Hugh de Bocland

• From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hugh de Bocland or Hugh of Buckland (d. 1119?), was sheriff of Berkshire and several other counties.

Origins

Bocland received his surname from the manor of Buckland, near Faringdon, in Berkshire (now Oxfordshire), of which he was tenant under the monastery of Abingdon.

Career

Before the death of William Rufus, he was already High Sheriff of Berkshire and he is stated in the Abingdon Chronicle to have been one of the persons who profited by the unjust transactions of Modbert, whom the king appointed to administer the affairs of the monastery in the interest of the royal revenues, during the period when the office of abbot was vacant. He was ordered by Henry I to restore to the abbey the possessions which he had in this manner wrongfully obtained. Notwithstanding this, the Abingdon historian gives Hugh a high character for uprightness and wisdom. The same authority states that he was held in great esteem by Henry I, and that he was sheriff of eight counties. Six of these, the evidence of charters enables us to identify, viz. Berkshire, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, and Middlesex. It is sometimes stated that Hugh de Bocland was Justiciar of England, but this assertion is extremely questionable. It is true that he is so described in the copy of Henry I's charter of liberties, which Matthew Paris quotes as having been read to the barons in 1213; but in the obviously more accurate copy of this charter, given by the same historian under the date 1100, the designation of justiciar is wanting. The Abingdon Chronicle also speaks of Hugh as 'justiciarius publicarum compellationum;' the precise import of this expression, however, is not clear. The statement in Foss's 'Lives of the Judges' that he was canon of St Paul's is probably erroneous, although his name occurs (without date or reference to any authority) in the list of prebendaries of Harleston in Newcourt's 'Repertorium,' i. 151. He witnessed a St. Albans charter dated 1116, and also another charter of the same abbey, which Mr. Luard assigns, apparently on good grounds, to the year 1119. As we find from the Abingdon history that William de Bochelande (presumably a son of Hugh) was High Sheriff of Berkshire in 1120, it may be inferred that Hugh de Bocland died in 1119. Another Hugh de Bocland, who may have been a grandson of the subject of this article, was High Sheriff of Berkshire from 1170 to 1176, and was one of the itinerant justices in 1173 and 1174.

References

This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: "Bocland, Hugh de". Dictionary of National Biography. London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1885–1900.

--------------------

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2003-10/...

From: Rosie Bevan <rbevan@paradise.net.nz>
Subject: Re: The Ancestries of Isabel and Maud de Bocland Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003

Dear Gordon

Thanks for your messages to which I will endeavour to respond.

There were 25 Bucklands in England at the time of Domesday and so Guy de Boclande was not connected to the Berkshire Buckland family as far as is known, but a Devonshire one. In 1166 he was holding 2 knight's fees of the honour of Totnes in Plymouth, Devon [Red Book of the Exchequer, p.258]. This comprised Eggbuckland manor, including Compton, Knacker's Knowle and Hooe, which passed to the Giffard family owing to the marriage of Isabel de Boclande and Osbert Giffard. Eggbuckland was simply referred to as Buckland at Domesday, and Hekebocland by the time of Henry III [CIPM I no.112], indicating that the 'Egg' in Eggbuckland is a corruption of heke or eke. As to whether Alan fitz Guy was son of the Guy holding in 1166, there is no indication, but the former certainly succeeded to the fee and this would be worth mentioning in a DD addition.

Isabel's ancestry as described by Moriarty and Keats-Rohan is well documented.

The Boclande family of Buckland, Herts. is correctly covered by Keats-Rohan, except for the wife of Hugh II, whom she names as Matilda de Mandeville, which, (as Todd remarked on last year), seems to have arisen from a misreading of the pedigree in CP v.V, following p.116. Moreover if she had been a Mandeville there would have been serious implications of consanguinity in immediate generations.

Matilda, wife of Hugh II de Boclande was widow of Piers de Lutegareshale and mother of Robert and Geoffrey fitz Piers. Her identity is unknown but she appears to be of Stuteville/Glanville descent. As you have deduced, Maud was daughter of William II de Boclande who died in 1216. He left three daughters and coheirs by Maud (Matilda) dau. of William de Say d.1177, and this is outlined in the pedigree mentioned above. 1. Maud, wife of William d'Averanches of Folkestone d. 1230, by whom she had issue. 2. Hawise d. s.p. 1226, wife of John de Boville 3. Joan d.1252, wife of Robert de Ferrers d.s.p. 1225 and Geoffrey d'Averanches, by whom she had issue.

Keats-Rohan probably omitted the above because the timeframe is technically outside the volume's scope of 1066-1166. However I don't see why we can't add this, and also cross-reference Maud de Say as the wife of William II de Boclande, to the additions web page as per your suggestion.

As far as your Wido/Guy suggestion goes, however, you will note that Keats-Rohan's entries are in the form in which they appear in contemporary record. I think this must have been a difficult decision but ultimately the correct one, despite the fact it does lead to inconsistencies (many of which could have been helped by cross-referencing). While I take your point about Wido and Guy being the same name, if I were to cross-reference all the Latin entries to vernacular ones on the Domesday Descendants' additions/amendments web pages, I would still be doing it to the next Domesday!

Regarding the date 1166, you will often find it quoted by Keats-Rohan as a point of reference from the the Red Book of the Exchequer, as it is the year given to a comprehensive return of certificates of knights' fees throughout England - basically a census of who was holding what from whom. It does not necessarily mean that it is a date of significance to the holding family at the time.

