In early records it is invariably called "la Real," "la Reole," "la
Riole," or "la Ryal or Ryole;" and it is described simply as a
"tenement;" I have never found an instance of its being called a
"tower". At the close of the reign of Henry III. it was held by one
Thomas Bat, citizen of London, who demised it to Master Simon of
Beauvais, surgeon to Edward I.; this grant was confirmed by that
sovereign by charter in 1277. (Rot. Cart. 5 Edw. I. m. 17.--Placita de
Quo Warranto, p. 461.) This Simon of _Beauvais_ figures in Stow and
Pennant as Simon de Beawmes. In 1331 Edward III. granted "la Real" to
his consort Philippa, for the term of her life, that is might be used as
a depository for her wardrobe. (Rot. Pat. 4 Edw. III. 2nd part, m. 15.)
By Queen Philippa it was extensively repaired, if not rebuilt, and the
particulars of the works executed there by her direction, may be seen in
the Wardrobe Account of the sixth year of her reign, preserved in the
Cottonian MS. Galba E iii. fo. 177, et seq.; this account is erroneously
attributed in the catalogue to Eleanor, consort of Edward I. One Maria
de Beauvais, probably a descendant of Master Simon, received
compensation for quitting a tenement which she held at the time
Philippa's operations commenced. In 1365 Edward III. granted to Robert
de Corby, in fee, "one tenement in the street of la Ryole, London" to
hold by the accustomed services. Finally, in 1370 Edward gave the "inn
(hospitium) with its appurtenances called le Reole, in the city of
London," to the canons of St. Stephen's, Westminster, as of the yearly
value of 20_l_. (Rot. Pat. 43 Edw. III. m. 24.)

It is sufficiently clear that in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries
this place was not called _Tower Royal_; nor does there appear to be any
ground for supposing it was so named in earlier times, or, indeed, that
it was ever occupied by royalty before it became Philippa's wardrobe.
The question, therefore is narrowed to this point:--what is the
significance of "la Real, Reole, or Riole?" I should be glad if any of
your correspondents would give their opinions on the subject. I may add,
that the building was in the parish of St. Thomas Apostle, not in that
of St. Michael Pater Noster Church, as Stow wrote. (Rot. Pat. 4 Edw.
III. 2nd part, m. 38.)

T.H.T

Let me refer Mr. P. Cunningham to "Stow's _Survey_, p. 27. 92. Thoms'
Edition," for a full answer to his query. The passages are too long to
cite, but Mr. C. will