^{page xlviii note 1} Nos. 65 and 67 below, see also Nos. 66, 68, and 69.

^{page xlviii note 2} As also did his father, another John Byset, in 1307, Cal. Inq., iv, 431.

^{page xlviii note 3} Cal. Inq., vii, 605.

^{page xlviii note 4} Chancery Inq. p.m., Edw. III, File 130.

^{page xlviii note 5} They may perhaps be identified with Margeria Romesey, “domicella Isabelle Regine ” and John her son, who were buried at Greyfriars, London (The Greyfriars of London, p. 78).

^{page xlviii note 6} Cal. Inq., vii, 514.

^{page xlix note 1} Cal. Inq., viii, 673; the year of birth is illegible, it cannot have been later tban 1325.

^{page xlix note 2} Feet of Fines, , No. 8.

^{page xlix note 3} See No. 67 below.

^{page xlix note 4} Inquisition for William Horsy in 1448, Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry VI, File. 131.

^{page xlix note 5} See No. 67 below.

^{page xlix note 6} See p. liii below.

^{page xlix note 7} Chancery Inq. p.m., Edw. III, File 234.

^{page l note 1} Inq. ad quod damnum, 404 (7).

^{page l note 2} Hoare, Wilts. Cawden, p. 13.

^{page l note 3} Madox, Baronia Anglica, 51, 52 (with an account of the early history of the barony of Byset).

^{page l note 4} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry IV, File 21.

^{page l note 5} See No. 65 below.

^{page l note 6} Recited in Inquisitions for Sir Walter Romsey, William Horsy, and Thomas Payn.

^{page l note 7} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry IV, File 44.

^{page li note 1} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry IV, File 49.

^{page li note 2} Id., File 88.

^{page li note 3} Nos. 65 and 67.

^{page li note 4} Inquisition for William Horsy.

^{page li note 5} Id., Henry VI, File 38, the date of death is given as 3rd September or 1st November, 1428.

^{page li note 6} Inquisition for William Horsy.

^{page li note 7} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry VI, File 44.

^{page li note 8} Cal. Pat. Rolls, Henry VI, ii, 65.

^{page li note 9} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry VI, File 67.

^{page li note 10} Cal. Pat. Rolls, Henry VI, iii, 473.

^{page li note 11} Somerset Inquisition for William Horsy.

^{page li note 12} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry VI, File 131, “manerium &c. remanserunt Thome Hunteley &c. et eidem Thome virtute finis ”.

^{page lii note 1} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry VI, File 131. Horsy and the Wykes are alleged to have entered on Joan Payne's death, but Thomas Payne was clearly possessed of Ocle till 31st December, 1447. See also Cal. Pat. Rolls, Henry VI, v, 187.

^{page lii note 2} Coram Rege Roll, 807, m. 56, Hilary Term, 2 Edward IV. On the dorse of the same membrane Thomas Swete's wife is. described as “Johannam, uxorem ejus, nuper de Bradeford, spynster ”.

^{page lii note 3} Early Chancery Proceedings, 29/31 and 32.

^{page liii note 1} Coram Rege Rolls, 804, m. 19, 805, mm. 19 and 32, 807, m. 56.

^{page liii note 2} Id., 805; Rex. m. 22.

^{page liii note 3} Placita de Banco, Roll 807, m. 376 dorso; but this may have been a separate dispute relating to the same lands as were in dispute in 1482, see p. lv below.

^{page liii note 4} This does not preclude the possibility that Margaret was daughter of Walter and Alice de Romesey.

^{page liii note 5} A doubt was expressed by Hampton as to whether the “office ” was to be found in Wiltshire or Hampshire, see No. 65.

^{page liv note 1} Coram Rege Roll, 808, m. 80.

^{page liv note 2} Placita de Banco, Roll 811, m. 224.

^{page liv note 3} Roll 811, m. 96.

^{page liv note 4} See No. 65 below.

^{page liv note 5} Chancery Inq. p.m., Henry V, File 38.

^{page liv note 6} Dict. Nat. Biog., xlvi, 147, where the fact that he was ever married is questioned.

^{page liv note 7} See p. 69 below.

^{page liv note 8} See p. li above.

^{page lv note 1} Wrottesley, Pedigrees from the Plea Rolls, p. 462.

^{page lv note 2} The pedigree seems to be faulty; Richard Hunteley was certainly son of Margaret Romesey, whose husband was John Hunteley. Joan Swete's alleged grandmother Margaret was probably daughter of John and Margaret Hunteley.

^{page lv note 3} See No. 65.

^{page lv note 4} See No. 69.

^{page lv note 5} Cal. Pat. Rolls, Edw. IV, ii, 33. The appearance of Calewey is possibly explained by the statement in Hutchins, Dorset, iv, 370, that Joan, daughter of Maud and Thomas Bingham, married Thomas Kelwaye de Rathborne (? Rokeborne).

^{page lvi note 1} Chancery Inq. p.m, Edward IV, File 62.

^{page lvi note 2} Id., File 17.