Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="dltsrq, post: 7534526, member: 75482"]I agree. I think this last Robert, the land holder cited in the Eyre, may be the same as Robert St. John de Basing, the "baron" mentioned in the genealogy pages. One problem I have run up against is that the genealogy entries (and seemingly only the genealogy entries) call him the "2nd Baron of Basing" while other sources have the Barony of Basing created in 1299 with John St. John. The St. John family, though, had ties back to the Conqueror who apparently gave them 53 manors in Hampshire. Might Robert be better described as a lord and not a baron? <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_St_John_of_Basing" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_St_John_of_Basing" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_St_John_of_Basing</a> I am also inclined to think that the "Robert Besing" cited on the other forum may actually be this same individual. Both he and Robert St. John de Basing had sons named William (coincidence?). The Eyre has "Robert de Basing" active just before 1244 and the other source has "William, son of Robert Besing" active c. 1267, about a generation apart as one would expect for father and son. If this is indeed the same Robert, we then have a connection to Durham where the seal matrix was reportedly found.[/QUOTE]