Subject: Re: Manor of Llandough - MDR Entries
From: Sion Buckler
Direction: sent
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 17:41 UTC
Institution: The National Archives
Refs: none
Archive id: gm-19c90bdf2c23a4ab
------------------------------------------------------------

You are a delight.
My family thanks you.
This means a great deal.

Sion

On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 at 13:50, Philip Gale <
[email redacted]> wrote:

> Dear Mr Buckler,
>
>
>
> Thank you for your e-mail and for clarifying the subject of your enquiry.
>
>
>
> As you know the Manorial Documents Register (MDR) only gives general
> descriptions of the content, extent and location of the manorial records
> recorded in the register: LLANDOUGH MANOR | The National Archives
>   The
> manorial records for the Manor of Llandough are held at the National
> Library of Wales, Glamorgan Archives and West Glamorgan Archives, and their
> catalogues can be accessed on-line : NLW Catalogue
>  
> , Glamorgan Archives Catalogue  
> and Archive Collections - Swansea
>  
>
>
>
> The Welsh entries in the online MDR were added in the 1990’s were based on
> the survey returns to the Manorial Documents Committee received from
> institutions and private owners during the 1920’s. These were subsequently
> passed to the custody of the Historical Manuscripts Commission in 1959
> which amalgamated with the Public Record Office to form The National
> Archives in 2003. I have requested to see the original returns for Manor of
> Llandough to see if they can provide any additional information on the
> documentation relating to the manor (Ref. *HMC 9/311*: *https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C5879336
>  * )
>
>
>
> There are several other manors with a similar name in Glamorgan and a MDR
> search using the search term “Llandough” gives the following result: Search
> results: Llandough Glamorgan | The National Archives
>  
> Sometimes the administration of different manors were brought together and
> this appears to have occurred  with the Llandough and St May’s Church
> Manors :
> https://archives.library.wales/index.php/manors-of-llandough-and-st-mary-church
>
>
>
> I will contact you again once I have had an opportunity to look at the
> original returns sent to Manorial Documents Committee. I hope this
> preliminary information is of assistance.
>
>
>
> Yours sincerely
>
>
>
> [image: The National Archives logo]
>
> *Philip Gale *|* Head of the Collections and Cultural Property Team*
> T: 020 3908 X 9193 | W: nationalarchives.gov.uk
>  
> Twitter: @UkNatArchives
> The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey [postcode redacted]
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Sion Buckler  
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 18, 2026 5:49:54 PM
> *To:* Philip Gale  
> *Subject:* Re: Formal Notice for Record: Church View Close, Llandough /
> BP vs Buckler 1987
>
>
>
> *EXTERNAL*: This email originates from outside of The National Archives.
>
> Dear Mr Gale,
>
> Thank you for your reply of 12 February. I would like to clarify and
> narrow my request to ensure there is no misunderstanding regarding the
> records I am trying to locate.
>
> My correspondence is *not* seeking an adjudication of ownership or title
> — I fully accept the stated remit boundaries of the Manorial Documents
> Register (MDR). Rather, my enquiry concerns the existence of *any
> archival reference, index card, catalogue entry, or pointer to a document
> historically known as the “Williams Title”*, which was, according to
> contemporaneous family testimony, at one point:
>
>    1. Held in the *local public library* in the first half of the
>    twentieth century; and
>    2. Indexed in some manner (e.g., an index card or catalogue reference)
>    that persisted even after the original document could not be located.
>
> My understanding of the MDR — as described on your own website — is that
> it exists to provide brief descriptions of manorial records and details of
> their locations:
>
> “An official index of English and Welsh manorial records providing brief
> descriptions of documents and details of their locations… It does *not*
> include title deeds or conveyances, and is *not* a register of ownership
> of manorial lordships or rights.”
> https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/manor-search
>  
>
> Based on that description, I would be grateful if you could confirm
> whether:
>
>    1. *Any catalogue entries, index cards, reference pointers, or
>    archival descriptions* relating to the *Manor of Llandough* or the *Williams
>    family title* exist in the MDR or related archival catalogues.
>    2. If so, the *reference identifiers* and information on how these can
>    be consulted in person or via digitised records.
>
> To be precise, I am looking for historical references to the *index card
> or listing* for the Williams Title — whether held in a library, local
> record office, or other institutional archive — rather than a claim for
> ownership judgment itself.
>
> If such a reference does not currently appear in the MDR, I would greatly
> appreciate guidance on where any known catalogue cards or entry lists for
> manorial documents from *Glamorgan / Llandough* prior to 1950 might now
> reside (e.g., regional archives, National Archives holdings, or affiliated
> local repository catalogues).
>
> Anyway I anticipate your forgiveness, if I have erred in writing to you
> earlier.
