On 16-Jul-23 12:47 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 12:03:02 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>> On 16-Jul-23 11:32 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:41:47 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>> On 16-Jul-23 10:14 AM, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 7:58:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 8:17 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:22:22 AM UTC+10, taf wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 2:03:19 AM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the correct spelling is De Cantelupe.
>>>>>>>> There really isn't any such thing as a 'correct spelling'. There is often a typical way that historicans have come to represent a name, and there is certain a value in using these common forms for the sake of maintaining uniformity (and as bait for what would be the most common internet search terms).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Still, at the time in question, there was no concept of 'correct spelling', and one typically sees a range of phoenetic approximations, as well as attempts at Latinizing, Anglicizing, Gallicizing, etc. As a sociological phenomenon, standardization of surname spelling came only in the post-medieval era, and likewise, historiographical standardization was a later occurrence, the result either of repetition of the arbitrary personal preferences selected by the authors whose works were more broadly consulted, or anachronistic application of the much later standardized form adopted by surviving families from the historians' own time. This leads to a sort of community consensus usage among modern scholars, but that can all be changed by a single influential scholar selecting a different form they prefer. 'Typical' shouldn't be mistaken for 'correct'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> taf
>>>>>>> In English E is spelled as I and I is spelled as AI: Meny Greek names are modified to sound Greek like PETRIDIS --> PETRIDES. CANTELUPE in ENGLISH sounds CANTILUPE. Anyway I never tell people what to do or what to believe.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Saint Thomas de Cantelupe, also called Thomas Of Cantelupe, or Thomas Of Hereford, Cantelupe also spelled Cantilupe, (born c. 1218, Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, Eng.—died Aug. 25, 1282, Montefiascone, near Orvieto, Papal States; canonized 1320, feast day October 3), reformist, educator, English church prelate, bishop, and defender of episcopal jurisdiction who played an important role in the Barons’ War.
>>>>>> If you are keen on St Thomas, you might care to observe this note in his
>>>>>> Wikipedia article: "The commonly accepted modern spelling is
>>>>>> "Cantilupe", as used by the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography for
>>>>>> all members of this family, and which is followed in this article."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ODNB actually uses the inelegant but sensibly indecisive "Cantilipe
>>>>>> [Cantelupe]".
>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
>>>>>> www.avg.com
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm glad that you posted this... I was confused myself between Cantelowe and Cantilupe. If Cantilupe is the standard spelling for Oxford, then it should be the standard I would hope, but then again some people I guess have to quibble!
>>>> Some people might include the entire population of France, where the
>>>> modern "correct" spelling of the place from which the family took its
>>>> surname is "Canteloup". Somewhere on the internet they are probably
>>>> called "de Rockmelon".
>>>>
>>>> Peter Stewart
>>> Life is a mystery. My views are irrelevant.
>>> London 4 Aug 1891: The marriage of Viscount Cantelupe, only surviving son of Earl and Countess De La Warr, to the Hon. Muriel Agnes, daughter of Lord Brassey, was solemnized yesterday.
>> The title Viscount Cantelupe was created in March 1761 along with the
>> earldom of De la Warr, for John West, lord De la Warr. Not exactly a
>> compelling orthographic standard for the medieval family of Cantilupe.
>>
>> For some reason it is no longer used as the courtesy title for the heir
>> to the earldom, who is known instead as Lord Buckhurst.
>>
>> Peter Stewart
>>
>> Peter Stewart
> What about Milicent De Cantelupe d 1279 married Eon De La Zouche about Dec 1273; Mother of William b 1276 Lord Zouche. It appears nobody knew the correct spelling of their own name. Thank God we have Oxford Dictionary to guide us.

No-one knew "correct" spelling in English before such a notion became
accepted as a result of 18th-century lexicography. Not even the Zouche
family - according to CP vol iii p. 1, "The title of Lord Cantelope
[sic] was assumed by Lord Zouche of Harringworth in or before 1552, but
not on any good ground."

Peter Stewart

On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:40:07 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
> On 16-Jul-23 12:47 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 12:03:02 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
> >> On 16-Jul-23 11:32 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:41:47 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
> >>>> On 16-Jul-23 10:14 AM, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
> >>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 7:58:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Stewart wrote:
> >>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 8:17 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:22:22 AM UTC+10, taf wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 2:03:19 AM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the correct spelling is De Cantelupe.
> >>>>>>>> There really isn't any such thing as a 'correct spelling'. There is often a typical way that historicans have come to represent a name, and there is certain a value in using these common forms for the sake of maintaining uniformity (and as bait for what would be the most common internet search terms).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Still, at the time in question, there was no concept of 'correct spelling', and one typically sees a range of phoenetic approximations, as well as attempts at Latinizing, Anglicizing, Gallicizing, etc. As a sociological phenomenon, standardization of surname spelling came only in the post-medieval era, and likewise, historiographical standardization was a later occurrence, the result either of repetition of the arbitrary personal preferences selected by the authors whose works were more broadly consulted, or anachronistic application of the much later standardized form adopted by surviving families from the historians' own time. This leads to a sort of community consensus usage among modern scholars, but that can all be changed by a single influential scholar selecting a different form they prefer. 'Typical' shouldn't be mistaken for 'correct'.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> taf
> >>>>>>> In English E is spelled as I and I is spelled as AI: Meny Greek names are modified to sound Greek like PETRIDIS --> PETRIDES. CANTELUPE in ENGLISH sounds CANTILUPE. Anyway I never tell people what to do or what to believe.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Saint Thomas de Cantelupe, also called Thomas Of Cantelupe, or Thomas Of Hereford, Cantelupe also spelled Cantilupe, (born c. 1218, Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, Eng.—died Aug. 25, 1282, Montefiascone, near Orvieto, Papal States; canonized 1320, feast day October 3), reformist, educator, English church prelate, bishop, and defender of episcopal jurisdiction who played an important role in the Barons’ War.
> >>>>>> If you are keen on St Thomas, you might care to observe this note in his
> >>>>>> Wikipedia article: "The commonly accepted modern spelling is
> >>>>>> "Cantilupe", as used by the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography for
> >>>>>> all members of this family, and which is followed in this article."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ODNB actually uses the inelegant but sensibly indecisive "Cantilipe
> >>>>>> [Cantelupe]".
> >>>>>> Peter Stewart
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
> >>>>>> www.avg.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm glad that you posted this... I was confused myself between Cantelowe and Cantilupe. If Cantilupe is the standard spelling for Oxford, then it should be the standard I would hope, but then again some people I guess have to quibble!
> >>>> Some people might include the entire population of France, where the
> >>>> modern "correct" spelling of the place from which the family took its
> >>>> surname is "Canteloup". Somewhere on the internet they are probably
> >>>> called "de Rockmelon".
> >>>>
> >>>> Peter Stewart
> >>> Life is a mystery. My views are irrelevant.
> >>> London 4 Aug 1891: The marriage of Viscount Cantelupe, only surviving son of Earl and Countess De La Warr, to the Hon. Muriel Agnes, daughter of Lord Brassey, was solemnized yesterday.
> >> The title Viscount Cantelupe was created in March 1761 along with the
> >> earldom of De la Warr, for John West, lord De la Warr. Not exactly a
> >> compelling orthographic standard for the medieval family of Cantilupe.
> >>
> >> For some reason it is no longer used as the courtesy title for the heir
> >> to the earldom, who is known instead as Lord Buckhurst.
> >>
> >> Peter Stewart
> >>
> >> Peter Stewart
> > What about Milicent De Cantelupe d 1279 married Eon De La Zouche about Dec 1273; Mother of William b 1276 Lord Zouche. It appears nobody knew the correct spelling of their own name. Thank God we have Oxford Dictionary to guide us.
> No-one knew "correct" spelling in English before such a notion became
> accepted as a result of 18th-century lexicography. Not even the Zouche
> family - according to CP vol iii p. 1, "The title of Lord Cantelope
> [sic] was assumed by Lord Zouche of Harringworth in or before 1552, but
> not on any good ground."
>
> Peter Stewart
What about Sir Thomas West, of Hempston De Cantelupe who took part in the Battle of Crécy 26 Aug 1346. Milicent's father William unlike his daughter, he uses the name De Cantilupe. In most family trees, based on Leon's work, the name Cantilupe pops up here and there, for no reason. Anyway, they are not related to me, so my interests is based on curiosity.

On 16-Jul-23 4:13 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:40:07 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>> On 16-Jul-23 12:47 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 12:03:02 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>> On 16-Jul-23 11:32 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:41:47 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 10:14 AM, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 7:58:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 8:17 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:22:22 AM UTC+10, taf wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 2:03:19 AM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the correct spelling is De Cantelupe.
>>>>>>>>>> There really isn't any such thing as a 'correct spelling'. There is often a typical way that historicans have come to represent a name, and there is certain a value in using these common forms for the sake of maintaining uniformity (and as bait for what would be the most common internet search terms).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Still, at the time in question, there was no concept of 'correct spelling', and one typically sees a range of phoenetic approximations, as well as attempts at Latinizing, Anglicizing, Gallicizing, etc. As a sociological phenomenon, standardization of surname spelling came only in the post-medieval era, and likewise, historiographical standardization was a later occurrence, the result either of repetition of the arbitrary personal preferences selected by the authors whose works were more broadly consulted, or anachronistic application of the much later standardized form adopted by surviving families from the historians' own time. This leads to a sort of community consensus usage among modern scholars, but that can all be changed by a single influential scholar selecting a different form they prefer. 'Typical' shouldn't be mistaken for 'correct'.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> taf
>>>>>>>>> In English E is spelled as I and I is spelled as AI: Meny Greek names are modified to sound Greek like PETRIDIS --> PETRIDES. CANTELUPE in ENGLISH sounds CANTILUPE. Anyway I never tell people what to do or what to believe.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Saint Thomas de Cantelupe, also called Thomas Of Cantelupe, or Thomas Of Hereford, Cantelupe also spelled Cantilupe, (born c. 1218, Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, Eng.—died Aug. 25, 1282, Montefiascone, near Orvieto, Papal States; canonized 1320, feast day October 3), reformist, educator, English church prelate, bishop, and defender of episcopal jurisdiction who played an important role in the Barons’ War.
>>>>>>>> If you are keen on St Thomas, you might care to observe this note in his
>>>>>>>> Wikipedia article: "The commonly accepted modern spelling is
>>>>>>>> "Cantilupe", as used by the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography for
>>>>>>>> all members of this family, and which is followed in this article."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ODNB actually uses the inelegant but sensibly indecisive "Cantilipe
>>>>>>>> [Cantelupe]".
>>>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
>>>>>>>> www.avg.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm glad that you posted this... I was confused myself between Cantelowe and Cantilupe. If Cantilupe is the standard spelling for Oxford, then it should be the standard I would hope, but then again some people I guess have to quibble!
>>>>>> Some people might include the entire population of France, where the
>>>>>> modern "correct" spelling of the place from which the family took its
>>>>>> surname is "Canteloup". Somewhere on the internet they are probably
>>>>>> called "de Rockmelon".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>> Life is a mystery. My views are irrelevant.
>>>>> London 4 Aug 1891: The marriage of Viscount Cantelupe, only surviving son of Earl and Countess De La Warr, to the Hon. Muriel Agnes, daughter of Lord Brassey, was solemnized yesterday.
>>>> The title Viscount Cantelupe was created in March 1761 along with the
>>>> earldom of De la Warr, for John West, lord De la Warr. Not exactly a
>>>> compelling orthographic standard for the medieval family of Cantilupe.
>>>>
>>>> For some reason it is no longer used as the courtesy title for the heir
>>>> to the earldom, who is known instead as Lord Buckhurst.
>>>>
>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>
>>>> Peter Stewart
>>> What about Milicent De Cantelupe d 1279 married Eon De La Zouche about Dec 1273; Mother of William b 1276 Lord Zouche. It appears nobody knew the correct spelling of their own name. Thank God we have Oxford Dictionary to guide us.
>> No-one knew "correct" spelling in English before such a notion became
>> accepted as a result of 18th-century lexicography. Not even the Zouche
>> family - according to CP vol iii p. 1, "The title of Lord Cantelope
>> [sic] was assumed by Lord Zouche of Harringworth in or before 1552, but
>> not on any good ground."
>>
>> Peter Stewart
> What about Sir Thomas West, of Hempston De Cantelupe who took part in the Battle of Crécy 26 Aug 1346. Milicent's father William unlike his daughter, he uses the name De Cantilupe. In most family trees, based on Leon's work, the name Cantilupe pops up here and there, for no reason. Anyway, they are not related to me, so my interests is based on curiosity.

How do you know that Sir Thomas West or Milicent's father William
themselves spelled the name "Cantelupe", rather than that this spelling
was arbitrarily used in reference to them later?

Do you still not get the point - made very clearly by taf - that there
was no such thing as "correct" vernacular spelling in England throughout
the medieval era?

Peter Stewart

As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.

Bob

On 16-Jul-23 5:28 PM, Robert Allen wrote:
> As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.

Belt up - when you start a thread on SGM you don't get to own it or to
determine every byway that may be pursued within it.

Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 11:13:42 PM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:40:07 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
> > On 16-Jul-23 12:47 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 12:03:02 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
> > >> On 16-Jul-23 11:32 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> > >>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:41:47 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
> > >>>> On 16-Jul-23 10:14 AM, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
> > >>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 7:58:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Stewart wrote:
> > >>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 8:17 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:22:22 AM UTC+10, taf wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 2:03:19 AM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the correct spelling is De Cantelupe..
> > >>>>>>>> There really isn't any such thing as a 'correct spelling'. There is often a typical way that historicans have come to represent a name, and there is certain a value in using these common forms for the sake of maintaining uniformity (and as bait for what would be the most common internet search terms).
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Still, at the time in question, there was no concept of 'correct spelling', and one typically sees a range of phoenetic approximations, as well as attempts at Latinizing, Anglicizing, Gallicizing, etc. As a sociological phenomenon, standardization of surname spelling came only in the post-medieval era, and likewise, historiographical standardization was a later occurrence, the result either of repetition of the arbitrary personal preferences selected by the authors whose works were more broadly consulted, or anachronistic application of the much later standardized form adopted by surviving families from the historians' own time. This leads to a sort of community consensus usage among modern scholars, but that can all be changed by a single influential scholar selecting a different form they prefer. 'Typical' shouldn't be mistaken for 'correct'.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> taf
> > >>>>>>> In English E is spelled as I and I is spelled as AI: Meny Greek names are modified to sound Greek like PETRIDIS --> PETRIDES. CANTELUPE in ENGLISH sounds CANTILUPE. Anyway I never tell people what to do or what to believe.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Saint Thomas de Cantelupe, also called Thomas Of Cantelupe, or Thomas Of Hereford, Cantelupe also spelled Cantilupe, (born c. 1218, Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, Eng.—died Aug. 25, 1282, Montefiascone, near Orvieto, Papal States; canonized 1320, feast day October 3), reformist, educator, English church prelate, bishop, and defender of episcopal jurisdiction who played an important role in the Barons’ War.
> > >>>>>> If you are keen on St Thomas, you might care to observe this note in his
> > >>>>>> Wikipedia article: "The commonly accepted modern spelling is
> > >>>>>> "Cantilupe", as used by the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography for
> > >>>>>> all members of this family, and which is followed in this article."
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> ODNB actually uses the inelegant but sensibly indecisive "Cantilipe
> > >>>>>> [Cantelupe]".
> > >>>>>> Peter Stewart
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
> > >>>>>> www.avg.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm glad that you posted this... I was confused myself between Cantelowe and Cantilupe. If Cantilupe is the standard spelling for Oxford, then it should be the standard I would hope, but then again some people I guess have to quibble!
> > >>>> Some people might include the entire population of France, where the
> > >>>> modern "correct" spelling of the place from which the family took its
> > >>>> surname is "Canteloup". Somewhere on the internet they are probably
> > >>>> called "de Rockmelon".
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Peter Stewart
> > >>> Life is a mystery. My views are irrelevant.
> > >>> London 4 Aug 1891: The marriage of Viscount Cantelupe, only surviving son of Earl and Countess De La Warr, to the Hon. Muriel Agnes, daughter of Lord Brassey, was solemnized yesterday.
> > >> The title Viscount Cantelupe was created in March 1761 along with the
> > >> earldom of De la Warr, for John West, lord De la Warr. Not exactly a
> > >> compelling orthographic standard for the medieval family of Cantilupe.
> > >>
> > >> For some reason it is no longer used as the courtesy title for the heir
> > >> to the earldom, who is known instead as Lord Buckhurst.
> > >>
> > >> Peter Stewart
> > >>
> > >> Peter Stewart
> > > What about Milicent De Cantelupe d 1279 married Eon De La Zouche about Dec 1273; Mother of William b 1276 Lord Zouche. It appears nobody knew the correct spelling of their own name. Thank God we have Oxford Dictionary to guide us.
> > No-one knew "correct" spelling in English before such a notion became
> > accepted as a result of 18th-century lexicography. Not even the Zouche
> > family - according to CP vol iii p. 1, "The title of Lord Cantelope
> > [sic] was assumed by Lord Zouche of Harringworth in or before 1552, but
> > not on any good ground."
> >
> > Peter Stewart
> What about Sir Thomas West, of Hempston De Cantelupe who took part in the Battle of Crécy 26 Aug 1346. Milicent's father William unlike his daughter, he uses the name De Cantilupe. In most family trees, based on Leon's work, the name Cantilupe pops up here and there, for no reason. Anyway, they are not related to me, so my interests is based on curiosity.

