SIR WILLIAM BONQUER
Knight, Magistrar, Judge, Diplomat and Emissary of King Henry III to France, Spain, Navaree and the %center&Vatican
The following research paper on, Sir William Bonquer, was found in the Bunker Family Association genealogical archives, upon transfer of the repository from Cape Cod to my home, in September, 1992. It is being republished, in its entirety, with some added definitions and rewriting to enhance the story.
Henry L. Bunker, our former genealogists who authored the Bunker Family History, wrote the following in his book: “Sir William Bonquer is of great interest to we Bunkers interested in our genealogical background. He is first recorded in 1246, and many subsequent references indicate he was a Magistrar, judge, diplomat and a very responsible member of King Henry Ill’s court, as he was frequently dispatched on sensitive diplomatic assignments, many to the Pope in Rome. There are many references to his property transactions. The last reference we know of are in 1271, and infer he died in that year. There are no references to his family during his lifetime. However, we do find later reference to a John and William Bonquer in 1298 and 1299; to an Alice Bonquer Blond in 1326; and to Willelmo Bonquer in 1343. The previously mentioned William le Bunkyer could indicate a transition from Bonquer to Bunker, as some references referred to Bonquer as le Bonquer.”
SIR WILLIAM BONQUER
(See Family of Bunker, cxcv, 435, 504)
Little is written of Sir William Bonquer in The Judges of England (by: Foss) even though he held judicial offices. He completed several missions to Rome in 1255 and 1259 which are mentioned, but those accounts can be considerably amplified from the Patent and Close Rolls and other sources. Of his origin nothing is known, and of his early life little; in the earlier references to him among the Westminster Abbey Muniments (writings pertaining to property titles) he is described as “Magister;” we may perhaps deduce that he was a graduate of some university; Mathew Paris describes him as “jurisperitus;” presumably he studied law at some time. As three out of his first four references show him buying land, it may be assumed that he already was a man of means.
The earliest dated reference to him, has been traced to a quit-claim (deed of release) dated 1246, by Martin, son of Gerard Bat, to the Abbot and Convent of Westminster concerning some land at Staines, Middlesex; Bonquer was one of the witnesses (Westminster Abbey Muniments).
Among the muniments too, is a record of a grant to him by Adam, son of Robert Walkelyn, of a whole plat (small plot) of his land in Long Ditch, Westminster (now Princes Street), subject to yearly rents of 2d. paid to St. Mary’s Chapel, Westminster, and 3s. to Adam and his heirs. For this grant Bonquer paid half a mark. The grant is undated, but is seems probable that the land is the same as that mentioned in the dated grant of 1 253 which is dealt with hereafter.
In May 1247 he bought a house in Westminster from William and Joan de Langedon for L5. In February, 1 248 he purchased a house and sixty acres in Willesden and Harlesden from John la Parsone for sixty marks (Midds. Feet of Fines).
On March 6th 1253, Bonquer had a grant from the King exempting his houses in Long Ditch from billeting the King’s men without permission; his whole court was to be absolved from the burden of housing men, women, horses and harness (W.A.M). This grant may be compared with a similar grant in favour of Walter de Torny, dated 1 271, and probably referring to the same property, noticed later.
On April 5th 1253, Bonquer was one of the witnesses to a charter of John de Munemuh (Monmouth) in favour of his kinsman Robert Walerand (Charter Rolls). Trivial as this notice may seem, it is interesting as we find Bonquer associated with men of position very early in his recorded career; Walerand, like Bonquer, was a supporter of King Henry III, and like him, was to hold judicial office, and to go as the King’s envoy to Rome. Among the other witnesses were Peter of Savoy, uncle of the Queen; John Mansel, Keeper of the Seal, who gets a long notice in the Dictionary of National Biography; William de Kilkenny, Bishop of Ely; Henry de Wengham, Bishop of London and Stephen de Baucan, Seneschal (baliff who represents his medieval Lord in court) of Gascony.
