13th Century Wealthy Nobleman Robert Achard d.1298 Oxford England

Robert Achard came from a wealthy noble family gifted with land in England by William the Conqueror in the 11th century for their help in conquering England. Their origins are in Normandy, France. Robert was the son of Peter Archard 1278 and Elizabeth / Isabel 1299, daughter of William Englefield 1260.

• BIRTH: 1250, England
• DEATH: 1298 (aged 47–48)England
• BURIAL: Holy Cross Churchyard Sparsholt, Vale of White Horse District, Oxfordshire, England. 

He married Joan Gurdon, who is said to have died in 1319 but had no issue (This is a common claim tale for melanated Anglo-Saxon nobles because many British lands should still be in the family name. Due to the Cromwellian race wars in the 17th century, the family coincidently no longer had heirs. It is time to stop lying and admit that their land was stolen while the family was genocided and or put into slavery. Notice his dominant handsome features that were intentionally removed but retained the outline of his lips and nose. No matter how much paint is removed from his monument, it is clear to see that Robert was a dark-melanated man, aka BLACK.

1336 Lady Joanna, first wife of Sir Robert Achard 1353, notice her children’s faces have been sanded down and one removed.  This is to hide the childs facial features.

The Achard lands can be traced to a grant by Henry I to his teacher (magister) Robert Achard of 5 manors, namely Aldermaneston (Aldermaston), Finchampstead (Finchampstead), Colsthorpe (Coldrop), Speresholt (Sparsholt) and Cewehlewe (Challow). – Robert Achard had a grant of free warren in Sparsholt, Eastmanton and Westcot in 1292

The estates seem to have passed to his nephew Robert, born Robert de Colehull / Coleshill, the son of Elias de Coleshill and Margaret Achard, who assumed the name Achard after receiving the inheritance of his uncle – Sparsholt church Berkshire.

The name Achard is very old. It is a surname known in the most remote times, of Germanic origin formed of two roots: ac (blade of the sword) and hard, hard, strong [1]. According to Marie-Thérèse Morlet, in Latin, this gives Acardus, Aicardus, Aicadrus, and Achardus.

The Achard house has lived in Poitou since the Merovingian period. The Achards gave their name to Chastel-Achard, which became Château-Larcher. Before Hugues Capet, this family lives in Normandy, and it gives its name to Bourg-Achard, near Rouen, as well as to the seigneury of Perthuis-Achard, land it will own for several centuries [2]. This old family is divided into several branches and is originally from the town of La Mothe-Achard, in Vendée. It is separated into many branches established in Angoumois, Anjou, Normandy, Poitou and Touraine [3], Berkshire, and perhaps the first counts of Lecce. The separation of these various branches dates back so far that no trace can be found in contemporary documents.

Robert Fitz-Achard (1070-1161) was born after the conquest at the manor of Aldermaston (Berkshire), according to the Royal Berkshire History, which is by no means certain. Robert Achard is the son of Achard and not of Guillaume. In 1091, Robert, castellan of Domfront, with his uncle, was sent to Henri, Count of Cotentin, to put this town back in his hands, and received from this prince, who had become king of England, in 1100, the gift of several mansions in Berkshire [4]. He was granted the domain of Aldermaston in 1102 by King Henry I of England, but also six other mansions: Woolhampton, Childrey, Manor of Rampayns, Sparsholt, Eastmanton, Sulhamstead Bannitser and Wescot. [5] Sulhamstead Bannister Manor is not mentioned in the Domesday Book but was subsequently passed on to Robert Achard.

Beautiful view of Berkshire where Robert Achard was born and buried.

Notice the Archard family is no longer around. It is NOT a coincidence because their land and assets would’ve been seized during the race wars in the 17th century. Due to the family being of colour, they would’ve literally been BLACKLISTED, executed, and or out into slavery. If I’m wrong in my assessment, I would like a major British historian to tell me I’m wrong so I can put their letter right here on my website for the world to see. 

There was a Saxon church at Sparsholt as early as the 8th century; indeed, the plain stone font is said to have survived from that period, though that seems perhaps a bit of rather optimistic archaeology. It certainly is ancient, though, so perhaps my scepticism is misplaced! The experts at British History Online place it in the 13th century, which seems more likely to me, but most sources quote the 8th century, so take your pick!

That wooden Saxon church was rebuilt in stone sometime in the 12th century. The tower and lowest sections of the nave survive from the 12th-century building, but much of the rest is from a comprehensive rebuilding in the late 13th and early 14th century.