Sir Peter (III) de Eyton, a 12^th great grandfather of Elizabeth Eaton, was born before 1246. He married Margery in 1246. He died after 1292.

The first mention of his name, otherwise than as an infant, is early in 1272, when Hugh Burnell had a Writ against him for disseizing the said Hugh of common-pasture in Eyton, and John de Apple had a Writ against him for disseizing the said John of a tenement in Eyton. At the Assizes of September 1272, Peter de Eyton was the third Juror for Bradford Hundred. His position on a Jury of March 1276 is not among the knights who composed it, but in an Inquest of December 2,1277, he takes precedence of several whom I know to have been knights at the time.

In July 1278, he appeared as one of the Verderers of the Shropshire Forests, and in January 1283, he expressly styled a knight on a Newport Inquest. From this period till his death, his occurrences as a Verderer, a Juror, or a Witness, are very frequent. The Feodaries of 1284-5, when collated, shows that Peter de Eyton was then holding two knights’-fees under Walter de Hopton and his wife Matilda (Baroness of Wem). The Manors constituting this Fief are Eyton, Brochetone ( Bratton), Sutton, and half Lawley, in Shropshire, and Cresswell in Staffordshire.

The latter was held under him by Henry de Cress, well. At the Assizes of 1292, he was one of the two Elisors sworn to elect the Jury for Bradford Hundred. He was returned for Salop as a knight of the Shire to the Parliament held at York on May 25, 1298, and again to the Parliament held at Lincoln in January 1301. The latter he attended and obtained his Writ of- expenses for so doing. His Manucaptors were Roger le Wodeward of Eyton, and Richard his brother.

Meanwhile, on June 5, 1300, as one of the Verderers of Shropshire, he attended the great Perambulation then made, and afterward ratified by Edward I. Peter de Eyton (III.) had settled his estate, or at least the Manor of Eyton, by a Fine levied at Westminster on January 27, 1292. He first gives it to his son Peter (the Plaintiff), who returns it to his father, to hold for life, under the Lords of the Fee, with remainder to Peter junior and the heirs of his body, or in default of such heirs to Margery, sister of Peter junior and the heirs of her body, with remainder to the right heirs of Peter senior quit of any other heirs of Margery.^[1] 

The Visitation Of Shropshire shows Peter born (or flourished) in the 6th year of the reign of Edward I – that would be 1278.

William de Eyton, a 13^th great grandfather of Elizabeth Eaton, was born before 1216. He married Matilda in 1216. He died between 1251 and 1255.

William de Eyton, whom the Feodaries of 1240 enter as holding one fee in Eyton, and one fee in Kereswall (Cresswell), of the Barony of Wem. Though so great a Feoffee, it does not appear that William ever obtained the honor of knighthood. We have double proof that in November 1240, he had married an heiress or coheiress, Matilda, by name. William de Eyton was probably contemporary with his Uncle of the same name, and a third William de Eyton was certainly resident near the Wrekin about this period. Between 1242 and 1248, William de Etton was the third of twelve Recognizors who attended the Sheriff, Forester, and Verderers of Shropshire to decide the Abbot of Lilles- hall’s rights in a question of forest-law. In 1248 William de Eton was the fourth juror on a Withyford Inquest.

Again William de Eton was Foreman of the Jury, which about February 1249 attended at Shrewsbury to make Inquest as to the estate of Hugh Fitz Robert, late Forester of Shropshire. This William I take to have been surely the individual now under notice. As William de Ethon, he again sat for the Foreman of a Jury which on January 30, 1251, decided a dispute between the Abbeys of Buildwas and Lilleshall.

In 1255 he was deceased, his widow Matilda surviving him, but his son and heir, Peter, being an infant, probably under ten years of age. Hence the Bradford Hundred-Roll of 1255 says as follows. —“Peter de Eaton is Lord of Eaton and is inward to Peter Peverel by a gift of Ralph le Butler (then Baron of Wem). And he (Peter de Eaton) holds the said Manor by service of one knight at Wemme, in time of war, for 40 days, at his own charges. And the Manor used to do suits to County and Hundred, but it has been withdrawn these ten years; the said suit is worth 2s yearly.

