On Wednesday, 11 May 2016 21:54:07 UTC+1, Robert Spencer wrote: > In 11 Henry II (1166) Thomas Despenser was amerced a fine for trespass with his kin "Hugh de Berc"(Berges) > Hugh de Prestwald alias Hugh de Berges fls. 1176 > Dear Robert, Thomas Despenser does not appear in the pipe rolls for 11 Henry II. He appears in the pipe rolls for 12 Henry II (1165-66) when he owed 1 mark for a default in Leicestershire, but "Hugh de Berc" does not appear in this pipe roll. https://archive.org/stream/piperollsociety09pipeuoft#page/70/mode/1up What is your source that Hugh de Berges was a relation of Thomas Despenser? Regards, John

Dear John , can you please confirm what it says in the other sources listed by Ravillous included the Farrer [9] and the Pipe Roll of 22 Hen II, reference and post back your findings, much appreciated. I apparently got the source mixed up. Ravillous conjectured that Thomas Despenser was cousin to Hugh de Berc (Berges) by confusing the Ansketil de Berges who he conjectured to be Anschetil Despenser at the time, who were in hindsight over 100 years apart and could not be the same person. My info is in error based on the summary of the family by John Ravillous in 2006, where he informs us that Thomas Despenser and Hugh were cousins: Excerpt form post by John Ravillios (2006) "amerced 40s. in 1176 for forest trespass in Leicestershire, as noted by Farrer [9]. The record in the Pipe Roll of 22 Hen II identifies both Thomas le Despenser and his cousin, Hugh de Berges: " De misericordia Regis pro foresta sua. In Legercestrescr'. Tomas dispensator redd. comp. de .xl. s. de misericordia pro foresta. In thesauro .xx. s. Et debet .xx. s. .... Hugo de Berc [Berch in C.R.] debet dimidiam marcam pro eodem. Sed requirendus est in Rotel'. " [19] I now find both men appear here: on page # 185 https://ia600307.us.archive.org/32/items/publicationsofpi25pipe_0/publicationsofpi25pipe_0.pdf De misericordia Regis pro foresta sua. In Legercestrescr'. Tomas dispensator redd. comp. de .xl. s. de misericordia pro foresta. In thesauro .xx. 5. Et debet .xx. s. Hugo de Berc 1 debet dimidiam marcam pro eodem. Sed requirendus est in Rotel'. Berch\ C.R. Thanks Robert