According to Mathew Paris (Chronica Majora), Bonquer had gone on many missions for the King Henry III to the King of Spain, and knew the Spaniards habits and customs; in the Autumn of 1253 the King sent William Bitton, Bishop of Bath, and John Mansel, Provost of Beverley, on a mission to Spain. Bonquer may have accompanied them, but he is not mentioned in connection with their journey. The statement in Mathew Paris re¬ceives some support from Bonquer having twice been associated with Spaniards visiting England; later he was to go on an mission to the King of Navarre (once an independent kingdom in northern Spain bordering France).
In the latter part of 1255, Garsia Martini came to England as envoy of the King of Spain. On December 9th the King ordered Ertaldo de Saneto Romano (the Keeper of the King’s Wardrobe), to issue Garsia, his knights, clerks, and servants, robes suitably furred, as William Bonquer should tell him (Close Rolls).
In the following year, Henry, brother of Alphonso of Castile, having quarrelled with his brother, took refuge in England, and he and his entourage were committed to Bonquer’s care (Mathew Paris, Chronica Majora). Henry seems to have arrived early in the year, as payments for his support are recorded in the Issue Rolls of the Exchequer for Easter and Michaelmas (Devon, Issues of the Exchequer). (Michaelmas is the feast of archangel Michael on September 29}
In March Bonquer received instructions to go to Rome on a mission which must have called for all his skill. The King had, at the suggestion of Pope Alexander IV, allowed his brother Richard to be put forward as a candidate for the Imperial throne, and his younger son, Edmund, to assume the title of King of Sicily. The French King (Louis IX) was opposed to an Englishman becoming head of the Empire and Henry of England was afraid that if the French had their way in this, the Sicilian affair might be greatly prejudiced (see Richard of Cornwall (N. Denholm-Young, 1947), 86). Bonquer was to persuade the Pope to send one of three cardinals, whom the King named, to Ger¬many, so that the matter might be arranged in a manner agreeable to the King.
The other part of Bonquer’s instructions called for considerable tact. They reminded him that he, the King, was bound to pay to the Roman Church before Michael¬mas a sum of 135,501 marks. The King was either to go to Italy himself, or send a military force under a competent leader, before the same date (see Richard of Cornwall, ut supra, 82).
For reasons alleged, as this date seems curiously irrelevant, the King was unable to comply with either part of his bond in so short a time, and Bonquer was to do his utmost to arrange Master Jordan, the Papal notary, be sent to England to devise an extension of time. Debts due to the Papal Court and to merchants, amounting to about half the total would be paid, and the King thought that Bonquer would probably succeed in arranging for a postponement of the payment of the balances, particu¬larly as the King hoped to forward the Pope’s schemes by both money and troops at an early date. Bonquer was also to investigate the possibility of raising a loan for the payment of the money (Close Rolls; Rymer, Foedera; Shirley, Royal and Historical Letters, 11., 114).
Bonquer was back in England by the Autumn; the Exchequer Issue Roll for Michaelmas records the payment to him of L100 for his expenses of going to the court of Rome. On November 5th, Bonquer and Richard de Clare, Earl of Gloucester and Hartford, and others, attested at Windsor, for a grant by the King to the Convent of Westminster, for the right to hold a weekly market and a yearly fair (W.A.M).
In the same month Bonquer was instructed to represent the King at Rome in a dispute with the English Cistercians (English Order of monks founded in 1098). Master Rostand (the Papal Nuncio) had summoned the abbots of the Cistercian houses in England to meet and receive the Pope’s orders. He had pressed for liberal financing for the Pope and the King, emphasizing the wealth of the monks derived from the wool produced by their flocks. The assembled abbots replied that the consent of the abbot and chapter of their mother house at Citeaux (France) was necessary. Rostand complained to the King, and both parties appealed to the Pope (Mathew Paris, Chronica Majora).