Matilda, the widow of William de Eyton, remarried to Walter de Pedwardine and took with her in dower one-third of two parts of the estate of Eyton. The remaining part had never come to William de Eyton’s hands, for it was held at the time of his death by his mother Alice, who survived him. Alice, however, died before 1256. At the Assizes of January in that year, a curious point in the Law of Dower had its solution. Walter de Pedwardine and Matilda, his wife, having already one-third of two-thirds of two carucates in Eyton in Wydemore as Matilda’s dower, sued Peter Peverel and Ralph de Kent for a third of that remaining third which had now lapsed to the general estate by death of Alice.

The Plaintiffs asserted that William de Eyton had given dower to Matilda out of this remaining third. This the Defendants denied, saying that William had never been seized of the said third except in tenancy and during the period between his father Peter’s death and the allotment of the said third as his mother’s dower. The facts were not in dispute. They were that Peter de Eyton died, seized of the whole estate, that William his son and heir instantly afterward gave one third to his mother Alice in dower, and had never been otherwise in seizure of such a third;—obviously, because his mother survived him. The question was one of law, viz. whether Walter de Pedwardine and Matilda could demand dower out of dower, i.e., take thirds in such part of William de Eyton’s estate as had reverted since his death? The Court decided in the negative, dismissed Peverel and Kent sine die, and pronounced the Plaintiffs in misericordia for a false claim.^[2]

Sir Peter (II) de Eyton, 14^th great grandfather of Elizabeth Eaton, was born before 1186. He married Alice in 1186. He died between 1237 and 1240.

About the year 1220, [according to Eyton], Peter de Eyton, calling himself “son of Peter de Eyton, made a concession to Lilleshall Abbey. His Charter is entitled in the Chartulary of that House as Carta Petri de Eyton de stag-no de Lubersty et Molendino ibidem firmando. He concedes for the souls’-health of himself, his ancestors and successors, and in pure alms, a stank for the Abbot’s Vivary on the rivulet called Holebroch in the Moor of Hordbur’, and allows that the Canons may establish such stank on his land, and that the water may thus be made to back-pound on his land.

A similar and, I presume, temporary concession by the Tenants-in-fee of the adjoining Manor of Preston was sanctioned by the Deed of their Suzerain, viz. Baldwin de Hodnet died in December 1224. This gives the probable date of the transaction. Some local peculiarities are worth observation. The spot where the Abbot of Lilleshall intended to establish a Vivary, Mill, or both, is still known as Lubstrec Park. The Brook then called Holebrook, but now Humber-Brook, here divided the Abbot’s Grange of Honington on the East, from Peter de Eyton’s Manor of Horton and Baldwin de Hodnet’s Manor of Preston on the West. Such a brook could not be dammed up or impounded without the consent of the landholders on the opposite bank. Hence the above concessions to Lilleshall.

In Trinity Term 1222 and again in Easter Term 1226, Peter de Eyton and Thomas de Constantine were the only two Recognizors who attended Westminster, in a great cause between Giles de Erdington and Elena Princess of Wales, concerning the Manor of Wellington. Between 1216 and 1224, we have seen Peter de Eyton attesting a Deed of Alan, Abbot of Lilleshall. This conjunction of names may serve to date an agreement that resulted after some dispute between Abbot Alan and Peter de Eyton regarding the right of common in their respective woods.

The Canons and their men now had the same common-right in Peter’s Wood as they had enjoyed in old. Peter was to have a similar right in the Canon’s wood, except in Gubalcfs Haye’s Park and other places enclosed with a ditch or fence. Moreover, Peter’s men of Buterey were to have housebote and haybote in the Canons’ moor of The Wildemoor, without question or view of the Canons’ Foresters, but they were to give or sell nothing of the said easements, nor indeed to use them themselves, except when Peter’s own land could not fully supply their needs. And the said men of Buterey were to make an oath to keep faith with the Church of Lilleshall both concerning that moor and other places.

