Wiesbaden, Feb. 16. 1850.
_Cromwell's Estates_ (No. 18. p. 277., and No. 21. p. 339.).--I am
much obliged to "SELEUCUS" for his answer to this inquiry, as far as
regards the seignory of Gower. It also throws a strong light on the
remaining names; by the aid of which, looking in Gloucestershire and
Monmouthshire, I have identified _Margore_ with the parish of Magor
(St. Mary's), hundred of Caldecott, co. Monmouth: and guess, that
for Chepstall we must read _Chepstow_, which is in the same hundred,
and the population of which we know was stout in the royal cause, as
tenants of the Marquis of Worcester would be.
Then I guess Woolaston may be _Woolston_ (hundred of Dewhurst), co.
Gloucester; and Chaulton, one of the _Charltons_ in the same county,
perhaps _Charlton Kings_, near Cheltenham; where again we read, that
many of the residents were slain in the civil war, _fighting on the
king's side_.
This leaves only Sydenham without something like a probable
conjecture, at least: unless here, too, we may guess it was miswritten
for Siddington, near Cirencester. The names, it is to be observed,
are only recorded by Noble; whose inaccuracy as a transcriber has been
shown abundantly by Carlyle. The record to which he refers as extant
in the House of Commons papers, is not to be found, I am told.
Now, if it could be ascertained, either that the name in question
had been Cromwell's, or even that they were a part of the Worcester
estates, before the civil war, we should have the whole list
cleared,--thanks to the aid so effectually given by "SELEUCUS'S"
apposite explanations of one of its items.
Will your correspondents complete the illustrations thus well begun?