BLOUNT 195 BLOUNT BARONY BY i. Thomas le Blount, 2iid s., but eventually WRIT. h. of Sir Ralph le Blount, of Belton, Rutland, (living . ^. Dec. 1298) by Cicely (or Alice) da. and coh. of Sir ■^*' ' John LovETT, of Hampton Lovett, co. Worcester, was one of the Knights who fought under Edward I, and was Governor of Drosselan [i.e. Drysslwyn) Castle in the vale of Towy, co. Carmarthen, 131 1. He was Steward of the Household, 1326, and was sum. to Pari, from 3 Dec. (1326) 20 Edw. II to 15 June (1328) 2 Edw. III,(') by writs directed Thome le Blount^ whereby he may be held to have be- come LORD BLOUNT.C) He m., istly, ( — ). He w., 2ndly, before 23 Sep. 1325, Julian, widow of John Hastings, [Lord] Hastings (who d. 6 Jan. 1324/5), da. and h. of Thomas de Leyburne, by Alice, da. of Ralph DE Tony, of Flamstead, Herts. He d. between 12 June and 7 Sep. 1328. Before 17 Oct. 1328, his widow m. Sir William Clinton, who in 1337 was cr. Earl of Huntingdon, and who d. s.t. 1354. She, who from her great possessions was called "The Infanta of Kent," d. s.p. i Nov. 1367. Will dat. 30 Oct. 1367, directing her burial to be at St. Augustine's, Canterbury. 2. William le BlounTjC^) s. and h. by ist wife, was living 1366, but neither he nor any of his descendants were ever sum. to Pari. 3. Sir John le Blount, of Belton afsd., s. and h., is said to have been Constable of the Tower of London to Edward III. Hew., istly( — ). He m., 2ndly, in or before 1366, Elizabeth, da. and h. of Sir Simon DE Furneaux, of Kilve, Somerset, by Alice, da. of Sir Henry Umfraville. She survived him and was living 1385. 4. Sir Thomas le Blount, of Belton, s. and h. by ist wife. He was Deputy Naperer for the Earl of Pembroke at the coronation of Richard II in 1377, and engaging in a conspiracy to restore that King, •<fizs, attainted znd'pxxt to death, with unwonted barbarity, in the Green Ditch at Oxford, Jan. 1399/1400, when any Peerage honours vested in him became forfeited. (^) The entry of this last writ is partially cancelled, which points to his having died about then. V.G. It is conjectured in Banks's Baron/a Aug/. Concentrata, vol. i, p. 1 26, that Thomas le Blount and William le Blount were both sum. jure uxoris, "for," adds Banks, "at that period, though the writs were personal, without any reference to a particular Barony, yet they were chiefly founded on the possession of some Baronial estate, which ceasing to remain in the inheritance of their descendants, such descendants were no longer reputed Barons, nor had further summons directed to them." C") As to how far these early writs of summons did in fact create any Peerage title, see Appendix A in the last volume. V.G. ('^) There has been general and not unnatural confusion between this man and his namesake who was summoned in 1330. V.G.