Each Party sealed a counterpart of this agreement, and the Writings were exchanged. The above agreement affords some presumption that Peter de Eyton had not as yet recognized his Ancestor’s grant of Buttery to Shrewsbury Abbey. We happen to know that he did so subsequently. The years 1225 and 1227 are the certain limits of a Deed whereby “Peter de Eyton gives to the said Abbey the whole land of Butherey and acquits it of all services to himself.”

This purports to have been done for a nominal sum of 2s. paid by the Monks, and the Deed was attested by Sir John le Strange, William Pantulf, Ralph de Picheford, John Boneth then Sheriff of Salope- sire, William Thaleboth, Hugh Fitz Robert, Hugh de Hedlega, John de Chetewind, Roger Sprenghose, William Chaplain of Wroccestre, Thomas de Eston, Wido de Gleseg (Glazeley), Ralph Marshall (of Boreton), and Hugh de Kynsedeleg.

An agreement between the Abbot of Shrewsbury and William de Ercalwe bears date May 13, 1234, and is attested by Peter de Eyton as second and by William de Eyton as the fifth witness. Peter and William were, perhaps, father and son, though, as we shall see, Peter had a brother named William. The latest notice I have of Peter de Eython as he is called bears the date October 13, 1237, when with twelve other Recognizors of knightly degree, he attended a great Trial concerning Shawbury, taken before the King himself at Worcester. At his death, which must have taken place within three years, Peter de Eyton left his wife Alice surviving.

On February 3, 1249, the said Alice quitclaimed to Adam Abbot of Shrewsbury all her right in Botereye, in the way of dower, the Abbot undertaking to pay her an annuity of half a merk. Witnesses Richard de Preston and Robert de Rodinson.2 In or about January 1250, Geoffrey de Langley set the orientation of 9d. on an acre at Eyton, taken from the Forest by “Alice, Relict of Peter de Eyton.” Already mentioned, William de Eyton, the brother of Peter, was seated at Eaton upon Tern. He occurs as a Juror or a Surety in June 1220 and August 1226, his name being written Eton or Ethon; but in a grant which about 1223 he made of a meadow at Eaton, he calls himself “William son of Peter de Eton,” son that is, as I think, of Peter de Eyton (I.). I shall refer to him and his successors as Eaton when I come to that place. Peter de Eyton (II.) was succeeded at Eyton by his son and heir, William de Eyton.^[3]

Peter (I) de Eyton, a 15^th great-grandfather of Elizabeth Eaton, was born before 1160. He died between 1207 and 1212.

Peter de Eyton, [successor and presumed son of Robert de Eyton], is known chiefly by his attestations of the earlier Charters of Wombridge Priory. The Benefactions of Madoc ap Gervase, Lord of Sutton, of Walter de Dunstanvill, Lord of Idsall, of John de Cambrai, Lord of Lee-Gomery, and of Alan de Hadley Lord of Hadley, range between the years 1180 and 1194, and they are nearly all attested by Peter de Eyton. In 1191, as [Eyton infers] from the names of the Justiciars who tried it, a suit about land in Chiswell was decided by a verdict of twelve Recognizors.

Peter de Eyton was one of them, and the matter having been re-opened in June 1200, he attended at Westminster with six other Recognizors (survivors, I presume, of the twelve) to certify what had taken place in 1191. In 1207 several amercements (probably inflicted at a recent Forest-Assize) were entered on the Shropshire Pipe-Roll. One of half a mark is charged on Peter de Eaton. The Pipe-Roll of 1212 contains a fine of 100 shillings. Which Peter de Hetton had proffered and paid for having the land of his Father (pro habendd terrd Patris sui). It is not known that the Eytons were Tenants-in-capite, nor was the Barony of Wem likely at this period to have been in the custody of the Crown.^[4] 

Robert de Eyton, 16^th great-grandfather of Elizabeth Eaton, was born before 1145. He was a contemporary of Henry II of England (between 1154 and 1189). He died between 1175 and 1180.

