Son of the Conqueror; Walker Tyrrel (Vol. v., p. 512.).—No other son of William the Conqueror, except William Rufus, was slain by an arrow in the New Forest. A grandson, however, of the Conqueror, Richard, son of Robert Duke of Normandy, met with the same fate as Rufus, as stated by the cotemporary chronicler, Florentius Wigornensis. (Edition of the Historical Society, vol. ii. p. 45.) Immediately after describing the death of William Rufus, he says:
"Nam et antea ejusdem Willelmi junioris germanus, Ricardus, in eadem foresta multo ante perierat, et paulo ante suus fratruelis, Ricardus, comitis scilicet Normannorum Rotberti filius, dum et ipse in venatu fuisset, a suo milite sagitta percussus, interiit."
Probably Sir N. Wraxhall or his authority had read this statement hastily, and had construed fratruelis brother instead of nephew, which is the correct sense of the word.
Your correspondent asks further for the authority for the death of William Rufus. Every historian of that day—Florentius Wigornensis and the Saxon chronicler among others—gives the received account of his death, except Suger, a Norman abbot, who says that Sir W. Tyrrel took a solemn oath to him that he was not the slayer of the king, but that the arrow came from an unknown hand.
There can, I think, be little doubt but that Sir W. Tyrrel's was the hand that drew the bow; whether, however, he intended to kill the king or not, is a point which it is probable, after the time that has elapsed, will never be satisfactorily determined.
R. C. C.
Oxon.
Sir Gilbert Gerrard (Vol. v., p. 511.).—I beg to refer Mr. Spedding to Erdeswick's Staffordshire, by Harwood (1820), p. 83., who states that Sir Gilbert Gerrard died in 1592, and that he was buried in Ashley churchyard in that county, under a handsome monument. Probably the inscription on it will give the precise date, and some of your readers may be able to refer to it, and send the communication to "N. & Q." His death must have occurred between January 8, 1592, 34 Elizabeth, the date of his will as given in Dugdale's Baronage, vol. ii. p. 417., and the following April; if Dugdale is right in saying that it was then proved. But on referring to the Baga de Secretis, the contents of which are so excellently calendared by Sir Francis Palgrave in the Appendices to his third, fourth, and fifth reports as deputy-keeper of the Public Records, it appears that Sir Gilbert was named in a commission of Oyer and Terminer, on March 22; that he signed a precept under it for the return of the grand jury, on April 11; and that he signed another precept to the lieutenant of the Tower for bringing up Sir John Perrott before the justices, on June 12, all in 34 Elizabeth, 1592. (Fourth Report, Appendix II. pp. 282, 283.) It would seem, therefore, that Dugdale has erred in the date he assigns to the probate of Sir Gilbert's will. A search, however, at Doctors' Commons will solve the difficulty.
Edward Foss.