Bonquer was also instructed to try and get the election of Hugh de Balsham as Bishop of Ely annulled; Balsham had been the sub-prior of the house. King Henry III thought Balsham was quite unsuitable for a bishop, who had been elected contrary to his wishes (Close Rolls). Balsham also appealed to the Pope, and was successful. When we next hear of Bonquer he was again in England. On February 28th, 1259, he was granted by the King a sum of 100s. which Rose, widow of Roger de Mortuo Mari, had paid as a fine for being allowed to remain in Roger’s capital mansion at Egmere, Norfolk, and at the same time he was granted the wardship and marriage of Roger’s heirs (Close Rolls), and before March 20th he and Imbert Fugeys received a confession by an approver that his charge on which Baiter Brid, a clerk, had been imprisoned in Newgate, was false. On May 8th there was issued to him a procuration about the “Sicilian business” although this was issued at Westminster, Bonquer appears to have been at Paris at the time he was to go to Rome, and was paid 100 marks toward his prospective expenses, but, as the proposed journey to Rome was cancelled, he was authorized, by Letters Patent issued in the following year, to keep the advance as credit toward his expenses incurred in travel¬ling to France (Patent Rolls; Close Rolls). The details of the instructions do not appear, as the only evidence of the procuration is the record of its surrender and cancellation at Paris about the end of 1259; but no doubt the instructions were similar to those issued to him in that year (Close Rolls).
It may be convenient to mention here two other undated references: before he was knighted, he appears as a witness to two grants, both in favour of the Abbott and Convent of Westminster, the one a grant of lands at Pershore, Worcestershire, by Laurence de Wendlesworth, and the other grant of a meadow at Todenham, Gloucestershire, by Simon de Lemeuintone (W.A.M.) In 1258 Bonquer first appears as a knight, when he, with the Archdeacon of Essex, and Sir Philip Lovel, the Treasurer of England, passed the accounts of the Dean of Hereford, and also of Master Lawrence de Somercote, Commmissary of the Bishop of Hereford (Close Rolls).
On May 20th, 1259, he was granted by the Council, in consideration of his expenses and labours in the King’s service, both beyond seas and at home, and of his expenses of an intended journey to Rome, L30 a year in land out of the first wardships that fall in, “if he be content therewith” (Patent Rolls).
On the same day letters of credence were issued in his favour addressed to the Pope. Bonquer, who was de¬scribed as “miles et mare-scallus noster,” was to inform the Pope of the reasons why the peace between the King of England and the King of France had been delayed. On the same day, and again four days later, similar letters, recommending Bonquer, were addressed to: Henry de Sousa, Archbishop of Embrun; the Archbishop of Tarentaise; Master Rostand; Master J. Clarel and others, who had been promoting the King’s interests at Rome (Patent Rolls; Rymer, Foedera).
Bonquer was also to deal with the “Sicilian business,” and the “Winchester affair.” in connection with the “Sicilian business,” the King had to ask the council for a considerable sum of money to enable him to support his son’s claim, against Manfred and the Hohenstauffens, and this had been refused. Of the “Winchester affair” we hear greater detail later.
Bonquer was also to disclose to the persons to whom the letters were addressed, other than the Pope, certain other secret affairs, probably the King’s financial straits, and was, apparently; to receive from those persons reports as to the progress they were making with the King’s business (Patent Rolls).
On 4th August 1260, Bonquer had a gram of 300 marks in part satisfaction of the L30 a year awarded to him in the previous May. Ralph de Normanville had died, and the King had granted to Galiena, his widow, the wardship of his heirs and her marriage in consideration of a fine of that amount; this sum, to be paid in three installments, was now granted to Bonquer (Patent Rolls; Excerpta e Rotulis Finium).
About this time he was able to be of some assistance to the Convent of Westminster. On the death of Abbott Richard de Crokesley in 1258, Philip de Lewisham, the Prior, had been elected his successor, and to secure his election, and presumably the Papal confirmation and benediction, the convent had borrowed 600 marks from Florentine merchants. Philip died in October before securing his confirmation, and his successor, Richard de Ware, questioned the liability of the convent loan. In the end, by the mediation of Fr. Robert de Scotia; Dom. Edward de Westminster, the King’s clerk, and Sir William Bonquer, it was arranged that the loan should be repaid by instalments, and on 1st November the Abbott gave an undertaking to that affect (W.A.M).