I will throw a herring into the pie by bringing up this message from DR (in the archives)
Showing yet another spelling

Subj: Re: Parentage of Sir William de Cantelowe, Steward of the King's Household (died 1239)
Date: 12/4/2010 1:45:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: royalancestry@msn.com <mailto:royalancestry@msn.com>
To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com <mailto:gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>

There were three successive William de Cantelowe's and here are their
dates of death:

1. William de Cantelowe I - died 7 April 1239 (Source: ODNB). He married Masceline de Bracy.

2. William de Cantelowe II - died 5 March 1250/1 (Source: Luard Annales Monastici 1 (Rolls Ser. 36) (1864): 143 (Tewkesbury Annals sub 5 March 1250/1: “Died ... William de Cantelowe in St. Peter's Cathedral, Pershore Abbey [Worcestershire] 5 March [1250/1].”). He married (1st) Milicent de Gournay, and (2nd) Maud Fitz Geoffrey.

3. William de Cantelowe III - died 25 September 1254 (Source: ODNB). He married Eve de Brewes.

On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 9:40:07 PM UTC-7, Peter Stewart wrote:
> On 16-Jul-23 12:47 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> > What about Milicent De Cantelupe d 1279 married Eon De La Zouche about Dec 1273; Mother of William b 1276 Lord Zouche. It appears nobody knew the correct spelling of their own name. Thank God we have Oxford Dictionary to guide us.
> No-one knew "correct" spelling in English before such a notion became
> accepted as a result of 18th-century lexicography.

It is perhaps worth mentioning two other relevant factors.

The 18th-century lexicographers and those who followed them were not just passive cataloguers of historical usage. They often invented idealized retrospective rules, and modified historical spellings into never-before-seen forms to reflect these false rules. This is part of the reason why English spelling is such a quagmire for non-native speakers, with seemingly random silent letters that had never been part of words before the lexicographers 'perfected' the language. The relevance for surname spelling is that the forms that came to be standard after this time not uncommonly reflect the later retrospective 'rules' rather than what spellings were actually used at the time.

Also, one has to be careful with regard to the phoenetic renderings used in the medieval era, because they didn't pronounce things the same as modern English. This is obvious for Anglo-Norman French, but is also true for native Middle English, due to the Great Vowel Shift that began at the very end of the medieval period. How a surname spelling would be pronounced in modern English diction is a rather poor indication of how it would have been pronounced at the time.

taf

On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
> As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
>
> Bob

You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."

I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?

I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.

Darrell

On 16-Jul-23 11:11 PM, Will Johnson wrote:
> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 11:13:42 PM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:40:07 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>> On 16-Jul-23 12:47 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 12:03:02 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 11:32 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:41:47 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 10:14 AM, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 7:58:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 8:17 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:22:22 AM UTC+10, taf wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 2:03:19 AM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the correct spelling is De Cantelupe.
>>>>>>>>>>> There really isn't any such thing as a 'correct spelling'. There is often a typical way that historicans have come to represent a name, and there is certain a value in using these common forms for the sake of maintaining uniformity (and as bait for what would be the most common internet search terms).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Still, at the time in question, there was no concept of 'correct spelling', and one typically sees a range of phoenetic approximations, as well as attempts at Latinizing, Anglicizing, Gallicizing, etc. As a sociological phenomenon, standardization of surname spelling came only in the post-medieval era, and likewise, historiographical standardization was a later occurrence, the result either of repetition of the arbitrary personal preferences selected by the authors whose works were more broadly consulted, or anachronistic application of the much later standardized form adopted by surviving families from the historians' own time. This leads to a sort of community consensus usage among modern scholars, but that can all be changed by a single influential scholar selecting a different form they prefer. 'Typical' shouldn't be mistaken for 'correct'.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> taf
>>>>>>>>>> In English E is spelled as I and I is spelled as AI: Meny Greek names are modified to sound Greek like PETRIDIS --> PETRIDES. CANTELUPE in ENGLISH sounds CANTILUPE. Anyway I never tell people what to do or what to believe.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Saint Thomas de Cantelupe, also called Thomas Of Cantelupe, or Thomas Of Hereford, Cantelupe also spelled Cantilupe, (born c. 1218, Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, Eng.—died Aug. 25, 1282, Montefiascone, near Orvieto, Papal States; canonized 1320, feast day October 3), reformist, educator, English church prelate, bishop, and defender of episcopal jurisdiction who played an important role in the Barons’ War.
>>>>>>>>> If you are keen on St Thomas, you might care to observe this note in his
>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia article: "The commonly accepted modern spelling is
>>>>>>>>> "Cantilupe", as used by the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography for
>>>>>>>>> all members of this family, and which is followed in this article."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ODNB actually uses the inelegant but sensibly indecisive "Cantilipe
>>>>>>>>> [Cantelupe]".
>>>>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
>>>>>>>>> www.avg.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm glad that you posted this... I was confused myself between Cantelowe and Cantilupe. If Cantilupe is the standard spelling for Oxford, then it should be the standard I would hope, but then again some people I guess have to quibble!
>>>>>>> Some people might include the entire population of France, where the
>>>>>>> modern "correct" spelling of the place from which the family took its
>>>>>>> surname is "Canteloup". Somewhere on the internet they are probably
>>>>>>> called "de Rockmelon".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>> Life is a mystery. My views are irrelevant.
>>>>>> London 4 Aug 1891: The marriage of Viscount Cantelupe, only surviving son of Earl and Countess De La Warr, to the Hon. Muriel Agnes, daughter of Lord Brassey, was solemnized yesterday.
>>>>> The title Viscount Cantelupe was created in March 1761 along with the
>>>>> earldom of De la Warr, for John West, lord De la Warr. Not exactly a
>>>>> compelling orthographic standard for the medieval family of Cantilupe.
>>>>>
>>>>> For some reason it is no longer used as the courtesy title for the heir
>>>>> to the earldom, who is known instead as Lord Buckhurst.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>> What about Milicent De Cantelupe d 1279 married Eon De La Zouche about Dec 1273; Mother of William b 1276 Lord Zouche. It appears nobody knew the correct spelling of their own name. Thank God we have Oxford Dictionary to guide us.
>>> No-one knew "correct" spelling in English before such a notion became
>>> accepted as a result of 18th-century lexicography. Not even the Zouche
>>> family - according to CP vol iii p. 1, "The title of Lord Cantelope
>>> [sic] was assumed by Lord Zouche of Harringworth in or before 1552, but
>>> not on any good ground."
>>>
>>> Peter Stewart
>> What about Sir Thomas West, of Hempston De Cantelupe who took part in the Battle of Crécy 26 Aug 1346. Milicent's father William unlike his daughter, he uses the name De Cantilupe. In most family trees, based on Leon's work, the name Cantilupe pops up here and there, for no reason. Anyway, they are not related to me, so my interests is based on curiosity.
>
> I will throw a herring into the pie by bringing up this message from DR (in the archives)
> Showing yet another spelling
>
> Subj: Re: Parentage of Sir William de Cantelowe, Steward of the King's Household (died 1239)
> Date: 12/4/2010 1:45:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
> From: royalancestry@msn.com <mailto:royalancestry@msn.com>
> To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com <mailto:gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
>
> There were three successive William de Cantelowe's and here are their
> dates of death:
>
> 1. William de Cantelowe I - died 7 April 1239 (Source: ODNB). He married Masceline de Bracy.
>
> 2. William de Cantelowe II - died 5 March 1250/1 (Source: Luard Annales Monastici 1 (Rolls Ser. 36) (1864): 143 (Tewkesbury Annals sub 5 March 1250/1: “Died ... William de Cantelowe in St. Peter's Cathedral, Pershore Abbey [Worcestershire] 5 March [1250/1].”). He married (1st) Milicent de Gournay, and (2nd) Maud Fitz Geoffrey.
>
> 3. William de Cantelowe III - died 25 September 1254 (Source: ODNB). He married Eve de Brewes.

