No, it would not rather have been "Lundie." The "de Londoniis" family, also
transcribed/translated as "de Londres" and "de London," was connected to the
Lundins, not Lundie, and not London, England. And yes, the Londoniis family
did end up with a new surname, Doorward or Durward, assumed from their
office. No one is claiming that the Lundin family were from London,
England.
Jared L. Olar
----- Original Message -----
From: "M.Sjostrom" <***@yahoo.com>
To: <gen-***@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 11:31 AM
Subject: Edgar the Atheling's daughter, Margaret,wife of Ralph Lovel and
Thomas de London
'Lundin': is this again another of unwarranted 'name's the same' cases ?
"....her 2nd marriage to Thomas de London, if what I read in print can be
trusted, it is believed that this couple had one son, Malcolm de London,
who adopted the surname, Durward. Malcolm Durward in turn is reputed to
be the grandfather of Sir Alan Durward, who married Marjory of Scotland,
the illegitimate daughter of King Alexander II of Scotland. Regarding the
name change from London to Durward, I can attest that Sir Alan Durward's
father occurs in records as both Thomas de London (or Lundin) and as
Thomas Durward."
* wouldn't it rather have been 'Lundie' than Lundin ?
* this lineage is somehow joined to the Forfarshire place, named
Lundie....
Of some for-us-unknown Scots origin, the lairds of Lundie, when the family
had become prominent, brought forward a genealogical myth that they
descend from Edgar Atheling.
* generally, the high-medieval people of prominence wanted to descend from
rulers; and did not want their lineage to be that of upstarts... All those
family inventions had the common feature that they had a king (or god) in
the root.
I have great suspicions that a Londoner family of 1100s would adopt Gaelic
first names for their kids...