It is possible that Bonquer’s share in the negotiations was carried out at Florence on his Rome journey of this year.
By Christmas Bonquer had returned to Paris, where he surrendered the unused procuration of the previous year, and on 24th December he was entrusted with Letters Patent, sealed there, ratifying the appointment of Master Umberto de Coquinato, a papal chaplain, as a King’s clerk, to be delivered to Umberto at Rome (Patent Rolls); four days later the King addressed letters to the Pope and all the cardinals informing them that peace had now been declared between England and France; Bonquer was to be the bearer (Shirley, Royal and Historical Letters, ii., 143).
Bonquer’s journey may have been delayed, as it seems likely that he carried also to the Pope letters from the Barons in the King’s name dated 18th January 1260, which closely concerned the King in his family relation¬ships. His half-brother Aymer de Valence, had been elected Bishop of Winchester in 1250, but had not been consecrated. His conduct, in connection with both his see (jurisdiction) and other matters, had made him highly unpopular, and after refusing to accept the Provisions of Oxford he had been compelled to retire to France. The Chapter of Winchester had elected a successor, and the King had given his approval provisionally. The letters accused Aymer of attacking the Queen, and of setting the King’s eldest son against him (Close Rolls). In spite of the King’s protests, however, Pope Alexander IV, conse¬crated Aymer on 16th May 1260. Aymer returned to Paris, where he died on 4th December in the same year. Bonquer evidently passed the remainder of the winter of 1 259–1 260 at Rome, as in February letters were sent out to him, and to Thomas, Archbishop of Liege, by John de Braban, the Queen’s envoy, to enable them to borrow L100 from the agents in Rome of Hugo de Symonetti, called Mace, of Florence, through whom the loan had been negotiated (Close Rolls).
The Pope had promised the King to send a legate (Papal representative) to England if asked, and Bonquer and the Archdeacon had asked that the Papal letters to this effect should be sent to them. This could not be done as the King was then at St. Omer and the Papal letters were in England.
Bonquer’s next duty at Rome must have been unpleasant; with others, he was to deliver a protest on a matter which had long been a cause of dispute between the Kings of England and the Papacy, namely the right claimed by the Popes in certain cases to nominate to vacant benefices (ecclesiastical curators) in England: many of the nominees were, not unnaturally, Italians, who never visited England, and whose only interest in their benefices was the income it produced. On the 25th February the King wrote to the Pope protesting that although the King had, as of right, during the vacancy of the See of York, presented Master Mansell, (who has already appeared twice in these notes), to the Prebend (stipend granted) of Fenton in that cathe¬dral, which had fallen vacant, the Pope had nevertheless collated a nephew of Cardinal Penestrini to the Prebend (Close Rolls).
By April 1261, Bonquer was presumably back in Eng¬land. On the 14th April Adam, son of Alexander of Lewisham, came into the King’s Chancery and entered into a recognizance that he owed Bonquer 20 marks, to be paid on the Feast of All Saints, in default of payment the money was to be levied from his lands and goods in Kent. Among the Westminster Muniments is a grant to Bonquer, undated, but later than 1258, by John, son of Geoffrey David, of land at Crocstede, at a yearly rent of 3d payable at Lewisham.