I hope this has covered all your queries, suggestions and comments.

Cheers

Rosie

Original Message ----- From: "Gordon Kirkemo" <kirkemo@comcast.net> To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com> Cc: <rbevan@paradise.net.nz> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 10:00 AM Subject: FW: The Ancestries of Isabel and Maud de Bocland

Rosie and Others,

After posting the query below concerning two Bocland women, Isabel and
Maud/Matilda, I found a website with additional information that suggests a
possible addition for Domesday Descendants. This information is relevant

to

Isabel de Bocland, daughter of Alan fitz Guy de Bocland.

At the time of my posting, I did not realize that the name Guy is
interchangeable with Wido. Keats-Rohan identified a Wido de Bocland of
Totnes on page 330, but the description does not suggest a connection to

the

other family of Bocland/Buckland. On page 1047, she cites Alan fitz Guy

of

Buckland as the wife of Alice de Murdac.

The following website: http://www.ateliers.demon.co.uk/hooe/past.html
provides a brief history of the West Hooe Manor and Hooe Barton Farm. This
site identifies Isabel de Bocland as the daughter of Alan de Bocland and

the

wife of Osbert Giffard. The history further identifies Alan as the son of
Wido de Bocland. Further, the history begins by indicating that Hooe is
mentioned in Domesday and that it was "granted to Iudhael of Totnes who

let

it to Stephen."

Wido de Bocland inherited Hooe Manor in 1166. It is not clear to me what
the relationship of Totnes and Hooe Manor might be, but it seems clear that
this Wido is the same as the Wido identified in DD as holding two fees of
the honour of Totnes in 1166. Having suggested this possibility, the
question remains as to how this Wido might fit in the proposed Bocland
lineage. Perhaps the date 1166 offers a clue? Keats-Rohan provides some
details regarding William de Bocland, son of Hugh. She suggests that he
probably died c1157/58, as this was the date of his last appearance in the
Pipe Rolls of Henry II. Interestingly, she further states that his land

was

certainly held by Hugh II de Bocland by 1166.

The use of 1166 as a date of certainty is very interesting, as it matches
the date that Wido apparently inherited Totnes and Hooe Manor. Is it
possible that William died after 1158, and possibly c1166? Further, is it
possible that Wido was a son of William and a brother of Hugh II de Bocland,
and they both inherited lands after the death of William?

Rosie, it seems to me there may be some modifications that should be
considered for DD. First, I believe we can add the name of a son (Alan de
Bocland) for Wido on page 330. Given the use of names in DD, I do not

know

if a modification on page 1047 identifying Alan as Alan fitz Wido rather
than Alan fitz Guy would be helpful to the reader trying to make
connections.

Second, as noted in the message below, we seem to have two William de
Boclands identified on page 330 with no spouses identified. On page 681, we
have a William of Buckland married to Matilda, daughter of William II de
Say. Is it possible that this William of Buckland is the same as William I
or William II (the chronology suggests William II) identified on page 330?
If not, should an additional William of Buckland be identified?

I certainly would welcome any feedback on these ideas.

Gordon Kirkemo

-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Kirkemo [mailto:kirkemo@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 9:08 PM
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: The Ancestries of Isabel and Maud de Bocland

I have two Bocland ladies that I hope someone can help me connect with their
Bocland (also found as Bokland and Buckland) lineages.

The first is Isabel de Bocland. Moriarty (NEHGS Register, Vol.75,

pp.62-63)

identifies her as the wife of Osbert Giffard (d. c1237), and suggests she
died before 8 July 1242. He identifies her parents as Alan de Bokland and
Alice Murdac (whom I have as the daughter of Ralph and Eva (de Grey)
Murdac-DD page 1047). Keats-Rohan identifies her father as Alan fitz Guy of
Buckland.

The second is Maud (Matilda) de Bocland. Doug Smith identified her as the
wife of William II d'Avranches (d. 1230) in a posting of 27 April 2002 found
in the archives. He further identified her parents as William de Bocland
and Maud de Say (Ian Mitchell Lambert also identified William and Maud in a
posting to the archive dated 18 July 1998.) Keats-Rohan, in DD on page

681,

also confirms the marriage of Matilda (Maud) to William of Buckland.

Keats-Rohan develops a Bocland line on page 330 of DD. The line appears

to

be as follows:

1. Hugh de Bocland (d. c1119) was succeeded by:
2. William de Bocland (d. c1157/58) was succeeded by:
3. Hugh II de Bocland (d. c1176) married Matilda de Mandeville and was
succeeded by:
4. William II de Bocland (d. 1216).

Regarding the lineage for Isabel de Bocland, it seems possible her
grandfather may have been named Guy de Bocland, given the reference from DD
cited above. Keats-Rohan makes no reference to Alan or Guy de Bocland in
her description of the family on page 330. Given the likely death date for
Isabel, it is possible that William (#4 above) might be her grandfather,

but

that is merely my speculation.

Regarding the lineage for Maud/Matilda, it seems possible that William (#4
above) might be a candidate for her father. Unfortunately, Keats-Rohan does
not identify the wife of either William on page 330, although the William

of

Buckland found on page 681 is identified as married to Maud de Say. This
suggests either an oversight by Keats-Rohan, or the existence of another
William of Buckland.

Can anyone assist me by connecting Isabel and Maud/Matilda to the Bocland
line identified by Keats-Rohan?

Thanks,

Gordon Kirkemo