GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-07 > 1025566579
From: "Stewart, Peter" <>
Subject: RE: de Thouars and de Faye (Bramley, Surrey) in 'DD' - ?
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:36:19 +1000
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2002 9:39
> Subject: de Thouars and de Faye (Bramley, Surrey) in 'DD' - ?
> Wednesday, 26 June, 2002
> Dear Chris, Rosie, et al.,
> Aimery [IV], vicomte de Thouars, is credited being as one of the
> 'companions of the Conqueror' at Hastings.
> 1. Is there any track of English landholdings of the
> vicomte de Thouars in Domesday Book? As he died
> in 1093 [per C. Settipani, SGM archives] it would
> be most surprising given his position and service
> if neither he nor one of his sons was a
> landholder in England in 1086.
There's an interesting article about this man by Jane Martindale, *Aimeri of
Thouars and the Poitevin Connection* in _Anglo-Norman Studies_ 7
(Proceedings of the Battle Conference 1984).
She notes that no-one in Domesday Book "could plausibly be identified with"
Aimeri, and records that he was definitely back in Poitou by 1069, when he
made a promise (subsequently kept) to the monks of Saint-Florent de Saumur.
He is supposed to have been released from captivity in the year of Hastings,
but the circumstances and exact timing of this are not known. Martindale is
cautious, but _maybe_ his apparently altruistic participation in the
conquest was a return for some valuable personal favour from William.
Martindale quotes Jacques Boussard's statement that the viscount of Thouars
was "the most powerful vassal" of the count of Poitou in the 11th century
[from _Le gouvernement d'Henri II Plantagenêt_ (Paris, 1956)], and she
points out "how difficult it would have been for Aimeri to have become
involved in the process of the Normans' settlement and colonisation of
England" due to his commitments in Poitou, adding that he was "no landless
knight who needed to seek his fortune in October 1066".
Notably, Martindale says that Aimeri "was twice married, firstly to
Orengardis and secondly to Amelina". The first was Aurengarde de Mauléon,
dead before 1070. ES gives him a third wife in between these two ladies,
called Marie (living 1080). This strikes me as an unusual given name at that
time in France - I wonder if it was rather a mistranscription, and she was
actually the same person as Amelina (living 1093, whose family is unknown).
|RE: de Thouars and de Faye (Bramley, Surrey) in 'DD' - ? by "Stewart, Peter" <>|