(Mr. L.E. Tanner, Keeper of the Muniments at the Abbey, to whom I am greatly indebted for the many references to Bonquer contained in the Muniments, suggests that Crocstede may be the present New Crosse; but two miles away to the south-west, Croxted Road is the present representative of Croxted Lane of 1594. This no doubt took its name from Crokstrete, which occurs in the Xlllth century. As late as 1877 the greater part of the northern end of the lane, in the angle formed by the present Croxted Road and Norwood Road, is a small irregular group of buildings, which may represent an early settlement. The boundaries can still be identified. JW)
Bonquer’s stay in England was not of long duration; in May he was bound for France again, for some reason not stated, with the King’s protection for a year, so long as he was in the King’s service, from the 25th (Patent Rolls). In the following year, 1262, he was one of five justices in eyre (circuit judge) who sat at Bedford for more than three weeks after Easter: a note of four cases heard by them in which Dunstable Priory was involved is given in Annales Monastici (Rolls Series), iii., 217. In the same year his grant of wardship of the heirs of Roger de Mortuo Mari seems to have come in question; there is an entry in the Close Rolls dated 15th May, which recites that the King had caused Walter de Merton, the Chancellor, to be given seisin (possession) of the wardship; it refers to the earlier grant to Bonquer, and, apparently, to a still earlier grant to the Chancellor by Hugh Bifod, Justiciar, in the King’s name, by reason of which it was not in the King’s power to make the grant to Bonquer. Walter de Merton had been made Chancellor in the previous year when the King replaced some of the supporters of the Barone by his own men, and there may be some political significance in this entry. The text of the roll has been corrected and seems to require some further revision.
In the summer of 1262, Bonquer was again in France with the King, and on 15th August, a protection was issued for him and for William de Berewik, who was with him, to last as long as they were in the King’s service (Patent Rolls).
By the autumn Bonquer was back in England, again employed in a judicial capacity. He was appointed one of the justices at a yearly fee of L40 and on 2nd September, the Sheriff of Kent was directed to pay him L20 out of issues of the Justices in eyre at their next itinerary in the county in lieu of Bonquer’s fee for the Michaelmas term (Liberate Roll, 46 Hen. III., m.3; and see Close Roll, 46 Hen. III., 13 Sept.)
On 4th October his name was included in a commission to go on eyre for common pleas in Kent and his name appears as sitting at Canterbury and Rochester in the Feet of Fines for that county. In the spring and early summer following he was named in similiar commissions for Hampshire, where he and the other justices sat at Win¬chester after Easter (Annales Monastici, Rolls Meries, 11, 100) and Yorkshire. He had also been name in a commis¬sion for an assize (judical inquest) of novel disseisin (wrongful dispossession) in Buckinghamshire in Novem¬ber, 1262. He seems also to have been named a justice eyre for Lincolnshire, but a fresh commission was issued with fresh names substituted (Patent Rolls: Close Rolls).
Early in 1263 he was again investing in land. When he bought of Robert Doget a messuage (house, adjoining buildings and land) and 40 acres in Legh, Lewisham and Greenwich (Feet of Fines for Kent 48/983).
(No reference to him has been found for the remainder of 1263 or for 1264; he may have been ill, or in need of a rest; but the country was in a disturbed state, and his employment, if he was employed, may not have entailed entries in the records. JW)
On the 8th of January 1265, he was named as the third of four judges, in addition to Hugh le Despenser, Justiciar of England, included on a list of persons to receive robes from the Wardrobe (Close Rolls)
From February to May, and again in October, he was appointed to inquire into the circumstances of certain deaths (Close Rolls), and in Easter Term of this year his name appears as one of the judges before whom fines were taken (Excerpta e Totulis Finium); ten Feet of Fines show him sitting at Westminister in January, April and November (P.R.O., C.P. 25 (1) 97/49 (1006–14).
In addition to the evidence of his continual employment in the King’s service, we now get further evidence of his importance, as in this year we find for the first time records of his influence being sought by other men to obtain royal grants. On 8th November, 1265, a protection was issued, at his request, to William le Mazerer, a citizen of London and in January following, again and at his request, Ralph de Septem Fontes and Thomas Marines were allowed to postpone taking up knighthood for a period of three years from the ensuing February (Patent rolls; Close Rolls). Ralph, like Bonquer, may have had some connections at Westminister, as in 1270 we find him exempted from being made sheriff against his will, at the instance of John de Sutton, Sacristan of Westminister (Patent Rolls).