This family's entry in CP is under "Cauntelo". Shakepeare's mother was
from Aston Cantelow, in Warwickshire, that took its name from the
family. The best-known person in recent time bearing a form of this as a
surname is the singer April Cantelo. These variants - and others - still
exist, so that any alleged "correct" version has no special authority
behind it.

Peter Stewart

On 17-Jul-23 8:38 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
> On 16-Jul-23 11:11 PM, Will Johnson wrote:
>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 11:13:42 PM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis
>> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:40:07 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>> On 16-Jul-23 12:47 PM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 12:03:02 PM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 11:32 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:41:47 AM UTC+10, Peter Stewart wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 10:14 AM, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 7:58:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Stewart
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 16-Jul-23 8:17 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 2:22:22 AM UTC+10, taf wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 2:03:19 AM UTC-7, George
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tsambourakis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is that the correct spelling is De Cantelupe.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There really isn't any such thing as a 'correct spelling'.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is often a typical way that historicans have come to
>>>>>>>>>>>> represent a name, and there is certain a value in using
>>>>>>>>>>>> these common forms for the sake of maintaining uniformity
>>>>>>>>>>>> (and as bait for what would be the most common internet
>>>>>>>>>>>> search terms).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Still, at the time in question, there was no concept of
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'correct spelling', and one typically sees a range of
>>>>>>>>>>>> phoenetic approximations, as well as attempts at Latinizing,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anglicizing, Gallicizing, etc. As a sociological phenomenon,
>>>>>>>>>>>> standardization of surname spelling came only in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> post-medieval era, and likewise, historiographical
>>>>>>>>>>>> standardization was a later occurrence, the result either of
>>>>>>>>>>>> repetition of the arbitrary personal preferences selected by
>>>>>>>>>>>> the authors whose works were more broadly consulted, or
>>>>>>>>>>>> anachronistic application of the much later standardized
>>>>>>>>>>>> form adopted by surviving families from the historians' own
>>>>>>>>>>>> time. This leads to a sort of community consensus usage
>>>>>>>>>>>> among modern scholars, but that can all be changed by a
>>>>>>>>>>>> single influential scholar selecting a different form they
>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer. 'Typical' shouldn't be mistaken for 'correct'.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> taf
>>>>>>>>>>> In English E is spelled as I and I is spelled as AI: Meny
>>>>>>>>>>> Greek names are modified to sound Greek like PETRIDIS -->
>>>>>>>>>>> PETRIDES. CANTELUPE in ENGLISH sounds CANTILUPE. Anyway I
>>>>>>>>>>> never tell people what to do or what to believe.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Saint Thomas de Cantelupe, also called Thomas Of Cantelupe,
>>>>>>>>>>> or Thomas Of Hereford, Cantelupe also spelled Cantilupe,
>>>>>>>>>>> (born c. 1218, Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, Eng.—died Aug. 25,
>>>>>>>>>>> 1282, Montefiascone, near Orvieto, Papal States; canonized
>>>>>>>>>>> 1320, feast day October 3), reformist, educator, English
>>>>>>>>>>> church prelate, bishop, and defender of episcopal
>>>>>>>>>>> jurisdiction who played an important role in the Barons’ War.
>>>>>>>>>> If you are keen on St Thomas, you might care to observe this
>>>>>>>>>> note in his
>>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia article: "The commonly accepted modern spelling is
>>>>>>>>>> "Cantilupe", as used by the Oxford Dictionary of National
>>>>>>>>>> Biography for
>>>>>>>>>> all members of this family, and which is followed in this
>>>>>>>>>> article."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ODNB actually uses the inelegant but sensibly indecisive
>>>>>>>>>> "Cantilipe
>>>>>>>>>> [Cantelupe]".
>>>>>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus
>>>>>>>>>> software.
>>>>>>>>>> www.avg.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm glad that you posted this... I was confused myself between
>>>>>>>>> Cantelowe and Cantilupe. If Cantilupe is the standard spelling
>>>>>>>>> for Oxford, then it should be the standard I would hope, but
>>>>>>>>> then again some people I guess have to quibble!
>>>>>>>> Some people might include the entire population of France, where
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> modern "correct" spelling of the place from which the family
>>>>>>>> took its
>>>>>>>> surname is "Canteloup". Somewhere on the internet they are probably
>>>>>>>> called "de Rockmelon".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>>> Life is a mystery. My views are irrelevant.
>>>>>>> London 4 Aug 1891: The marriage of Viscount Cantelupe, only
>>>>>>> surviving son of Earl and Countess De La Warr, to the Hon. Muriel
>>>>>>> Agnes, daughter of Lord Brassey, was solemnized yesterday.
>>>>>> The title Viscount Cantelupe was created in March 1761 along with the
>>>>>> earldom of De la Warr, for John West, lord De la Warr. Not exactly a
>>>>>> compelling orthographic standard for the medieval family of
>>>>>> Cantilupe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For some reason it is no longer used as the courtesy title for the
>>>>>> heir
>>>>>> to the earldom, who is known instead as Lord Buckhurst.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter Stewart
>>>>> What about Milicent De Cantelupe d 1279 married Eon De La Zouche
>>>>> about Dec 1273; Mother of William b 1276 Lord Zouche. It appears
>>>>> nobody knew the correct spelling of their own name. Thank God we
>>>>> have Oxford Dictionary to guide us.
>>>> No-one knew "correct" spelling in English before such a notion became
>>>> accepted as a result of 18th-century lexicography. Not even the Zouche
>>>> family - according to CP vol iii p. 1, "The title of Lord Cantelope
>>>> [sic] was assumed by Lord Zouche of Harringworth in or before 1552, but
>>>> not on any good ground."
>>>>
>>>> Peter Stewart
>>> What about Sir Thomas West, of Hempston De Cantelupe who took part in
>>> the Battle of Crécy 26 Aug 1346. Milicent's father William unlike his
>>> daughter, he uses the name De Cantilupe. In most family trees, based
>>> on Leon's work, the name Cantilupe pops up here and there, for no
>>> reason. Anyway, they are not related to me, so my interests is based
>>> on curiosity.
>>
>> I will throw a herring into the pie by bringing up this message from
>> DR (in the archives)
>> Showing yet another spelling
>>
>> Subj:    Re: Parentage of Sir William de Cantelowe, Steward of the
>> King's Household (died 1239)
>> Date:    12/4/2010 1:45:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
>> From:    royalancestry@msn.com <mailto:royalancestry@msn.com>
>> To:    gen-medieval@rootsweb.com <mailto:gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
>>
>> There were three successive William de Cantelowe's and here are their
>> dates of death:
>>
>> 1. William de Cantelowe I - died 7 April 1239 (Source: ODNB). He
>> married Masceline de Bracy.
>>
>> 2. William de Cantelowe II - died 5 March 1250/1 (Source: Luard
>> Annales Monastici 1 (Rolls Ser. 36) (1864): 143 (Tewkesbury Annals sub
>> 5 March 1250/1: “Died ... William de Cantelowe in St. Peter's
>> Cathedral, Pershore Abbey [Worcestershire] 5 March [1250/1].”). He
>> married (1st) Milicent de Gournay, and (2nd) Maud Fitz Geoffrey.
>>
>> 3. William de Cantelowe III - died 25 September 1254 (Source: ODNB).
>> He married Eve de Brewes.
>
> This family's entry in CP is under "Cauntelo". Shakepeare's mother was
> from Aston Cantelow, in Warwickshire, that took its name from the
> family.

