyes.”

John FitzGilbert Marshal was probably born in the southwest of England, most likely Wiltshire or Berkshire around the year 1105. His father was a Marshal at the court of King Henry I and we know his name was Gilbert Giffard. The appellation is a fairly common Norman one, meaning ‘chubby cheeks.’ John's younger brother William, entered holy orders and had the living of the church of Cheddar in Somerset. He went on to become chancellor to the Empress Matilda. If there were other siblings they have not come down to us in history. We also don't know the name of John Marshal's mother, although some genealogy sites suggest that she was a de Venoix and perhaps called Heloise. Venoix is very close to Caen in the Calvados region of Normandy where many of William the Conqueror's followers came from. There was also a royal marshal called Robert de Venoix, so it can be speculated that the families by association of work, formed a closer bond through marriage. I must stress that John’s maternal parentage is open to debate and not hard fact.

Gilbert the Marshal had estates provided for him to live off what he performed his duties at court. These included Tidworth in Wiltshire and Nettlecome in Somerset. The family had estates in Devon and possessed seven and a half knights’ fees for scattered estates held for various landlords including the Dean of Glastonbury. Hamstead, now Hampstead Marshall in Berkshire, was also probably a holding. There is a 13th-century mention of the marshal’s right to Hamstead and the Grange at Speen for services of the Marshal’s Rod. Speen lies just outside Newbury on an area of strategically valuable high land overlooking the modern town.

The Marshal family were of minor nobility but ambitious to change that. There were middle-ranking royal civil servants on the make. The Marshal’s duties were numerous, and since John followed his father into the position, he must have learned the ropes from an early age. The word Marshal comes from Marescallus, meaning ‘Horse Slave,’ and at one time they had been stable hands under the control of the Constable's department. Although the office rose from these humble beginnings, the marshal’s work was much concerned with horses and transport and keeping order. The marshals had their own department at court and there were several of them although with a Master Marshal in charge of all. This was a somewhat fluid position when John was growing up and there was a certain amount of jockeying for position within the ranks.

The marshal’s duties included seeing that the stables were properly run and supplied and providing harness and mounts for those in need of them. The job also involved dealing with the kennels and the mews. It was the marshal’s task to provide carts for transport when the court was on the move. He had to find lodging for the household and keep order at the court. As a symbol of the latter office, he carried the Marshal’s Rod – a kind of ceremonial stick or mace and still in evidence today with the title of ‘Black Rod’ and said mace being held by the officer in charge of the ushers of the Houses of Parliament. In the 12th century, the Marshal had to ensure that the ‘verge’ was observed. A verge was a personal space between the king and any supplicant. Take a step too far and the Marshal’s rod would make sure you knew you had transgressed! The Marshal was in charge of the ushers who saw to it that only desirables got in to see the king. They were the club bouncers of their day so to speak. We know that two of John’s ushers were called Gilbert Bonhomme and Ralf. Another aspect of the job was dealing with the ‘ladies of the night’ who serviced the court. The Marshal had to keep the working girls in line and regulate their activities. There were fines for unruly behaviour, and one suspects that this was an area where backhanders and insider dealing frequently went on.

The Marshal also had to sit at the exchequer. It was his task to take responsibility for anyone who couldn’t pay their debts, and his department maintained the debtor’s prison. Being in there would cost a sheriff or a bailiff half a mark for every night they were in custody. On top of this he kept the tallies of all the wages owed to the King’s troops when in the field and saw that they were paid, for which he was entitled to a portion of that wage bill. Perks of the job included being entitled to every black and white horse taken on a battle campaign! Each time a noble’s son was knighted at court, the marshal was entitled to a payment of a palfrey or a saddle. The Master Marshal’s daily wage was two shillings and he was entitled to bread, wine and candles whilst working at court. There were also ‘backhander’ perks from barons higher up the food chain who thought that a bit of glad-handing in the form of grants of land was useful in order to keep the king’s marshal sweet. 

When John was in his mid-twenties, he and his father had to fight for their right to be the Master Marshals of the court. Two of the other Marshals, Robert de Venoix and William de Hastings were claiming the post, but John and his father were successful in their petition, which probably took the form of a trial by combat. John’s father died around 1129 or 1130 and John inherited his position at court, although he had to pay 40 marks for the privilege. This included the office of ‘avener’ or provider of provender. To inherit his lands, he had to pay the death duty of £22 13s and 4d. Some time over the next few years, he married an heiress of modest worth with lands adjoining his own Wiltshire and Berkshire interests. She was called Aline Pipard and her main estate was at Clyffe Pypard in Wiltshire, not so far from John's own territories. It was a good solid match, although not a spectacular one.
Ludgershall Castle, a holding of John Marshal's. Photo courtesy of  E. Chadwick. 

Aline bore John two sons – Walter and Gilbert. In 1135 King Henry I died and the country was thrown into turmoil as two claimants jostled for the crown – Henry’s daughter Matilda, and her cousin, Stephen. Initially, John swore fealty to Stephen and was granted the castles of Ludgershall and the town and castle of Marlborough in Wiltshire in reward. Stephen’s generosity gave John a strong power base and made him formidable in the Kennet Valley and northeast Wiltshire. 

In 1139, the Empress Matilda came to England and made her bid to take the crown from Stephen. For whatever reason, Stephen suspected John Marshal of duplicity and besieged him at Marlborough. My personal opinion is that John had fallen foul of the factions at court who thought he had been receiving too many favours, and felt that he should be put in his place. He had no strong affinities at Stephen’s court and a man isolated was a man who could be picked off and brought down. I think John jumped before he was pushed (off the mortal coil). Speculation aside, what is known is that John swore for the Empress and adhered to her cause for the rest of the Civil War. His brother William joined her entourage as her chancellor and remained with her until at least 1151. Unfortunately for John, the Empress’s attempt to regain the throne was not plain sailing and to cut a long story short, she lost her advantage and while besieging the Bishop of Winchester at his palace of Wolvesely, she was almost captured. John was a few miles out of Winchester, dealing with a supply problem, when he heard that the troops of William D’Ypres, a Flemish mercenary in the pay of Stephen’s queen, were coming down the Andover road straight for him. If D’Ypres managed to break through, John knew that Winchester would be encircled and the Empress captured. John made his stand at Wherwell where there was a ford over the river Teste beside a Benedictine nunnery that had been founded by an Anglo Saxon queen in the late 10th century.
River Teste at Wherwell. Photo courtesy of E. Chadwick.

John fought for as long as he could, but with D’Ypres’ numbers too great to withstand, he retreated into the nunnery and barricaded himself in. D’Ypres knew he couldn’t leave a man like John Marshal to create mayhem in his rear, so he ordered the nunnery to be burned along with the men inside it. There was mayhem and chaos. Some of the troops fled the burning church only to meet their end on the edges of the mercenary’s swords. John barricaded himself in the tower with another knight and refused to come out. When his companion feared for their lives and wanted to surrender, John told him that he would kill him with his own hands if he mentioned that word again. They stayed put, but John paid the price when molten lead from the church roof landed on his face and burned out his eye. Once D’Ypres’ force had moved on, John staggered from the church with his companion, and the two of them made their way to safety. This must have been something of a feat because that safety was 25 miles away at Marlborough; they were on foot, and John had suffered a terrible facial injury. 

Nevertheless, they made it and once recovered, John set out to recoup and regroup. Modern novelists and readers studying this detail sometimes dismiss John’s actions as those of a lunatic adrenaline junkie, but I don't believe that is the case at all. Like a commander in World War II ordered to hold a particular bridge against the enemy in dire circumstances, he did so. He did his duty; he did what he had to do despite the terrible odds against him, and that to me is a man who knows what his word of honour is worth and what doing your duty really means.

Model of Sarum/Salisbury in the 12th century.
John’s most powerful neighbour in the region was Walter of Salisbury, hereditary sheriff of Salisbury (nowadays called Old Sarum). Walter himself came from a paternal Anglo Saxon line that had survived the Norman Conquest. When Walter died, his son William succeeded him, but died not long after the battle of Wilton in 1143. The second son, Patrick, became lord of Salisbury and he supported Stephen. Looking to curtail his forceful neighbour in the Kennet valley, Patrick took up arms against John. John ably defended himself, although he had fewer resources than Patrick, and even if often on the back foot, it was never defeat. Eventually Robert Earl of Gloucester, the Empress’s brother and chief general, stepped between the men. He offered Patrick an earldom if he would come over to the Empress and he suggested that John divorce his wife and marry Patrick’s sister to make peace between them. The men agreed and sometime between 1144 and 1145, John Marshal annulled his marriage to Aline and took Sybilla FitzWalter to wife. Aline was remarried to Gloucester’s uncle, a widower called Philip de Gay or de Gai. On the surface, John’s action may seem harsh, but again, that’s to judge him by the standards of our day, not the 12th century. By doing what he did, he turned a ‘you will lose’ situation into a ‘you might win’ one and stabilised life for himself and his dependents. Aline was not disparaged by her remarriage, and his sons retained their inheritance.

John and Sybilla swiftly began a second family. It is perhaps telling that he only had two sons by his first wife in the course of fifteen years and six (and perhaps seven) offspring with Sybilla over the same period. The first was born within a year of the marriage and christened John for his father. The second, destined for fame and legend was William, born in either 1146 or 1147. We know for certain there were two daughters, Sybilla and Marguerite, and two more sons, Ancel and Henry. Henry went on to become bishop of Exeter and was probably born after Henry II had gained the throne. Ancel became a household knight in the service of his cousin, Rotrou, Count of Perche. Around the time that John married Sybilla, Sybilla’s sister Hawise married Robert de Dreux, brother of Louis VII of France [first husband of Eleanor of Aquitaine], thus making a distant connection between the Marshals and French royalty.

In England, the fighting continued and the Empress’s position grew more desperate as her adherents either gave up or died. She lost her stalwart supporter Miles of Gloucester when he was accidentally shot by one of his own men whilst out hunting. Her half-brother Robert of Gloucester died, and her close friend and supporter Brian FitzCount retired to a monastery. The Empress herself departed England in 1148 and did not return, but her son Henry was waiting in the wings and growing up fast.

For John Marshal the period covered by the late 1140’s up to 1153 was a continuing dark time when he was involved in a war of slow grinding attrition. His lands were burned and ravaged by Eustace, the son of King Stephen and the best that John could manage was to grit his teeth and endure – which he did. He was known as a man of great cunning, a builder of castles ‘designed with wondrous skill’ and a man well able to attract men to his banner. Although a generous benefactor to the Church, he was still vilified by certain bishops and clergy. He was excommunicated for raiding church lands and forcing the church to answer in his secular court. He also made the church’s tenants build his castles for him, which did not go down well. (Gesta Stephani). John seems to have taken the excommunication stoically and to have treated it as a hazard of the job, so to speak. John’s relationship with the Church was not all bad-feeling and acrimony. He was, in fact, a generous patron. He donated his house and lands in Winchester on Jewry Street to Troarn Abbey in 1148. He gave lands at his manor of Rockley to the Templars and he was a benefactor of Bradenstoke Priory [Christy’s photos and description at link], where he was eventually to be buried.
Marlborough Down near Rockley. Photo courtesy of E. Chadwick.

At some point in the early 1150s John built a castle at Newbury. The whereabouts of this place is now unknown and there has been much speculation as to where it was. As far as I’m concerned, the answer is staring everyone in the face. It’s at Speen, on high ground overlooking various strategic roads. The bishop of Salisbury was known to have a house here, and as we gave already seen in the paragraph above: ‘He built castles designed with wondrous skill, in the places that best suited him; the lands and possessions of the churches he brought under his own lordship, driving out the owners whatever order they might belong to.’ Wherever the castle is, John fortified a position in the Newbury area and held it for the Empress. In the summer of 1152 King Stephen besieged it on his way to try and take Wallingford. With Brian FitzCount out of the reckoning, having taken the cowl, John Marshal was the Angevins’ last hope to protect Wallingford from Stephen’s advance.

The first assault battered John’s troops badly, but they didn’t give in. Stephen didn’t want to sit down to besiege it. I suspect he knew how hard John Marshal could stand and that he would sell the castle very dearly. John in his turn knew he was in a dire situation and couldn’t hold out for much longer. He didn’t have the men and supplies necessary. He asked Stephen for time to gain honourable permission from the Empress to surrender the castle. Stephen agreed, but told John that he must provide hostages and pledges for his good word. John agreed to do so and handed over as one of them, his small son William, who would have been around five or six years old.
Norman helm belonging to E. Chadwick.