The political troubles of the last years of Henry III sent Bonquer again to Rome. In the spring of 1266 he, with William de Chavent of Chaumpent, Dean of St. Martin’s le Grant, went to Rome to lay before the Pope the damage and losses inflicted on the King by the late disturbances, and to ask for a timely subsudy for the relief and amelioration (to make better) of the estate of the King and realm. The Letters Patent were dated 9th March, and a week later a year’s protection was issued to Bonquer to proceed to Rome (Patent Rolls).
The Pope was no longer Alexander IV to whom Bonquer had been sent before; he had died in 1261, and been succeeded by Urban IV and he again by Clement IV. Bonquer was still in Rome in June, when the Pope wrote to Friar Bacon thanking him for his letters which had been explained to him Viva Voce (orally) by Bonquer. Clement IV had become interested in Bacon while still a cardinal, and after being elected Pope had sent a message to Bacon expressing a wish to see some of his writings. Bacon wrote to the Pope regretting that this was not possible, and at the same time sent a verbal explanation of his letter by Bonquer; as a Franciscan it would be contrary to the rules of his order, and he could only comply with the Pope’s wishes if authorized by dispensation. Unfortu¬nately there is nothing to show whether Bacon and Bonquer were previously acquainted, or whether Bacon merely made use of Bonquer as a fellow countrymen on a mission to Rome (Bacon. Opera Inedita, 1 .p.xvi). The Pope’s letter is noticed twice in the printed Calendar of Papal Registers; in the first notice Bonquer is described as “G. catted Bone Cornutes,” in the second as “G. called Bonecor, Knight, Bone Cornules” is, no doubt, a misread¬ing, either in the original or in the transcript, of “Bone Cor miles.”
Later in the summer Bonquer and his fellow-envoy seems to have been in need of money, and on 28th August they were authorized to borrow 100 marks (Patent Rolls).
Bonquer was back in England by November, but was not allowed to remain idle; he was sitting at Westminster in that month, and on 3rd November a commission of gaol-delivery for the prison of the Abbott of Westminster was issued to him in the absence of the Abbott, who had gone to Rome on the King’s business. The Abbott was Richard de Ware; his journey is not noticed in Pearce’s “The Monks of Westminster.”
Bonquer’s work now received a more substantial re¬ward. On 10th November he was granted L30 a year which the Archbishop of Rhages was bound to pay for the Royal Manor of Havering, and a further L20 a year from the issues of the City and the Commonwealth of London. On the same day the King wrote to the King of France to inform him that he had sent Bonquer and Sir John de la Linde, also a judge, to negotiate a truce with the King of Navarre (ibid.; Rymer, Foederal). At the beginning of 1 267 Bonquer was back in England, and once more on his way to Rome, his sixth and last recorded mission, with letters from the King to the Pope dated 26th January. The purpose of the mission is not given in the letters, but was to be disclosed to the Pope by Bonquer in person. Bonquer took with him also, letters addressed to John de Toledo, the White Cardinal, and to the cardinals generally, thanking them for there help given to Bonquer in the past, and asking them for their assistance on this occasion (Close Rolls).
On 28th January the prior and convent of Cirencester acknowledged that they had delivered to Bonquer 60 marks due to the King on a fine for keeping house “during the present voidance;” Bonquer was described as going on an embassy to Rome, so no doubt the payment was made to provide him with funds for the journey (Patent Rolls),
Bonquer’s departure may have been delayed for a short time as the Patent Roll for this year contains his appoint¬ment, tentatively dated February in the printed calendar, to inquire into the death of Henry Thorenger at the hand of John de Handlo, who alleged that he acted in self defense; the jury was to be summoned from Kent (ibid.).
Once more back in England, in March 1268 he was one of the witnesses to the marriage contract between Robert de Vere, Earl of Oxford, and Margaret, daughter of Sir Roger de Mortimer, of Wigmore, Herefordshire (Charter Rolls; Genealogist, New Series, xxxiii, 134–136).
On the 27th of the same month, in consideration of his losses and damages suffered in the King’s service, he was granted 500 marks of the nearest and clearest debts due to the King, as he, Bonquer, should select, and, on the following day, L40 a year out of the Exchequer, until the King should provide for him in wards or escheats more bountifully; this was in addition to the L30 and L20 previously granted (Patent Rolls).
One other reference to Bonquer’s property in Westminster in his lifetime has not been dealt with. It is a grant, undated but later than 1258, by John, son of Alured Mason, to the convent of Westminster of a house in Long Ditch, subject to yearly rents of 2s, to Sir William Bonquer and his heirs, and 12d. to Katherine de Domo of Edward Clerk of
The grant of 12 March 1268 is the last reference to Bonquer in the Patent and Close Rolls which certainly refers to him as being still alive, and he is not mentioned again until 1271. It is probable that he was dead by September of that year, and certain that he was dead by December. On 10th September, 1 271, Walter de Torny, the King’s Chaplain, had a grant that he, his heirs and assigns, might hold the houses in Westminster which he had of the gift of William Bonquer quit of the King’s livery of his stewards, marshalls and ministers, so that none might lodge there without his license (Patent Rolls), and on 29th December in the same year the Abbot of Westminster appropriated the cellarer (stewart) of the convent land at Kelveden, Essex, which had belonged to the late Sir William Bonquer. The grant in favour of Walter de Torny may be compared with the grant to Sir William himself in 1253, presumably in respect of the same property. One may be justified in assuming that de Torny would not waste time in applying for the same exemption that Bonquer had, and inferring that the property only recently come into his hands. The property at Kelveden had been redeemed by the Abbot from the hands of Hervey de Borham, a judge of the Common Pleas.
One other mention of Bonquer requires rather lengthy treatment. In 1916, the late Mr. J. McMaster published “A Short History of the Royal Parish of St. Martins-in-the Fields.” In it he quoted extracts from Simpson’s ‘St. Martin’s’ relating to “the presentation of the patronage of the living by Sir William Bonquer (sic), knight, to the Abbot of Westminster, the induction of the vicar and the Pope’s sanction.”
(In spite of extensive searches and inquiries no work which would normally be described as “Simpson’s St. Martin’s” has been identified. In 1636, H. Sumpson, a churchwarden of the parish, wrote a book, “Our Parish,” dealing largely with the parish accounts, which appears to quote the first part only of a document, or perhaps the first two documents, also quoted by McMaster; Simpson dated the document 1297; McMaster leayes it to be inferred the date is 1275. JW)
The document purports to have been issued by Richard (de Gravesend), Bishop of London, and makes provisions for the vicar, apparently the first, receiving due proportion of the income of the living. Slight variations in the two versions suggest both may have used a common, perhaps Latin, source.
It is followed in McMaster by a translation of an inspeximus (charter letter confirming or resinding a former charter) by Geoffrey de Vezano of a Bull (Papal letter) of Alexander IV, but there is nothing to show whether this is a part of the document issued by the bishop; there seems every reason to suppose it was; as the date, 1297, falls within the period when Geoffrey de Vezano was the Papal Nuncio in England.
Unfortunately, neither Simpson, except for the vague reference quoted above, nor McMaster quoted the sources from which they copied their documents or worked from the translations. Be that as it may, it seems clear the translator of the inspeximus cannot have attached much Westminster (W.A.M.) meaning to the words in the Latin original which he translated “in no mean;” but the “nullo medio,” with an occasional variant “nullo mediante,” occur regularly in Bulls of this period in connection with monastic houses subject only in Papal jurisdiction.