On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:02:30 AM UTC-7, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
> > As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
> >
> > Bob
> You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."
>
> I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?
>
> I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.
>
> Darrell
I did get help from Peter. The help was as to one of several problem areas I was asking for help on and/or discussion about. The help I got was a secondary medieval source that carries some weight to establish that Agnes, wife of our Robert St. John was a de Cantilupe/Cantelupe. There were several other questions I asked in my initial post that have not be addressed by anybody yet. From which William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe does Agnes descend? The William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe of Candleston Castle, Glamorgan Wales, or the William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Millicent de Gournay? Or, where these two William of Cantilupes/Cantelupes the same person? Did Robert de St. John have any connection with the Cantilupe/Cantelupe family of Wales or with the manor/castle of Fonmon in Glamorgan, Wales, as some others have suggested by saying that his son, William de St. John, brother to our John St. John "received Fonmon in appendage" (suggesting it was handed down to him from his father)? I also was seeking help and discussion on an a claim that seem incredible to me that Agnes de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Robert St. John was descended from Howel Fychan ap Howel through Hopkin ap Howell Fychan. It is the help and discussion I was seeking on these matters yet to be commented upon that this very lengthy conversation about the correct spelling of the Cantilupe/Cantellupe surname has hijacked and diluted. I think I am being totally fair in my criticism.

Since my initial posting I have come into possession of a three pages from Peter Bartrum's Welsh Genealogy collection. His chart/page 41 is headed by Hokpin ap Howell Fychan of Tregantlle. Is says that one of his children was Sir William Cantelupe of Tregantlle who married Maud, daughter of Sir William de Londres. There is a footnote 2 after "Sir William de Londres" that says "2. So SA 33, by Glam 215 substitutes Sir Henry Humphreville; probably correctly"

Along these same lines, there is an article in "The National Library of Wales Journal", Vol. XVII (Summer 1972) entitled "The Ancestors of My Lord Herbert" , pages 238-247. At page 243, it says "By the sayd Gwenlliant Hopkyn ap Howel gat (by her) ij synes & ix doghters. The names of the sones: Sir William Kawntlo, knyght, lord of Kawntlestown . . . ." On page 244, it says - "Item. Roger d'Wmferuyll,* barwn of Penbrwk* maryd the Erl of wrwic is dochter & gat a doghter by her maryd [to] Sir Wiliam [Cantlo of] Cantloistown. Wihich doghter was heyr to her fathr, & mother to Hopkyn ap Howel ychan, father to the ix doghter above sayd . . . ."

I don't want this to turn into an Umfreville discussion, about the family or the spelling, but I totally distrust that Roger de Umfrevlle/d'Wmferuyll was an existing person in Glamorgan Wales. It is well established that a Umfreville family owned 4 fees of Penmark in Glamorgan Wales, but no Roger de Umfreville is known have existed in that family.

None of this information proves that this William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe/Cantlo of Cantloiston/Candleston manor/castle in Glamorgan Wales had a daughter name Agnes or a connection with Robert de St. John. But some people are jumping down this rabbit hole and it confusing the genealogy of Robert St. John and his wife, Agnes, daughter of a William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe.

Bob

On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 4:17:45 PM UTC-7, Robert Allen wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:02:30 AM UTC-7, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
> > > As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling.. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
> > >
> > > Bob
> > You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."
> >
> > I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?
> >
> > I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.
> >
> > Darrell
> I did get help from Peter. The help was as to one of several problem areas I was asking for help on and/or discussion about. The help I got was a secondary medieval source that carries some weight to establish that Agnes, wife of our Robert St. John was a de Cantilupe/Cantelupe. There were several other questions I asked in my initial post that have not be addressed by anybody yet. From which William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe does Agnes descend? The William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe of Candleston Castle, Glamorgan Wales, or the William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Millicent de Gournay? Or, where these two William of Cantilupes/Cantelupes the same person? Did Robert de St. John have any connection with the Cantilupe/Cantelupe family of Wales or with the manor/castle of Fonmon in Glamorgan, Wales, as some others have suggested by saying that his son, William de St. John, brother to our John St. John "received Fonmon in appendage" (suggesting it was handed down to him from his father)? I also was seeking help and discussion on an a claim that seem incredible to me that Agnes de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Robert St. John was descended from Howel Fychan ap Howel through Hopkin ap Howell Fychan. It is the help and discussion I was seeking on these matters yet to be commented upon that this very lengthy conversation about the correct spelling of the Cantilupe/Cantellupe surname has hijacked and diluted.. I think I am being totally fair in my criticism.
>
> Since my initial posting I have come into possession of a three pages from Peter Bartrum's Welsh Genealogy collection. His chart/page 41 is headed by Hokpin ap Howell Fychan of Tregantlle. Is says that one of his children was Sir William Cantelupe of Tregantlle who married Maud, daughter of Sir William de Londres. There is a footnote 2 after "Sir William de Londres" that says "2. So SA 33, by Glam 215 substitutes Sir Henry Humphreville; probably correctly"
>
> Along these same lines, there is an article in "The National Library of Wales Journal", Vol. XVII (Summer 1972) entitled "The Ancestors of My Lord Herbert" , pages 238-247. At page 243, it says "By the sayd Gwenlliant Hopkyn ap Howel gat (by her) ij synes & ix doghters. The names of the sones: Sir William Kawntlo, knyght, lord of Kawntlestown . . . ." On page 244, it says - "Item. Roger d'Wmferuyll,* barwn of Penbrwk* maryd the Erl of wrwic is dochter & gat a doghter by her maryd [to] Sir Wiliam [Cantlo of] Cantloistown. Wihich doghter was heyr to her fathr, & mother to Hopkyn ap Howel ychan, father to the ix doghter above sayd . . . ."
>
> I don't want this to turn into an Umfreville discussion, about the family or the spelling, but I totally distrust that Roger de Umfrevlle/d'Wmferuyll was an existing person in Glamorgan Wales. It is well established that a Umfreville family owned 4 fees of Penmark in Glamorgan Wales, but no Roger de Umfreville is known have existed in that family.
>
> None of this information proves that this William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe/Cantlo of Cantloiston/Candleston manor/castle in Glamorgan Wales had a daughter name Agnes or a connection with Robert de St. John. But some people are jumping down this rabbit hole and it confusing the genealogy of Robert St.. John and his wife, Agnes, daughter of a William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe.
>
> Bob
Sorry, here is the link to The National Library of Wales Journal article I mentioned in the most recent post. https://journals.library.wales/view/1277425/1284228/28#?xywh=-1697%2C-9%2C6662%2C4276