Some sources suggest that Robert de Eyton was a son of William Fitz Alan, and therefore either a descendent of Banquo, Thane of Lochaber (AD 1000) or of Alan, Seneschal of Dol (c. 1066). The former has been traced as follows: (I) Banquo, Thane of Lochaber, A. D. 1000. (II) Fleance, son of Banquo, married Guenta, Princess of North Wales. (III) Alan Fitz Flaald, son of Fleance, married America. (IV) William Fitz Alan (son of Alan) married Isabel de Say. (V) Robert de Eaton, son of William Fitz Alan.

The Banquo, who heads the list above, is none other than the character who appears in Shakespeare’s Macbeth and is murdered under orders of the title character and later comes back as a ghost to haunt Macbeth. Banquo was the progenitor of the Royal House of Stuart (Stewart), which ruled Scotland and later Scotland and England as the United Kingdom. Shakespeare alludes to this in the opening scene of the play, in which the three witches prophesied that Banquo’s descendants would take the throne of Scotland. However, this pedigree was largely discredited by 19th-century historians and literary critics, such as Sir Walter Scott.^[5] 

“These characters, though named by Holinshed, followed by Shakespeare, are now considered by the best authors to be altogether fictitious personages. Mr Chalmers says, ‘History knows nothing of Banquo, the Thane of Lochabar, nor of Fleance, his son.’ Sir Walter Scott observes, that ‘early authorities show us no such persons as Banquo and his son Fleance; nor have we reason to think that the latter ever fled further from Macbeth than across the flat scene according to the stage direction. Neither were Banquo and his son ancestors of the house of Stuart.’ Yet still modern ‘ Peerages’ and ‘Genealogical Charts’ retain the names of Banquo and Fleance in the pedigree of the Royal Houses of Scotland and England ; even the laureate Southey invokes Fleance, as,— ‘ Parent of the sceptred race;’ and our great Dramatist makes the weird sisters foretell to Banquo,— ‘ Thou shall get kings, though thou be none.’^[6] 

The real progenitor of the Stuarts has been ably traced by George Chalmers, in his Caledonia (1807), to the common ancestor of the Fitz-Alans in England, and of the Stuarts in Scotland. FLAALD, or Flathald, obtained from William the Conqueror, whom he accompanied to England, the castle and lordship of Oswaldestre, which is now Oswestry, in Shropshire. He left a son, Alan Fitz-Flaald, who had two sons. The eldest, William Fitz-Alan, was an ancestor of the Fitz-Alans, Earls of Arundel. The second son, Walter, was made seneschal, or high-steward to David I., King of Scots, ‘and the dignity becoming hereditary in the family, what was originally a title was converted into a surname, and employed as such.”

An alternate pedigree of Robert de Eyton is accepted by some. If Robert de Eyton is, in fact, the son of William Fitz Alan, then the revised pedigree follows the accepted pedigree for the Fitz Alan brothers, and that is as follows: ( I) Alan, Seneschal of Dol, a Breton of Normandy, fl. A. D. 1066. ( II) Flaald fis de Alan ( III) Alan Fitz Flaald.( IV) William Fitz Alan. (V) Robert de Eaton, son of William Fitz Alan. However, even this pedigree is controversial, as discussed by Rev. Robert Eyton in his multi-volume Antiquities of Shropshire published in the 19th century.

“The probability that Robert de Eyton was Warin’s direct descendant and heir is not the mere average probability that the Tenant of three distinct Manors a century after Doomsday was the lineal representative of the Tenant of those same Manors at Doomsday. Paul’s Barony was exempt from all probability of being disturbed as to its constituents by that great Shropshire catastrophe, the fall of Earl Robert de Belesme. We know in short that it was then or afterward enlarged rather than diminished, and we may fairly presume that this was in reward of the loyalty of its Chief and his services at the siege of Bridgenorth. Again, it is probable that Warin was himself a Cadet of the House of Pantulf, for the Descendants of Robert de Eyton, his presumed heir, have uniformly quartered the Arms of Pantulf. It has been suggested that this quartering of the Arms of a Suzerain might have been merely a token of feudal dependence. The alternate theory seems to be that when a Vassal is found bearing the Arms of his Suzerain, as a quarter, and without any difference, he was his Suzerain’s relation by blood as well as tenure.

