On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 1:17:16 PM UTC+1, Peter Stewart wrote: > On 31/05/2017 10:04 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > I would think it more likely to be correct as relayed as Hugh de Mortimer was a husband of a daughter as well. > > That's why I thought the meaning "descended from" would encompass both > men's family circumstances. > > Without the original text we can only grope in the dark. Luckily, > publishing extracts in English from unpublished Latin documents (as with > Salzman's "edition" of the Sele priory cartulary) is getting to be a > thing of the past, and perhaps before too long Magdalen will use some of > its wealth to get a proper and complete edition of their documents > published. > > Peter Stewart The thing I find most interesting is that the reservation made on the fine is about "THE SERVICES of Walter de Beauchamp and Hugh de Mortimer and their heirs... " Surely this implies that Reginald is referring to living people which can only mean Walter (d1235). Also, I read only yesterday that William de Braose was granted custody of Elmley in 1202. That looks like it may have included custody of Walter then. If so Braose may have married Walter to his daughter as a first marriage. Mortimer is granted custody of Walter in 1212 after the death of Braose. Perhaps Bertha had had heirs in that time but had died subsequently. Doug Thompson