On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:26:56 AM UTC+10, Robert Allen wrote:
> On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 4:17:45 PM UTC-7, Robert Allen wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:02:30 AM UTC-7, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
> > > > As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
> > > >
> > > > Bob
> > > You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."
> > >
> > > I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?
> > >
> > > I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.
> > >
> > > Darrell
> > I did get help from Peter. The help was as to one of several problem areas I was asking for help on and/or discussion about. The help I got was a secondary medieval source that carries some weight to establish that Agnes, wife of our Robert St. John was a de Cantilupe/Cantelupe. There were several other questions I asked in my initial post that have not be addressed by anybody yet. From which William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe does Agnes descend? The William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe of Candleston Castle, Glamorgan Wales, or the William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Millicent de Gournay? Or, where these two William of Cantilupes/Cantelupes the same person? Did Robert de St. John have any connection with the Cantilupe/Cantelupe family of Wales or with the manor/castle of Fonmon in Glamorgan, Wales, as some others have suggested by saying that his son, William de St. John, brother to our John St. John "received Fonmon in appendage" (suggesting it was handed down to him from his father)? I also was seeking help and discussion on an a claim that seem incredible to me that Agnes de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Robert St. John was descended from Howel Fychan ap Howel through Hopkin ap Howell Fychan. It is the help and discussion I was seeking on these matters yet to be commented upon that this very lengthy conversation about the correct spelling of the Cantilupe/Cantellupe surname has hijacked and diluted. I think I am being totally fair in my criticism.
> >
> > Since my initial posting I have come into possession of a three pages from Peter Bartrum's Welsh Genealogy collection. His chart/page 41 is headed by Hokpin ap Howell Fychan of Tregantlle. Is says that one of his children was Sir William Cantelupe of Tregantlle who married Maud, daughter of Sir William de Londres. There is a footnote 2 after "Sir William de Londres" that says "2. So SA 33, by Glam 215 substitutes Sir Henry Humphreville; probably correctly"
> >
> > Along these same lines, there is an article in "The National Library of Wales Journal", Vol. XVII (Summer 1972) entitled "The Ancestors of My Lord Herbert" , pages 238-247. At page 243, it says "By the sayd Gwenlliant Hopkyn ap Howel gat (by her) ij synes & ix doghters. The names of the sones: Sir William Kawntlo, knyght, lord of Kawntlestown . . . ." On page 244, it says - "Item. Roger d'Wmferuyll,* barwn of Penbrwk* maryd the Erl of wrwic is dochter & gat a doghter by her maryd [to] Sir Wiliam [Cantlo of] Cantloistown. Wihich doghter was heyr to her fathr, & mother to Hopkyn ap Howel ychan, father to the ix doghter above sayd . . . ."
> >
> > I don't want this to turn into an Umfreville discussion, about the family or the spelling, but I totally distrust that Roger de Umfrevlle/d'Wmferuyll was an existing person in Glamorgan Wales. It is well established that a Umfreville family owned 4 fees of Penmark in Glamorgan Wales, but no Roger de Umfreville is known have existed in that family.
> >
> > None of this information proves that this William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe/Cantlo of Cantloiston/Candleston manor/castle in Glamorgan Wales had a daughter name Agnes or a connection with Robert de St. John. But some people are jumping down this rabbit hole and it confusing the genealogy of Robert St. John and his wife, Agnes, daughter of a William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe.
> >
> > Bob
> Sorry, here is the link to The National Library of Wales Journal article I mentioned in the most recent post. https://journals.library.wales/view/1277425/1284228/28#?xywh=-1697%2C-9%2C6662%2C4276
Out of curiosity, I did a "simple" check. It appears that all comments and opinions are right.
I observed that the original name before 1250 was de Cantelupe. Than, for reasons unknown, in England, after about 1280, both options Cantelupe and Cantilupe were used. After 1300 Cantilupe was from frequently used in England than Cantelupe. Finally, a third option appeared "Cantelou". (Fathet Cantelupe --> daughter Cantelou). In England, after 1300, there were more individuals using the name Cantilupe. Today, It appears, "Cantelupe" is returning as the preferred name by some.

On 18-Jul-23 9:59 AM, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:26:56 AM UTC+10, Robert Allen wrote:
>> On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 4:17:45 PM UTC-7, Robert Allen wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:02:30 AM UTC-7, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
>>>>> As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob
>>>> You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."
>>>>
>>>> I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?
>>>>
>>>> I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.
>>>>
>>>> Darrell
>>> I did get help from Peter. The help was as to one of several problem areas I was asking for help on and/or discussion about. The help I got was a secondary medieval source that carries some weight to establish that Agnes, wife of our Robert St. John was a de Cantilupe/Cantelupe. There were several other questions I asked in my initial post that have not be addressed by anybody yet. From which William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe does Agnes descend? The William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe of Candleston Castle, Glamorgan Wales, or the William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Millicent de Gournay? Or, where these two William of Cantilupes/Cantelupes the same person? Did Robert de St. John have any connection with the Cantilupe/Cantelupe family of Wales or with the manor/castle of Fonmon in Glamorgan, Wales, as some others have suggested by saying that his son, William de St. John, brother to our John St. John "received Fonmon in appendage" (suggesting it was handed down to him from his father)? I also was seeking help and discussion on an a claim that seem incredible to me that Agnes de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Robert St. John was descended from Howel Fychan ap Howel through Hopkin ap Howell Fychan. It is the help and discussion I was seeking on these matters yet to be commented upon that this very lengthy conversation about the correct spelling of the Cantilupe/Cantellupe surname has hijacked and diluted. I think I am being totally fair in my criticism.
>>>
>>> Since my initial posting I have come into possession of a three pages from Peter Bartrum's Welsh Genealogy collection. His chart/page 41 is headed by Hokpin ap Howell Fychan of Tregantlle. Is says that one of his children was Sir William Cantelupe of Tregantlle who married Maud, daughter of Sir William de Londres. There is a footnote 2 after "Sir William de Londres" that says "2. So SA 33, by Glam 215 substitutes Sir Henry Humphreville; probably correctly"
>>>
>>> Along these same lines, there is an article in "The National Library of Wales Journal", Vol. XVII (Summer 1972) entitled "The Ancestors of My Lord Herbert" , pages 238-247. At page 243, it says "By the sayd Gwenlliant Hopkyn ap Howel gat (by her) ij synes & ix doghters. The names of the sones: Sir William Kawntlo, knyght, lord of Kawntlestown . . . ." On page 244, it says - "Item. Roger d'Wmferuyll,* barwn of Penbrwk* maryd the Erl of wrwic is dochter & gat a doghter by her maryd [to] Sir Wiliam [Cantlo of] Cantloistown. Wihich doghter was heyr to her fathr, & mother to Hopkyn ap Howel ychan, father to the ix doghter above sayd . . . ."
>>>
>>> I don't want this to turn into an Umfreville discussion, about the family or the spelling, but I totally distrust that Roger de Umfrevlle/d'Wmferuyll was an existing person in Glamorgan Wales. It is well established that a Umfreville family owned 4 fees of Penmark in Glamorgan Wales, but no Roger de Umfreville is known have existed in that family.
>>>
>>> None of this information proves that this William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe/Cantlo of Cantloiston/Candleston manor/castle in Glamorgan Wales had a daughter name Agnes or a connection with Robert de St. John. But some people are jumping down this rabbit hole and it confusing the genealogy of Robert St. John and his wife, Agnes, daughter of a William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe.
>>>
>>> Bob
>> Sorry, here is the link to The National Library of Wales Journal article I mentioned in the most recent post. https://journals.library.wales/view/1277425/1284228/28#?xywh=-1697%2C-9%2C6662%2C4276
> Out of curiosity, I did a "simple" check. It appears that all comments and opinions are right.
> I observed that the original name before 1250 was de Cantelupe. Than, for reasons unknown, in England, after about 1280, both options Cantelupe and Cantilupe were used. After 1300 Cantilupe was from frequently used in England than Cantelupe. Finally, a third option appeared "Cantelou". (Fathet Cantelupe --> daughter Cantelou). In England, after 1300, there were more individuals using the name Cantilupe. Today, It appears, "Cantelupe" is returning as the preferred name by some.
Whatever "simple" check you may have done, the outcome is either
misstated above or "simply" wrong: there was never a consistent spelling
before or after "about 1280". I doubt that you can have found any
support at all to offer for this preposterous idea in any vernacular
English or Anglo-Norman document, and in Latin documents where the
toponym does occur it is more usually in the form "de Cantilupo", less
frequently "de Cantelupo". Hence the name is most commonly rendered
either as closely to these alternatives as practicable, Cantilupe or
Cantelupe, by modern historians writing in English, with both given in ODNB.
Whatever problem you are still having with this reflects on your
comprehension, not on medieval orthographic conventions.
Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On 18-Jul-23 9:17 AM, Robert Allen wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:02:30 AM UTC-7, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
>>> As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
>>>
>>> Bob
>> You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."
>>
>> I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?
>>
>> I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.
>>
>> Darrell
> I did get help from Peter. The help was as to one of several problem areas I was asking for help on and/or discussion about. The help I got was a secondary medieval source that carries some weight to establish that Agnes, wife of our Robert St. John was a de Cantilupe/Cantelupe.