“I should now observe that the Lords of Eyton are found to have obtained feoffment from the Barons of Wem in four Manors, in which Doomsday does not state that Warin or any other Tenant had as yet acquired investiture.

That this change was to come soon after Doomsday is clear, for the whole Fief held by D.C. Eyton under Pantulf was of old Feoffment. The four Manors in question were Buttery, Half-Lawley, and Sutton, all in Shropshire, and Cresswell, in Staffordshire. It is, with respect to Buttery, and Robert de Eyton’s disposal thereof in the reign of Henry II, that the history of this family recommences, nearly a century after Doomsday. Robert de Eyton gave Buttery to Shrewsbury Abbey, with Ivo Pantulf his Suzerain. As usual in such early grants, the confirming Deed of the Suzerain is the only one preserved, perhaps the only one executed at the time.

Ivo Pantulf addressing his sons, acquaints them that “he has conceded in almoning to the Monks of Shrewsbury a certain estate (unam terram) called Buttereia, which Robert de Eaton had given to the said Monks. Witnesses, Alured Abbot of Hageman, Ivo Chaplain, Ralph Pantulf, Walter Meverel, Roger de Bethesloua, John de Eppeleia, Helias de Jai, Robert Christian, &C.” The above Deed probably passed between 1170 and 1175, and so was coeval with the close of Robert de Eyton’s life.”^[7] 

The coat-of-arms of the English family of Eaton is: Azure fret on a field. Crest: An eagle’s head erased sable in the mouth a sprig vert. Motto: Vincit Omnia Veritas. (Truth conquers all things.) Eaton is a surname of Welsh and Saxon origin. It is a place name meaning hill or town near the water. In Welsh, ‘Aw’ means water, and ‘Twyn,’ a small hill; Awtyn, called ‘Eyton,’ a small hillock near the water. In Saxon, ‘Ea’ means water and ‘Ton’ town – the same significance, viz.: A town or hill near the water. And from someplace bearing this name, the first of the family to use the surname took their hometown name, after a very common custom. The name of the family is spelled in various ways: Eton, Etton, Eyton, and Eaton by all authorities during the early days, but the latter spelling became generally used several generations before the first emigrant came to America.^[8]

As Cordelia Pickering is, in fact, the mother of Della Gaume DeBacker, then Robert de Eyton is my 25th great grandfather.

As noted above, Thomas Cressett, the father-in-law of Henry Eaton, was the son of Thomas Cressett and Jane Corbet. The family of Jane Corbet was another line traceable back to the century of the Norman Conquest.

Jane Cressett, a 9th great-grandmother of Cordelia Pickering, was born in 1492 at Upton, Cresset, Shropshire, England. She married Henry Eaton, son of Louis Eaton and Anne Savage, abt. 1510.^[9] Her father, Thomas Cressett, died in England. He was born in 1465 at Upton Cresset, Shropshire, England. He married Elizabeth Cornwall, daughter of Edmund Cornwall and Maria Hoorde, in 1496 at Burford, Shropshire, England.

Jane Corbet, the grandmother of Jane Cressett, was born in 1430 at Moreton Corbet, Shropshire, England. She married Thomas Cressett, son of Robert Cressett and Christian Stapleton, in 1456 at Moreton Corbet, Shropshire, England. She died after 1456 at Shropshire, England.

“Jane Corbet married Thomas Corbet, Esq of Upton-Cressett [in] Shropshire, son and heir of Robert Crossett by Christian, dau. of John Stapleton, Kt…. They had two sons, Richard and Thomas… Thomas Cressett, Esq. left a will dated August 20 1520.”^[10]

Roger Corbet, a great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, was born in 1412 at Moreton Corbet, Shropshire, England. He married Elizabeth Hopton, daughter of Thomas Hopton, in 1450 at Moreton Corbet, Shropshire, England.^[11] He died in 1468 at Moreton Corbet, Shropshire, England.^[12]

Robert Corbet, 2nd great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, married Margaret Mallory, daughter of Sir William Mallory. He died in 1439. Sir Roger Corbet, 3rd great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, married Margaret Erdington de Shawbery, daughter of Thomas Erdington, Lord of Shawberry. He died in 1395. Sir Robert Corbet de Morton, a 4^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, married Elizabeth. He died in 1399.^[13]

Sir Thomas Corbet de Morton, 5^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, married Amicia. Sir Robert Corbet de Morton, a 6^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, married Lady Matilda de Tideshall after 1307. Sir Richard Corbet de Morton, a 7^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, married Lady Petronilla de Booley et de Edbaldenham in 1248 at Salop, England.^[14]

 Sir Richard Corbet de Morton, an 8^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, married Joanna Turret. Sir Rodger Corbet was the 9^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett.  Thomas Corbet of Wattlesborough was the 10^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett. William Corbet of Wattlesborough was the 11^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett.

Roger Corbet, a 12^th great-grandfather of Jane Cressett, accompanied William I to the conquest of England in 1066.^[15] He witnessed the charter of Henry I to Abbey Shrewsbury and held twenty-five manors in Salop (Shrewsbury) in 1121.^[16]

As Cordelia Pickering was, in fact, the mother of Della Gaume DeBacker, Rogerus Corbet was my 27^th great-grandfather.

---

[1] Rev. Robert Eyton Antiquties of Shropshire, pgs 32-33.

[2] Rev. Robert Eyton Antiquties of Shropshire, pgs 30-32.

[3] Rev. Robert Eyton Antiquties of Shropshire, pgs 28-30.

[4] Rev. Robert Eyton Antiquties of Shropshire, pg 26.

[5] William Richard Cutter, New England Families, pg 1402.

[6] George Russell French, Shakspeareana Genealogica: Part I. Notes On Characters In Macbeth And Hamlet (London: MacMillan, 1869), pgs 291-292. Hereinafter cited as Shakspeareana Genealogica.

[7] Rev. Robert Eyton Antiquties of Shropshire, pgs 26-35.

[8] William Richard Cutter, New England Families, pgs 1402-1403.

[9] Thomas Hawley, The Visitations of Essex, 1552 (Essex (England): Mitchell and Hughes, 1878), pg 50 “Henrey Etton of Etton.= Janne, da. Tho. Cressett, of Upton Cressett”. Hereinafter cited as The Visitations of Essex, 1552.

[10] Douglas Richardson, Plantagenet Ancestry: A Study in Colonial and Medieval Families (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 2004), pg 515. Hereinafter cited as Plantagenet Ancestry.

[11] Richard Treswell, The Visitation of Shropshire; 1623, pg 135 “Rogerus Corbet (miles ob.) == Elizabetha, fillia et haeris Thomoae Hopton, renupta Tiptoft Comiti Wigorniae et 3rd William Stanley.”

[12] Douglas Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry: A Study in Colonial & Medieval Families (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 2005), pg 535 “Roger Corbett de Morton ob. 7 Ed. 4”. Hereinafter cited as Magna Carta Ancestry.

[13] Richard Treswell, The Visitation of Shropshire; 1623, pg 134 “miles ob. 49 E 3.”

[14] Richard Treswell, The Visitation of Shropshire; 1623, pg 134 – date is given 32 H III (1348) assume this is date of union.

[15] John Burke, Genealogical and Heraldic Dictionary of the Landed Gentry (London: Henry Colburn, 1868), Vol I, pg 263. Hereinafter cited as Burke’s Landed Gentry.

[16] Richard Treswell, The Visitation of Shropshire; 1623, pg 134.