GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-03 > 1016339262


From: (Jay)
Subject: Re: A Hugh de Grandmesnil
Date: 16 Mar 2002 20:27:42 -0800
References: <018501c1cd37$06c2a740$e70b86d9@oemcomputer>, <acQk8.1926$GH4.74951@eagle.america.net>


"D. Spencer Hines" <> wrote in message news:<acQk8.1926$>...
> With two Companions of the Conqueror [COC] here you get a complimentary
> egg roll.
>
> Robert de Beaumont, later 1st Earl of Leicester, is also a Companion of
> the Conqueror, according to William of Poitiers and CP [XII(1):Appendix
> L]
>
> Indeed, Robert de Beaumont is the first COC listed ---- a singular
> honour indeed. He seems to have been only about 17-20 at the Battle of
> Hastings. How'd you like to experience that day with your ancestor?
>
> Just hop into your Time Machine with Guy Pearce and off you go.
>
> This first Earl of Leicester is reportedly the Grandfather of Robert de
> Beaumont, the 3rd Earl of Leicester ---- who married Petronille
> ["Pernel"] de Grandmesnil, circa 1155.
>

It would be an interesting time travel experiment until some guy swung
an axe at you. One question for the group. Was the above Robert de
Beaumont really the 1st Earl of Leicester or did that honor really
belong to his son? I have read that he held the title the Count of
Meula, but became possessed the towns of fiefs of Leicester by charter
from Ivo de Grandmesnil. Was posession of that charter enough to make
him the Earl of Leicester de jure, or was he merely styled that in
retrospect because of his de facto possession of the rights and
privileges of the Earldom. I don't have the answer so I look to the
skilled medieval scholars that inhabit this group.

This thread: