GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2001-05 > 0989778304


From: "D. Spencer Hines" <>
Subject: Re: Burke's overkill?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:25:04 +0100
References: <9c.e52c6a8.282f5487@aol.com>, <20010513045922.03255.00006813@ng-fi1.aol.com>


"Incidentally, was Gilbert Jocelyn one of the 38 or 39 known companions
of the Conqueror?"
------------------

1. No.

2. 38 or 39 "Companions of the Conqueror" are NOT _known_.

3. From G. E. Cokayne's "The Complete Peerage," Vol. XII, Part 1,
Postscript to Appendix L (regarding the 1066 Battle of Hastings),
"Companions of the Conqueror," pp. 47-48, written by Geoffrey H. White:

1. Robert de Beaumont, later first Earl of Leicester.
2. Eustace, Count of Boulogne.
3. William, afterwards third Count of Evreux.
4. Geoffrey of Mortagne, afterwards Count of Perche.
5. William Fitz Osbern, afterwards first Earl of Hereford.
6. Aimeri, Vicomte of Thouars.
7. Hugh de Montfort, seigneur of Montfort-sur-Risle.
8. Walter Giffard, seigneur of Longueville.
9. Ralph de Toeni, seigneur of Conches.
10. Hugh de Grandmesil, seigneur de Grandmesnil.
11. William de Warenne, afterwards first Earl of Surrey.
12. William Malet, seigneur of Graville.
13. Eudes, Bishop of Bayeux, afterwards Earl of Kent.
14. Turstin Fitz Rou.
15. Engenulf de Laigle, seigneur of Laigle.

(# 1-12 recorded by William of Poitiers, # 13 portrayed in the
battle scene on the Bayeux Tapestry, # 14-15 named by Orderic.)

Five more who were certainly in the Duke's army and almost
certainly at the battle:

16. Geoffrey de Mowbray, Bishop of Coutances.
17. Robert, Count of Mortain, afterwards first Earl of Cornwall.
18. Wadard, believed to be a follower of the Bishop of Bayeux
19. Vital, believed to be a follower of the Bishop of Bayeux.
20. Goubert d'Auffay, seigneur of Auffay.

(# 16 named by William of Poitiers, # 17-19 portrayed in the
Bayeux Tapestry, # 20 said by Orderic to have taken part in the English
War before William became King of England.)
-----------

[N.B. At the church of Notre Dame in Dives-sur-Mer, where the invasion
forces of William the Conqueror first embarked, there is a plaque
listing hundreds of "Companions of the Conqueror". It was reportedly
placed there in 1862. It is totally bogus. ---- DSH]

"The Dives Roll, compiled by Leopold Delisle for the 8th centenary of
the Battle, was published by de Magny in his "Nobiliare de Normandie",
and was probably first published in England as an Appendix to the 2nd
edition of Burke's "Vicissitudes of Families", 3rd Series, 1863, and
reprinted in "The Battle Abbey Roll: with some Account of the Norman
Lineages", I, xxxi-xxxv, (by the Duchess of Cleveland, 1889 in 3 vols),
and in "Falaise Roll", pp. 216-219.

The list seems to be taken from Domesday Book, but the Duchess of
Cleveland said "it is to be regretted that he has in no case cited an
authority or given a reference"." (For this reason, this list is
generally ignored by genealogists.) [From "My Ancestor Came With The
Conqueror", by Anthony Camp.]

Now ---- the interesting question is:

"Which of those 20, supra, have descendants living in 2001?"
--

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

"Most Illustrious Lord Father

We are terribly saddened by the death of your cherished sister, our dear
aunt; but our sorrow at losing her is as nothing compared to our concern
for your sake, because your suffering will be all the greater... And
while I tell you that we share deeply in your grief, you would do well
to draw even greater comfort from contemplating the general state of
human misery, since we are all of us here on Earth like strangers and
wayfarers, who soon will be bound for our true homeland in Heaven, where
there is perfect happiness, and where we must hope that your sister's
blessed soul has already gone...

I will say no more, except that with all our hearts we fervently pray
the Lord to comfort you and be with you always, and we greet you dearly
with our ardent love.

From San Matteo, The 10th Day Of May 1623.

Most affectionate daughter,

S. Maria Celeste" ---- [Suor Maria Celeste Galilei - Galileo's Daughter]

All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.

All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.

Vires et Honor

<> wrote in message news:...
| I have read both The Problem of Norman Ancestry and They Came With the
| Conqueror and enjoyed them thoroughly. Pine was very enlightening,
and a
| reliable commentator on the subject. Didn't he work for Burke? I
seem to
| recall an autobiography called something like My Years with Burke's or
| something of that nature. I shall certainly obtain Mr. Pine's Heirs
of the
| Conqueror, that sounds excellent. I agree, sadly in part, that for a
| pedigree to be regarded as true, it must come from an accepted source
or
| otherwise be supported by contemporary evidence--which is usually
scanty or
| unclear. There was a controversy in my family's pedigree which I
thought
| (for about a year) was cleared up by Burkes, a volume of English and
Irish
| Landed Gentry from about 1858 which I came across in a university
library.
| Subsequently I became aware that Burke had only perpetuated a fallacy
which I
| believed because it was in print and was seductively neat. Really,
Annie
| must tone way down, she is only embarrassing herself.
| Incidentally, was Gilbert Jocelyn one of the 38 or 39 known companions
of the
| Conqueror? It is alleged so by the Jocelyns.
| Andrew Jocelyn Waller (family, Burke's Waller of Prior Park section,
or
| Waller of Cully depending on the edition)


This thread: