Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 9.djvu/262

This page needs to be proofread.


256


NOTES AND QUERIES. [n s. ix. MAK 28, 1914.


are faulty," and by reference to a deed (Gormanston Register, f. 188 dors.) "to be dated c. 1194," by which both the above were granted by Walter de Laci to his brother Hugh.

May I venture, however, to ask whether MR. ORPEN can state what lands are referred to in Cal. Doc. Ire., No. 1210, as quoted by me (11 S. viii. 67), and what the names were of the two castles held by Lesceline " of the fee of Nicholas in Ireland of her mari- tagium " (Pat. 10 Hen. III. m. 3, m. 5, and 5 dors.), referred to by Lynam at p. xvi of his above-mentioned work ?

MR. ORPEN says " Cal. Doc. Ire., No. 1372, is correct " ; and this shows that Lesceline received some lands on her mar- riage to Hugh de Laci, and this is confirmed by the passage I have quoted from the 'Book of Howth,' p. 416 (11 S. viii. 372), which passage might be read (might it not ?) as implying that the castles of Rath and Nober had formed a portion of Lesceline's inheritance.

The date given for Hugh's marriage with Emeline de Riddlesford, namely, c. 1212-16, is that assigned for it by MR. ST. CLAIR BADDELEY (ib., p. 172). MR. ORPEN is disposed to place it at a much later date. If we accept this view, we may, perhaps, also assume that her birth was later than 1198. As regards the barrenness of Eme- line, may not her failure of issue by Hugh probably be accounted for by the fact that " he had in 1225 already abandoned his wife, and was living with an adulteress " ('Ann. Mon.,' iii. 91) ? Evidently relations were strained, and, if MR. ORPEN'S idea is correct, may have been so ever since the marriage took place. This would seem to be what may have happened, and as MR. ORPEN'S suggestion is a feasible one, and as a consequence Emeline's birth has to be postdated, there would be nothing strange in her having had two children by her second husband. Unfortunately, we do not know the date of the marriage of Emeline's parents, which would be a valuable clue, though we know her father died 1243 (Arch- dall's Lodge's ' Peerage of Ireland,' i. 120), and .that she was the eldest daughter. There is scope here for conjecture as to what was the year of her birth. As she was married to Hugh before 1225, perhaps only just before, the latest probable date of her birth would be 1210. She would thus have been c. 33 years of age at the time of her second marriage in 1243.

Your correspondent brings his communi- cation to a close with the suggestion that


possibly there were two Walters de Riddles- ford. From this it would appear that Amabilis FitzHenry may have been mother to the Walter de Riddlesford to whom she has been assigned as first wife, the said Walter's only wife being Alianore de Viteri. If Amabilis can be shown to have been sister to Meiler FitzHenry, the Justiciar of Ireland 1199-1203, she might possibly have filled the position assigned to her by MR. ORPEN. But this is quite a fresh problem, which will need investigation.

Thus one thing to another leads,

And gives fresh cause for searching deeds.

FRANCIS H. RELTON. 9, Broughton Road, Thornton Heath, Surrey.

SIR ROGER L'ESTRANGE'S POEM ' THE LOYAL PRISONER' (US. ix. 201). If your correspondent will refer to 10 S. i. 250 he will be able to correct some of his informa- tion about this poem. Lovelace's lines ' To Althea ' were written, according to the MS. heading in varioiis transcripts, during his imprisonment in the Gate-house, where he was confined from 30 April to 21 June, 1642.

I should be glad to know where and when he and L'Estrange were in the same prison and at the same time, and also what is the evidence that either was imprisoned for his share in the Kent rising of 1648. The latter is generally supposed to have escaped to Holland immediately upon the failure of the insurrection, and though the former was committed to Peter-house on 9 June, I have hitherto failed to find any mention of his name as having taken part in it.

G. THORN-DRURY.

"RUCKSACK" OR "RUCKSACK" (11 S. viii. 447, 497, 517 ; ix. 53, 117, 196). Hav- ing used the rucksack in the Bavarian Tyrol, I was interested in H. K. H.'s notes, and wrote to my friend Prof. K. Gschweiid of Hanover (himself a native of Tyrol and speaking the dialect), enclosing the cutting from ' N. & Q.' He tells me that he is not in agreement with Prof. Farmer, and says that it is from ruck'n, a man's back in the Bavarian dialect (not riickcn), and is entirely so understood by the people, many of whom cannot speak High German, and would not be concerned about the incorrect form of rucksack (in place of ruck'nsack) ; they are a very simple folk, and give simple names to their belongings. The rucksack was a Bavarian invention of about fifty years ago, used by wood choppers and floaters and others who had to carry food with them for,