The first help I gave was to direct your attention to the only source
cited in CP, which for some reason you had neglected to check, and I
took the trouble to give you links to the Latin text, to an English
translation of this when you had got it wrong, and finally to the BL
scan of the original document. Then I provided you with a link to a PhD
thesis on the Corbet and Cantilupe families, which you have evidently
not yet taken the time and trouble to consider adequately.

Yet you come back here mewling like a baby that you have not received
exactly and exclusively what you wanted in making the original posting,
which by the way did not "create" a thread that comes into being when
one or more responses are added.

I for one could no longer care less about the welter of questions you
have raised. Do some purposeful work for yourself first if you want to
start a fruitful discussion here.

Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 4:59:19 PM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:26:56 AM UTC+10, Robert Allen wrote:
> > On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 4:17:45 PM UTC-7, Robert Allen wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:02:30 AM UTC-7, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
> > > > > As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bob
> > > > You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."
> > > >
> > > > I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?
> > > >
> > > > I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.
> > > >
> > > > Darrell
> > > I did get help from Peter. The help was as to one of several problem areas I was asking for help on and/or discussion about. The help I got was a secondary medieval source that carries some weight to establish that Agnes, wife of our Robert St. John was a de Cantilupe/Cantelupe. There were several other questions I asked in my initial post that have not be addressed by anybody yet. From which William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe does Agnes descend? The William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe of Candleston Castle, Glamorgan Wales, or the William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Millicent de Gournay? Or, where these two William of Cantilupes/Cantelupes the same person? Did Robert de St. John have any connection with the Cantilupe/Cantelupe family of Wales or with the manor/castle of Fonmon in Glamorgan, Wales, as some others have suggested by saying that his son, William de St. John, brother to our John St. John "received Fonmon in appendage" (suggesting it was handed down to him from his father)? I also was seeking help and discussion on an a claim that seem incredible to me that Agnes de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Robert St. John was descended from Howel Fychan ap Howel through Hopkin ap Howell Fychan. It is the help and discussion I was seeking on these matters yet to be commented upon that this very lengthy conversation about the correct spelling of the Cantilupe/Cantellupe surname has hijacked and diluted. I think I am being totally fair in my criticism.
> > >
> > > Since my initial posting I have come into possession of a three pages from Peter Bartrum's Welsh Genealogy collection. His chart/page 41 is headed by Hokpin ap Howell Fychan of Tregantlle. Is says that one of his children was Sir William Cantelupe of Tregantlle who married Maud, daughter of Sir William de Londres. There is a footnote 2 after "Sir William de Londres" that says "2. So SA 33, by Glam 215 substitutes Sir Henry Humphreville; probably correctly"
> > >
> > > Along these same lines, there is an article in "The National Library of Wales Journal", Vol. XVII (Summer 1972) entitled "The Ancestors of My Lord Herbert" , pages 238-247. At page 243, it says "By the sayd Gwenlliant Hopkyn ap Howel gat (by her) ij synes & ix doghters. The names of the sones: Sir William Kawntlo, knyght, lord of Kawntlestown . . . ." On page 244, it says - "Item. Roger d'Wmferuyll,* barwn of Penbrwk* maryd the Erl of wrwic is dochter & gat a doghter by her maryd [to] Sir Wiliam [Cantlo of] Cantloistown. Wihich doghter was heyr to her fathr, & mother to Hopkyn ap Howel ychan, father to the ix doghter above sayd . . . ."
> > >
> > > I don't want this to turn into an Umfreville discussion, about the family or the spelling, but I totally distrust that Roger de Umfrevlle/d'Wmferuyll was an existing person in Glamorgan Wales. It is well established that a Umfreville family owned 4 fees of Penmark in Glamorgan Wales, but no Roger de Umfreville is known have existed in that family.
> > >
> > > None of this information proves that this William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe/Cantlo of Cantloiston/Candleston manor/castle in Glamorgan Wales had a daughter name Agnes or a connection with Robert de St. John. But some people are jumping down this rabbit hole and it confusing the genealogy of Robert St. John and his wife, Agnes, daughter of a William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe.
> > >
> > > Bob
> > Sorry, here is the link to The National Library of Wales Journal article I mentioned in the most recent post. https://journals.library.wales/view/1277425/1284228/28#?xywh=-1697%2C-9%2C6662%2C4276
> Out of curiosity, I did a "simple" check. It appears that all comments and opinions are right.
> I observed that the original name before 1250 was de Cantelupe. Than, for reasons unknown, in England, after about 1280, both options Cantelupe and Cantilupe were used. After 1300 Cantilupe was from frequently used in England than Cantelupe. Finally, a third option appeared "Cantelou". (Fathet Cantelupe --> daughter Cantelou). In England, after 1300, there were more individuals using the name Cantilupe. Today, It appears, "Cantelupe" is returning as the preferred name by some.

The National Archives catalogue has a few dozen entries prior to 1300:
early 1190s:Cantelo
1198 (x2):Cantelupo
1199:Cantilupo
late 12th cent (x2):Kantelupo
13th cent:Cantilupo
1200:Cantilupe
1210:Kantelowe
1214:Cantilupe
1215:Cantilup'
1215:Kantilupe
late 1210s:Cantilupe
1220:Cantel'
1224:Cantelope
1225:Cantelow
2nd quarter 13th cent:Cantilupe
1231:Cantilupo
1237:Cantilupe
1240:Cantilupe
1241:Cantilupe
1241:Cantilupo
1242:Cantelup'
1243:Cantilupe
1244:Cantilupo
1248:Cantilupo
mid-13th cent:Cantelur
mid-13th cent (x2):Cantilupe
mid-13th cent:Cantilupo
1250:Cantilupo
1254 (x2):Cantilupo
1256:Cantelupo
1258:Cantilupe
1260:Cantilupe
1260s/70s:Cantilupe
1263:Cantelupo
1263 (x2):Cantilupe
1265:Cantilupe
1267:Cantilupe
1272 (x2):Cantilupo
1273 (x3):Cantilupe
1274 (x3):Cantilupe
1275:Cantelou
1275:Cantilupe
4th quarer 13th cent (x2):Cantilupe
1276 (x2):Cantilupe
1278:Cantilupe
1280 (x2):Cantelupe
1280:Cantilupo
1282 (x2):Cantilupe
1285:Cantilupo
1287:Cantilupo
1288:Cantilupo
1289:Cantilupe
1299:Cantelo
1299 (x3):Cantilupe
(problematic dating):Kantelu

I am not seeing a trend.

On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:46:29 PM UTC-7, Peter Stewart wrote:
> On 17-Jul-23 8:38 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:

> > This family's entry in CP is under "Cauntelo". Shakepeare's mother was
> > from Aston Cantelow, in Warwickshire, that took its name from the
> > family.
> My recalcitrant brain cells and/or typing fingers added a surplus "e" -
> Shakespeare's mother was from Aston Cantlow [sic] in Warwickshire.
> Peter Stewart

And of course, there is the eponymous Cantlop, Salop., which in Domesday Book is thought to be the land held by Normann', tenant of Rogero Cantelop, and before the conquest was held by Edric.

On 18-Jul-23 12:13 PM, taf wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:46:29 PM UTC-7, Peter Stewart wrote:
>> On 17-Jul-23 8:38 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
>
>>> This family's entry in CP is under "Cauntelo". Shakepeare's mother was
>>> from Aston Cantelow, in Warwickshire, that took its name from the
>>> family.
>> My recalcitrant brain cells and/or typing fingers added a surplus "e" -
>> Shakespeare's mother was from Aston Cantlow [sic] in Warwickshire.
>> Peter Stewart
>
> And of course, there is the eponymous Cantlop, Salop., which in Domesday Book is thought to be the land held by Normann', tenant of Rogero Cantelop, and before the conquest was held by Edric.

This appears to be a one-horse town where the horse has bolted some time
ago - at least from Google maps. I dare say there are, or have been,
other places in England taking part of all of their name from families
with this Norman toponym. Roger may have been from the modern Cantleu
near Rouen rather than from Canteloup near Caen.

Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

Kantelupo sounds like a B monster movie

Or maybe Night of the Kantelupo

On 18-Jul-23 12:05 PM, taf wrote:
> On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 4:59:19 PM UTC-7, George Tsambourakis wrote:
>> On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:26:56 AM UTC+10, Robert Allen wrote:
>>> On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 4:17:45 PM UTC-7, Robert Allen wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 10:02:30 AM UTC-7, Darrell E. Larocque wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:28:19 AM UTC-4, Robert Allen wrote:
>>>>>> As the creator of this thread, I am very disappointed that the my effort to engage in a genealogical dialog on the genealogy of de Cantilupe/Cantelupe family(ies) has been hijacked and diluted by a group of people who are arguing about the "correct" or prevailing spelling of the surname. We all know what family we are talking about regardless of the "correct spelling. If you want to continue the discussion on the spelling of the surname, please have the courtesy to start your own thread on the topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bob
>>>>> You said this: "Thanks again. I found it. Just finished translating it. It give the genealogy down from Robert de Haia and indeed does say that Robert de St. John, son of William (de Port) St. John and Godehelda, daughter of N. Pagnell, was married to Agnes, daughter of William de Cantilupe." and "As you say, this is the closest to a primary source for Agnes de Cantilupe being Robert de St. John's wife as probably will ever find."
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know what other sources you hope to find that will be revealed, but to me you got help from Peter and now after a discussion about the spelling of the name, you come back with this?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am also a descendant of Robert de St. John and Agnes de Cantilupe through their son John, so it's not like I chose to just ask about the spelling for no reason. I have gotten confused because of the back and forth between Cantelowe and Cantilupe, and I don't think calling my sincere interest in resolving that as hijacking is fair at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Darrell
>>>> I did get help from Peter. The help was as to one of several problem areas I was asking for help on and/or discussion about. The help I got was a secondary medieval source that carries some weight to establish that Agnes, wife of our Robert St. John was a de Cantilupe/Cantelupe. There were several other questions I asked in my initial post that have not be addressed by anybody yet. From which William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe does Agnes descend? The William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe of Candleston Castle, Glamorgan Wales, or the William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Millicent de Gournay? Or, where these two William of Cantilupes/Cantelupes the same person? Did Robert de St. John have any connection with the Cantilupe/Cantelupe family of Wales or with the manor/castle of Fonmon in Glamorgan, Wales, as some others have suggested by saying that his son, William de St. John, brother to our John St. John "received Fonmon in appendage" (suggesting it was handed down to him from his father)? I also was seeking help and discussion on an a claim that seem incredible to me that Agnes de Cantilupe/Cantelupe who married Robert St. John was descended from Howel Fychan ap Howel through Hopkin ap Howell Fychan. It is the help and discussion I was seeking on these matters yet to be commented upon that this very lengthy conversation about the correct spelling of the Cantilupe/Cantellupe surname has hijacked and diluted. I think I am being totally fair in my criticism.
>>>>
>>>> Since my initial posting I have come into possession of a three pages from Peter Bartrum's Welsh Genealogy collection. His chart/page 41 is headed by Hokpin ap Howell Fychan of Tregantlle. Is says that one of his children was Sir William Cantelupe of Tregantlle who married Maud, daughter of Sir William de Londres. There is a footnote 2 after "Sir William de Londres" that says "2. So SA 33, by Glam 215 substitutes Sir Henry Humphreville; probably correctly"
>>>>
>>>> Along these same lines, there is an article in "The National Library of Wales Journal", Vol. XVII (Summer 1972) entitled "The Ancestors of My Lord Herbert" , pages 238-247. At page 243, it says "By the sayd Gwenlliant Hopkyn ap Howel gat (by her) ij synes & ix doghters. The names of the sones: Sir William Kawntlo, knyght, lord of Kawntlestown . . . ." On page 244, it says - "Item. Roger d'Wmferuyll,* barwn of Penbrwk* maryd the Erl of wrwic is dochter & gat a doghter by her maryd [to] Sir Wiliam [Cantlo of] Cantloistown. Wihich doghter was heyr to her fathr, & mother to Hopkyn ap Howel ychan, father to the ix doghter above sayd . . . ."
>>>>
>>>> I don't want this to turn into an Umfreville discussion, about the family or the spelling, but I totally distrust that Roger de Umfrevlle/d'Wmferuyll was an existing person in Glamorgan Wales. It is well established that a Umfreville family owned 4 fees of Penmark in Glamorgan Wales, but no Roger de Umfreville is known have existed in that family.
>>>>
>>>> None of this information proves that this William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe/Cantlo of Cantloiston/Candleston manor/castle in Glamorgan Wales had a daughter name Agnes or a connection with Robert de St. John. But some people are jumping down this rabbit hole and it confusing the genealogy of Robert St. John and his wife, Agnes, daughter of a William de Cantilupe/Cantelupe.
>>>>
>>>> Bob
>>> Sorry, here is the link to The National Library of Wales Journal article I mentioned in the most recent post. https://journals.library.wales/view/1277425/1284228/28#?xywh=-1697%2C-9%2C6662%2C4276
>> Out of curiosity, I did a "simple" check. It appears that all comments and opinions are right.
>> I observed that the original name before 1250 was de Cantelupe. Than, for reasons unknown, in England, after about 1280, both options Cantelupe and Cantilupe were used. After 1300 Cantilupe was from frequently used in England than Cantelupe. Finally, a third option appeared "Cantelou". (Fathet Cantelupe --> daughter Cantelou). In England, after 1300, there were more individuals using the name Cantilupe. Today, It appears, "Cantelupe" is returning as the preferred name by some.
>
> The National Archives catalogue has a few dozen entries prior to 1300:
> early 1190s:Cantelo
> 1198 (x2):Cantelupo
> 1199:Cantilupo
> late 12th cent (x2):Kantelupo
> 13th cent:Cantilupo
> 1200:Cantilupe
> 1210:Kantelowe
> 1214:Cantilupe
> 1215:Cantilup'
> 1215:Kantilupe
> late 1210s:Cantilupe
> 1220:Cantel'
> 1224:Cantelope
> 1225:Cantelow
> 2nd quarter 13th cent:Cantilupe
> 1231:Cantilupo
> 1237:Cantilupe
> 1240:Cantilupe
> 1241:Cantilupe
> 1241:Cantilupo
> 1242:Cantelup'
> 1243:Cantilupe
> 1244:Cantilupo
> 1248:Cantilupo
> mid-13th cent:Cantelur
> mid-13th cent (x2):Cantilupe
> mid-13th cent:Cantilupo
> 1250:Cantilupo
> 1254 (x2):Cantilupo
> 1256:Cantelupo
> 1258:Cantilupe
> 1260:Cantilupe
> 1260s/70s:Cantilupe
> 1263:Cantelupo
> 1263 (x2):Cantilupe
> 1265:Cantilupe
> 1267:Cantilupe
> 1272 (x2):Cantilupo
> 1273 (x3):Cantilupe
> 1274 (x3):Cantilupe
> 1275:Cantelou
> 1275:Cantilupe
> 4th quarer 13th cent (x2):Cantilupe
> 1276 (x2):Cantilupe
> 1278:Cantilupe
> 1280 (x2):Cantelupe
> 1280:Cantilupo
> 1282 (x2):Cantilupe
> 1285:Cantilupo
> 1287:Cantilupo
> 1288:Cantilupo
> 1289:Cantilupe
> 1299:Cantelo
> 1299 (x3):Cantilupe
> (problematic dating):Kantelu
>
> I am not seeing a trend.
There isn't even consistency to be expected within single documents or
by individual authors - for instance, Matthew Paris first mentioned the
family of William de Cantilupe with variant spellings in the same
passage ("Willelmus de Cantelu, et Willelmus filius ejus, Fulco de
Canteleu"). He subsequently quoted from a charter of King John naming
"W[illelmo] de Cantelupo", then used the latter form in his own words
("Willelmus de Cantelupo, et Willelmus filius ejus") before switching to
another vriant ("Willelmus de Cantello et Willelmus filius ejus"). All
written long before 1280.
Peter Stewart
Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com