With the time he had been given, John set about stuffing his keep to the rafters with men and supplies. Why did he do this when he could have yielded? I suspect it was because he was buying time for Wallingford and for Henry FitzEmpress. Each day that he stood, was a day gained for the Angevin cause. John Marshal hadn’t backed down at Wherwell, where his stand had allowed the Empress to escape. He hadn’t backed down before the superior strength of Patrick of Salisbury, and he wasn’t going to back down now, even if it meant gambling with his son’s life.
Stephen duly came on the appointed day to demand the surrender of the castle and John refused him and told him he would fight. When threatened with the execution of little William by hanging, John uttered those by now infamous words. ‘Il dist ken e li chaleit de l’enfant, quer encore aveit les enclumes e les marteals dunt forgereit de plus beals’ (He said that he did not care about the child, since he still had the anvils and hammers to produce even finer ones.)

Callous father? Cool brinkman gambling with his son’s life? A man caught between a rock and a hard place and doing what he must to safeguard others? It becomes a tough call, but I will say that there is far more going on under the surface than a cursory glance informs, and that it is vital for anyone studying this incident to read it through the lens of medieval mindset. It’s not what’s on top that matters here, but what’s underneath. 

Stephen could not bring himself to hang the boy, although for a time William was the plaything and victim of the royal camp, as he was also threatened with being flung from a catapult and squashed whilst strapped to a hurdle intended to attack the castle gate. This is often not mentioned in the various secondary source narratives concerning the incident. From what I have garnered elsewhere, young squires and captive sons were frequently subjected to such torments – rather like the traditional ‘punishment details’ for youths at public school. Stephen took William into his household and John Marshal’s son seems to have settled well in his new life. He was happy and confident enough despite his ordeal to want to play a game with King Stephen, involving jousting with plaintain leaves. One wonders how such a chirpy, confident, secure little boy could have been born of such supposed parental indifference. A servant was sent to keep an eye on William, ‘because his family had great fears that he would come to harm’ (Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal) but was caught in the act and chased away.
An anvil. One can see clearly what John Marshal MIGHT have been punning at!

Another point to note is to wonder whether those words were ever actually said, or if it was the poet, writing the Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal, 80 years later, who used them as a dramatic motif. The anvils and hammers were symbols of a marshal and there were existing medieval stories involving tales of children being threatened with death unless the father cut off his own testicles. Not so John Marshal. He still had his intact! So the reference to ‘anvils and hammers’ may well be a motif for John’s cool, daring, virility and occupation, rather than proof that he actually ever said the words. We will never know. If he did, it was clever punning on various pertinent symbols that everyone understood in his day. [See photo.]

John’s castle at Newbury eventually fell to Stephen, but John had managed to buy that extra time for Wallingford. Stephen moved up to invest the latter and Henry came from Normandy to oppose him. Eventually a treaty was agreed whereby Stephen would keep the throne in his lifetime and Henry would inherit it on his death. Although there were a few more skirmishes, the long civil war was in essence over.

Stephen died in 1154 and Henry FitzEmpress, at the age of twenty-one, became King of England. Life slowly settled down. It is likely that John’s final son Henry was born at this time and named for the new power in the country. Henry set about restoring order. All adulterine castles were to be destroyed, and I suspect this is what happened to Newbury. Certainly there is no trace of it today. Henry also took several castles back into his own power, including Marlborough. John was allowed to keep the manors of Wexcombe and Cherhill that Stephen had granted him, but only for his lifetime; it was not to be a hereditary right. John continued to serve Henry as his master marshal, but the King had his own new men to promote and John was of the ‘old regime.’ Many of the gains made in the period of the war were lost, but John had still played his hand well, and while his fortunes diminished, he nevertheless had created a fine platform from which his offspring could leap to greatness. 
William Marshal's effigy at Temple Church, London. Photo courtesy of E. Chadwick.

Bradenstoke Priory "church" at place where altar and tombs
would have been, looking west.
Photo by Christy K. Robinson.
William did so in spectacular fashion, going on to become Earl of Pembroke and regent of England. Henry Marshal, as aforementioned, was to become bishop of Exeter. More distant descendants of John Marshal include Robert the Bruce, Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth I, George Washington and Winston Churchill. John died in 1165, around the age of 60, which is as much as we know about his demise, although it may be telling that he made a grant to Bradenstoke Priory of half of the township of Easton, in the presence of his wife, two of earl Patrick’s chaplains, his chamberlain Osbert and Ralph the Physician. Was the physician there because he just happened to be handy and a man of learning, or was he there because of medical difficulties? John was buried at Bradenstoke Priory, the foundation of his marital relatives the Earls of Salisbury.  His tomb and Sybilla’s have been lost, but their bones rest somewhere beneath the grass and tumbled stones of the priory ruins.


I can say without a doubt and from personal experience that their spirits live on and John’s is a particularly vibrant one still! 

Select bibliography:

THE CARTULARY OF BRADENSTOKE PRIORY Edited by Vera C.M. London. Wiltshire Record Society 1979

DIALOGUS DE SCACCARIO. The Course of the Exchequeur and CONSTITUTIO DOMUS REGIS. The Establishment of the King's Household. Edited and translated by the late Charles Johnson. Clarendon Press Oxford. POD ISBN 0198222688
WILLIAM MARSHAL. Court Career & Chivalry in the Angevin Empire 1147-1219 by David Crouch. Longman 1990 ISBN 0582037867

WILLIAM MARSHAL. Knight Errant, Baron and Regent of England By Sidney Painter. John Hopkins Press 1967

HISTORY OF WILLIAM MARSHAL VOL 1. Text and Translation (11. 1-10031) ed. by A.J. Holden with English translations by S.Gregory and D. Crouch. Anglo Norman Text Society ISBN 0905474422

HISTORY OF WILLIAM MARSHAL VOL II ed by A.J. Holden with English translation by S. Gregory and D. Crouch. Anglo Norman Text Society occasional publications series 5 2004. ISBN 0905474457

HISTORY OF WILLIAM MARSHAL VOL III ed by A.J. Holden. Historical notes by D. Crouch. Anglo Norman Text Society 2006 ISBN 0905474481

WILLIAM MARSHAL EARL OF PEMBROKE By Catherine A. Armstrong. Seneschal Press 2006 ISBN 978169530385

THE BIGOD EARLS OF NORFOLK IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY By Marc Morris. Boydell 2005. ISBN 1843831643

__________________


Thank you so much, Elizabeth. As I continue to research and write my own historical novel of the 17th century, I have you and Sharon Kay Penman to thank for setting such astronomically-high standards for research methods, literary skill, and really, creating the vast and hungry market for intelligently-written historical fiction. (It’s both daunting and enervating to make my bid to be your colleague!)

MORE on Elizabeth Chadwick and her historical novels, blogs, research methods, and links to Facebook and Twitter: http://www.elizabethchadwick.com/index.php
A Place Beyond Courage, a novel by Elizabeth Chadwick, tells the vibrant, heart-pounding story of John FitzGilbert Marshal. 
The Greatest Knight and The Scarlet Lion, also by Elizabeth Chadwick, are two stand-alone novels on the life of John Marshal’s son, William Marshal. 
If you haven’t read her books, get thee to a bookstore now (online or bricks and mortar) and get started! 

***********************************************  

If you enjoy life sketches, anecdotes, and historical details like these, you can find them in the book Effigy Hunter, by Christy K Robinson. It's available in print from CreateSpace, Barnes and Noble, and Amazon

Monday, March 7, 2011

Coming soon: guest post from author Elizabeth Chadwick

Coming soon: a guest post by one of my favorite authors, Elizabeth Chadwick. On a blog tour, she’s promoting the March 2011 US release of her book To Defy A King, the story of Maud/Matilda/Mahelt Marshal, daughter (and third-born) of William Marshal (my ancestor).

Mahelt is not my ancestor, but she is closely related. She was the sister of Isabella and Eva Marshal, and sister-in-law, daughter-in-law, aunt, or niece to Llewellyn Prince of Wales, John King of England, and the families of Quincy, Bigod, Tosny, Ferrers, de Clare, de Braose, and de Bohun. (Many others, too, that I’m not descended from.)

Have you noticed the effigy photos in my blog header? The two upright effigies are at Coverham, Yorkshire. They represent Robert and Ranulf, lords of Middleham, Yorkshire a handful of miles away. Ranulf makes a few appearances in To Defy a King, being the brother-in-law of Mahelt's first husband, Hugh Bigod. Robert and Ranulf, father and son, were ancestors of the Nevilles, who get most of the hits in my blog stats!

If you’re interested in the heart and soul of who our shared ancestors were, as I am, you’d be wise to collect Elizabeth’s historical novels. I’ve read all but one or two, and let me tell you, she can’t write a page without mentioning the people from whom I sprang!  She’s no medieval name-dropper, but a solid researcher, historical re-enactor, and best of all, an exciting, award-winning novelist. I’m writing a novel on ancestor Mary Barrett Dyer (1611-1660), and I aspire to both the scholarship and artistry of Elizabeth Chadwick. 

So stay tuned: Elizabeth’s blog post will appear here very soon.

Below is my list of connections within the William Marshal and Isabel de Clare brood. I’ve highlighted the individuals who are my direct ancestors. To summarize, two of their children were my ancestors, but most of their children were married to those who would become my ancestors in other, later, marriages. Medieval mating—wow, who knew?

Children of William Marshal & Isabel de Clare:
1.             William Marshal, 2nd Earl of Pembroke (~1190-April 6 1231), married (1) Alice de Betun, daughter of Earl of Albemarle; (2) April 23 1224 Eleanor Plantagenet, daughter of King John of England
2.             Richard Marshal, 3rd Earl of Pembroke (>1190-April 16 1234), married Gervase le Dinant.
3.             Maud /Mahelt /Matilda Marshal (1192-March 27, 1248), married (1) Hugh Bigod, 3rd Earl of Norfolk (son of my ancestors Roger Bigod and Ida de Tosny); (2) William de Warenne, 6th Earl of Surrey by whom Maud had a son and daughter, Isabelle de Warrenne, who married Hugh d’Aubigny/Albini (they had no children). Hugh was the brother of my ancestor, Isabella d’Aubigny/Albini (married to John Fitzalan, earl of Arundel after Hugh d’Aubigny died); Maud married (3) Walter de Dunstanville.
4.             Gilbert Marshal, 4th Earl of Pembroke (d. June 27 1241), married (1) Margaret of Scotland, daughter of King William I of Scotland; (2) Maud de Lanvaley
5.             Walter Marshal, 5th Earl of Pembroke (>1198 - November 1245), married Margaret de Quincy, daughter of Hugh de Kevelioc, 3rd Earl of Chester. They had no children. But Margaret married her brother-in-law, William de Ferrers, and I am descended from them.
6.             Anselm Marshal, 6th Earl of Pembroke (d. December 22 1245), married Maud de Bohun, daughter of Humphrey de Bohun, 2nd Earl of Hereford.
7.             Isabella Marshal (October 9 1200 - January 17 1240), married  (1) Gilbert de Clare, 5th Earl of Hertford, October 9 1217. Gilbert de Clare Earl of Gloucester  was son of Sir Richard FitzRoger de Clare Earl of Hertford and Amicia FitzRobert Countess of Gloucester.  Isabella married (2) Richard of Cornwall Plantagenet Earl of Cornwall, son of John King of England and Isabella Taillefer d'Angoulême, 13 Mar 1231 Fawley Church, Buckinghamshire, England; Isabella died 15 Jan 1240 Berkhamsted Castle, Hertfordshire, England, at age 39; buried after 15 Jan 1240 Beaulieu Abbey, Hampshire, England.
8.             Sibyl (or Sybilla) Marshal, married William de Ferrers, 5th Earl of Derby. Sibilla (d ante 1238) married, before 1219, William de Ferrers, earl of Derby, and they had seven daughters, though I'm descended from NONE of them! (Sheesh, what are the odds?) These daughters were: Agnes (d1290) who married William de Vesci of Alnwick; Isabel (d1260) who married Gilbert Basset of Wycombe; Maud (d 1299) who married Simon de Kyme of Sotby; Sybil (d 1173/4) who married Franco de Bohun of Midhurst; Joan (d1268) who married John de Mohun of Dunster; Agatha (d1306) who married Hugh de Mortimer of Chelmarsh; and Eleanor (d1274) who married William de Vaux. Sibilla died after 1238. William de Ferrers (d. 1254) then married Margaret de Quincy (widow of William Marshal above) in or after 1238, from whom I am descended.
9.             Eva Marshal married William de Braose, Lord of Abergavenny, son of Reginald de Braose, before 1219. They had four daughters, and William de Braose was hanged by Llywelyn ap Iorwerth in 1230. William was accused of having dallied with Llywelyn’s wife Joan, bastard of King John. Eve’s and de Braose’s daughters were: Maud/Matilda (d1301) who married Roger de Mortimer of Wigmore; Isabel who married (1229) David (d1246), son of Llywelyn ap Iorwerth; Eve (d1255) who married William de Cantelou; and Eleanor (d c 1250) who married Humphrey VI de Bohun earl of Hereford.
10.          Joan (or Joanna) Marshal, married Warin de Montchensy, Lord Swanscombe.