>
> Thank you again and in advance for your assistance.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
>
> Sion Buckler
>
> On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 at 14:30, Philip Gale <
> [email redacted]> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr Buckler,
>
>
>
> Thank you for your e-mail of 10 February whose contents are noted. The
> National Archives does not hold any records relating to your enquiry. The
> Manorial Documents Register which this department administers is a register
> for the location of manorial documents and not of the ownership and descent
> of manorial titles:
>
>
>
>
> https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/finding-records-in-discovery-and-other-databases/manorial-documents-register/
>
>
>
> A similar position holds for The National Archives responsibilities for
> public records and concerns about the past management of official records
> is a matter for the relevant government department such as HM Land
> Registry.
>
>
>
> Yours sincerely
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: The National Archives logo]
>
> *Philip Gale *|* Head of the Collections and Cultural Property Team*
> T: 020 3908 X 9193 | W: nationalarchives.gov.uk
>  
> Twitter: @UkNatArchives
> The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey [postcode redacted]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Sion Buckler  
>
> Sent: 10 February 2026 22:15
>
> To: Archives Sector Leadership  
>
> Cc: [email redacted]; [email redacted];
> Paul Egan  ; [email redacted];
> [email redacted]
>
> Subject: Formal Notice for Record: Church View Close, Llandough / BP vs
> Buckler 1987
>
>
>
>         You don't often get email from [email redacted]. Learn
> why this is important  
>
>
>
>
>
> EXTERNAL: This email originates from outside of The National Archives.
>
>
>
> FORMAL NOTICE OF RECORD CHALLENGE, ASSERTION OF RIGHT, AND DEMAND FOR
> ENGAGEMENT
>
>
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
>
>
> This Notice is issued for placement on official record and for reliance.
> It is not informal correspondence. I urge you not to resort to silence,
> deflection, or delay, as doing so following receipt of this notice
> constitutes knowing reliance upon, and maintenance of, records alleged to
> be materially defective through fraud, concealment, denial of due process,
> and systemic erasure. Please report any suspicious activity and
> discrepancies identified.
>
>
>
> This Notice is issued in pursuit of narrative justice at this stage;
> formal judicial remedies are expressly reserved. It serves to document our
> family's side of the story before it is completely erased and history
> rewritten, ensuring awareness among custodians of land, heritage, heraldry,
> archaeology, and public records.
>
>
>
> My elder brother, Rhys Buckler, and I are the sons of the late William
> Buckler (d. 1991), defendant in the landmark legal case BP Properties Ltd v
> Buckler (1987), and the grandchildren of the late Mary Williams, whose
> dispossession, marginalisation, and exclusion from judicial determination
> remain unresolved matters of record. Mary Williams was repeatedly and
> materially falsely addressed/mislabeled in legal and administrative records
> as “Mrs Buckler,” a misidentification that was never judicially tested and
> which directly affected the handling, scope, and outcome of proceedings.
> The Williams/Buckler family held claim to the land title, having acquired
> and occupied Great House Farm continuously since 1667, based on family
> records, historical evidence, and centuries of resistance to adverse claims.
>
>
>
> I place on record that I am the first member of my family able to speak
> publicly and formally on these matters. Other close family members remain
> too traumatised and intimidated by the historical conduct of these
> proceedings—including violent eviction, demolition, and loss of
> livelihood—to engage, despite the continuing consequences of dispossession.
> That silence must not be misread as consent, acquiescence, or abandonment
> of right. There is a material distinction between free silence and silence
> produced by fear, trauma, and coercive experience.
>
>
>
> The story, as we have pieced it together, reveals a multi-generational
> pattern of lawfare and siege: from Norman/English conquests in 1100
> granting lordships over ancient Welsh Christian landscapes, through
> monastic (1215–1539) and Crown seizures (1539 onward), to industrial
> encroachments (e.g., 1876 Limeworks severance without consent) and modern
> corporate possession actions. This culminated in the 1988 demolition of an
> 800-year-old farmhouse amid police standoffs, leaving the family homeless
> and the site scarred, now buried under Church View Close. Archaeological
> vindication came too late—1994 excavations revealed over 1,000 Roman and
> medieval burials, confirming family warnings (e.g., the 1870 Roman soldier
> discovery under the living room floor, suppressed by authorities)—yet
> heritage records celebrate the site while omitting our dispossession.
>
>
>
> The following assertions of right are now formally placed on record. They
> have never been lawfully adjudicated or extinguished:
>
>
>
> 1.      Rhys Buckler may be the rightful Manorial Lord of the Manor of
> Llandough, by right of primogeniture and continuous hereditary connection
> arising from our family’s occupation of Great House Farm from 1667 until
> our narrative, legal, and physical dispossession.
>
> 2.      I assert a claim to act as Squire of the Manor of Llandough, as
> executive representative and guardian of the Buckler–Williams estate and
> matriarchal lineage, with a mandate to pursue correction of record,
> restitution, and restorative remedies.
>
>
>
> These are assertions of right, not settled declarations, placed on record
> pending proper adjudication—which has been historically obstructed through
> procedural narrowing, missing documents, and avoidance of full hearings.
>
>
>
> In 1974, Mary Williams was twice prevented from presenting her case and
> obtaining a judicial determination of superior ownership, despite claims
> grounded in long occupation, intent, and possession. The court confined
> inquiry to animus possidendi (intention to possess) and excluded animus
> domini (intention to own), reclassifying her from putative owner to mere
> occupier and foreclosing title adjudication. BP sought possession only, not
> ownership rulings—a choice unexplained and significant. Proceedings were
> adjourned or quashed without resolution.
>
>
>
> This occurred despite evidence of ownership intent, including:
>
>
>
> *       Centuries-long occupation and resistance (e.g., failed 1938
> auction due to local support; post-1945 rent disputes).
>
> *       Roman-era remains and historical significance (e.g., Guglielmo
> Marconi's 1897 residence during radio experiments, with family aid erased
> from records).
>
> *       Unformalized deals like the 1895–1905 Daniel Thomas quarrying
> permission for promised title, undermined by vanished deeds.
>
>
>
> Judicial ownership examination would have engaged archaeological/heritage
> protections, incompatible with redevelopment—consequences avoided, raising
> credibility concerns.
>
>
>
> Serious unresolved anomalies persist, indicating something is still not
> right with the record:
>
>
>
> *       Licence correspondence dated 31 October 1974 surfacing only on 4
> November, potentially interrupting proceedings to prevent hearings.
>
> *       Claims of 1974 benevolent withdrawal under press scrutiny
> unsupported by verifiable coverage.
>
> *       Land registration before Mary Williams’s 1983 death without title
> determination; disputes possibly lodged/suppressed by Land Registry.
>
> *       Inconsistent treatment of BP entities across proceedings to family
> detriment.
>
> *       Procedural barriers preventing effective defense (e.g.,
> interrupted essential services post-licence; 1960–1987 court rulings
> dismissing ancestral title as "notion" without evidence).
>
> *       Knowing bypass of archaeological constraints (e.g., 1978 trenches
> ignored; no contemporaneous 1970s/1990s press on discoveries amid
> development).
>
> *       Missing key documents (e.g., 1667 conveyance, 1811–1835 Lambert
> Williams agreements proving status, 1982–84 library deeds vanishing).
>
> *       Risks of further erasure: Heritage databases celebrate "Llandough
> Roman villa cemetery" while omitting our saga; modern residents unaware of
> the "battleground" site.
>
>
>
> These anomalies suggest systemic theft, from colonial English subjugation
> (e.g., 1543–1770 orbit shifts) to corporate siege, during Wales'
> cultural/economic transitions. Authority derived through such means is
> illegitimate under natural justice, customary Welsh principles, and
> moral-legal frameworks. The record's distortion secures advantage, but
> passage of time does not validate it.
>
>
>
> Preliminary assessment indicates cumulative benefits from redevelopment
> (absent title extinguishment) exceed £100 million, forming a basis for
> reparations—covering lost land, artifacts, livelihood, and trauma.
>
>
>
> I require relevant public servants, custodians, and office-holders
> (including Land Registry, heraldry bodies, museums, archaeologists, MPs,
> historians, and councillors) to cease delay, engage substantively,
> review/correct/annotate records where defective, and prevent further
> rewriting of history. Justice delayed is denied, especially with verifiable
> evidence available.
>
>
>
> This Notice:
>
>
>
> *       Challenges the record's accuracy, completeness, and legitimacy.
>
> *       Place assertions of title/standing on record pending adjudication.
>
> *       Reserves all rights without prejudice.
>
> *       Puts officials/beneficiaries on notice that silence/reliance may
> aggravate responsibility.
>
>
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, His Majesty the King was notified yesterday.
>
>
>
> This serves as an invitation to engage constructively before reliance
> becomes untenable.
>
>
>
> Regards, Sion Buckler On behalf of the Buckler–Williams family [address redacted],
> Dinas Powys, Vale of Glamorgan, Wales. https://bpvsbuckler.datro.xyz/ <
> https://bpvsbuckler.datro.xyz/>
>
>
>
> Postscript — Disability and Succession (Material Notice): The
> heir-apparent to the asserted Manorial Lordship is Rhys Buckler’s son, a
> young man with Down syndrome. Any obstruction, marginalisation, or
> differential treatment affecting his inheritance would engage the Equality
> Act 2010 and UK international obligations on disability rights. Disability
> cannot bar succession or recognition. This is recorded to prevent claims of
> ignorance.
>
> Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> National Archives Disclaimer This email and any files transmitted with it
> are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom they are
> addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this
> email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email. Opinions,
> conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do
> not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither
> given nor endorsed by it.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> National Archives Disclaimer This email and any files transmitted with it
> are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom they are
> addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this
> email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email. Opinions,
> conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do
> not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither
> given nor endorsed by it.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>