The text of the translation of the inspeximus, as given by McMaster, is as follows:
THE CHURCH OF ST. MARTIN-IN-THE FIELDS
To all persons who shall inspect the present letters, Geoffrey de Verano (sic). Cannon Chamberlain of the Chamber of the Lord the pope, Clerk, and Nuncio of the Apostolic See in England, Health in the Author of Health, Be it known unto you, that we have seen and diligently inspected certain apostolic letters of the Lord Alexander the Fourth, of good memory, Pope, sound and entire, with the entire silken thread, and bulled with a true bull, containing the tener (exact copy) which is thus: Alexander the Bishop, Servant of the Servants of God, to his beloved sons, the Abbot, Prior and Convent of the Monastery of Westminster (near) London, of the Order of St. Benedict, pertaining (in no mean) to the Roman Church, health, and Apostolic Benediction. The solicitude of our enjoined office admonished us that, concerning religious persons, we should support their sedulous thoughts by special favor and grace. When, therefore, as we are informed, the office of you, our son, was first known to be vacant, by reason of hospitality and other necessaries, your monastery, was bound to sustain mani¬fold charges and expenses, we, being willing of our paternal solicitude to provide for the said monastery, in this behalf inclining to the supplication of our beloved son, William Bonquer, knight, who asserts himself to be a scholar of the said monastery, the Church of St. Martin, near London, in which we are informed he hath the right of patronage, the profits whereof do not exceed the sum of fifteen marks sterling in every year, according to the common estimation of the country, as it is said, to you and to the monastery for the time, for supporting the charges of such hospitality, with all the rights and appurtenances of our special Grace, we do grant.
(The translation, which seems to have been made word by word with the aid of a dictionary, has every appearance of having been made from a genuine document: Bonquer was at Rome more than once while Alexander was Pope, and, as has been pointed out above, Vezano, not Verano, as the translator calls him, was Papal Nuncio in England in 1297, the date which Simpson is said to have given to the documents of which the inspeximus may form part. Unfortunately, by the courtesy of the Prefect of the Vatican Library, I learn that the bull cannot be traced among the Vativan Archives, and Mr. Tanner tells me there is no record of it among the Abbey Muniments. It would be interesting to learn where McMaster found his document.) J. B. Whitmore
Family Reunion Handbook
A GUIDE TO FAMILY REUNION PLANNING
Attention family reunion planners - give the Family Reunion Handbook serious consideration. Its well-organized approach to planning family reunions is packed with helpful common-sense suggestions. The Family Reunion Handbook takes readers through each step of the planning process while offering ideas and examples along the way. The chapters on feeding and entertaining the family are especially helpful. The authors discuss the pros and cons of different ways of serving meals. Specific games for children and adults are outlined. The Family Reunion Handbook guides planners through dilemmas such as starting with no money, sparking interest in the event and negotiating contracts. Family directories, newsletters and family associations are dis¬cussed. The family reunion scrapbook in the Handbook includes follow-up newsletters of actual family reunion events. Here planners discover what went right at re¬unions as well as tips for improving what didn’t. The Family Reunion Handbook’s Appendix includes a listing of text references, useful books and other resources for planners. A good reference guide for family reunion planners, the Family Reunion Handbook invites readers to share reunion tips, criticisms and photos with the authors.
The Bunker Song From Ann Tenney, our former treasurer comes this song; dated July 1913; sung to the tune of “America.” The first formal meeting of the BFA was at Smith’s Grove, near the garrison site, on July 26, 1913. The author is unknown.
The early settlers brave,
A loyal influence gave their clansmen prize.
Well did the Bunkers lead, grandly did they succeed
Meeting life’s urgent need, faithful and wise.
Fruitage their labors bore
And tho their work is ‘oer,
Blessings extend
Ancestry calls from the dust, make life a sacred trust Uplift and help we must,
True to the end.
Clansmen prove strong and brave
Now when life’s tidal wave, threatens indeed
Close up the ranks and stand, ready to meet demand
Cordially guide the hand, truly succeed.
Care less for worldly fame
Harbor no selfish aim, duty to find
They who will serve the best, bearing life’s crucial test
Find at the end, sweet rest.
Body and mind.
Source:Brent Bunker