GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2005-11 > 1132809498


From: "Todd A. Farmerie" <>
Subject: Re: Gilbert fitzReinfrid son and heir..Further..
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:18:18 -0700
References: <a1da1ddb24e907d4ac1e2f5d7941bc76@localhost.talkabouteducation.com>
In-Reply-To: <a1da1ddb24e907d4ac1e2f5d7941bc76@localhost.talkabouteducation.com>


butlergrt wrote:

> Ethelred of Workington Lord of Kendal who had:
> Ketal Lord of Kendal mar.Christiana who had:
> Gilbert of Lord of Kendal mar. Godith, dau of Fulk fitzReinfrid( possible
> descent of Fulk brother of Nicholas de Bacqueville son of Baldric Teutonis
> who had:
> William of Lancaster Lord of Kendal mar. Gundred, dau. of William de
> Warrene 1st Earl Warren and 2nd Earl Surrey who had:

There seems to be some conflict regarding the reconstruction of this
pedigree. Michael Anne Guido, in the latest _Foundations_, shows the
pedigree as you give it (only she gives no indication of Godith's
parents, citing Prescott's 1897 edition of the _Register of the Priory
of Wetherhal_ (C&WA&AS Records Series, vol.3). However, Keats-Rohan
shows it differently, following Washington in Trans. C&WA&AS 62 (1962)
to show William de Lancaster as nephew of Ketel son of Eldred, making
Godith, wife of Gilbert, Ketel's sister. The latter appears to be the
more accurate, as in a contemporary charter he refers to Ketel as his
avunculus = (properly maternal although sometimes used in a generic
sense) uncle.


> FIRST STRANGENESS:
> If Isabel,the wife of William de Warrene I, is the daughter of Hugh "the
> great" Count of Vermandois, then that makes Gundred related within 120
> years or so to 2 saxon kings of England a ggggrandaughter and cousin of a
> degree or 2 to Phillip King of France, Aunt-in-law to Hamelin Plantagenet
> and a cousin of one degree to a few, to most of the Plantagenet line, and
> WTC, yet alone a her son, William of Lancaster II, a gggg grandson of
> count Fulk IV and the line of Anjou and related to the Norman -saxon kings
> of England he was their cousin and no small wonder he was Steward to
> Henry, he was his cousin of a few degress and highly connected of course.

[See the end of the post about this sentence.]

> William of Lncaster II, wife Hawise d'estoutville descended from the line
> of de Verduns is also no small line.
> SO... Here we have their daughter Hawise who marries Gilbert fitzReinfrid
> son of Gilbert(so it is said) son of Roger fitzReinfrid de Breure,

I think you have an extra Gilbert here - the husband of Hawise is nog
son of Gilbert, but son of Roger. Further, I am not sure that the "de
Breure" is authentic. Could you cite a contemporary source for it.?

> apparently nobodys. At that day in age? that wouold be beyond belief I

Were they really nobodies? "Somebodyness" is all relevant -
particularly if, as you feel comfortable in assuming below, he was such
a close kinsman - it is hard to be both close kin and unbelievably
socially distant at the same time (. . . not that I think they really
were closely related). The fact is, Isabel, a person of close royal
connections, married a little below her station in marrying a non-royal,
distant kinsman of the King of England. Gundred married significantly
below her station, as daughter and widow of Earls, marrying a local
baron. Her son William appears to have married at a similar status to
his father's, not his mother's, and from their, a daughter marrying a
lesser local gent should be a lot less surprising than you make it out
to appear. Gilbert Fitz Reinfrid, from his perspective, was not
marrying the great-great-great-great- granddaughter of an Anglo-Saxon
king - he was marrying the daughter of a _local_ landholder.

> think, but let us say it did happen, Hawise with the obvious pedigree that
> she has married Gilbert fitzReinfrid and his pedigree was as is generally
> stated and believed,

This is, perhaps, more of an assumption than is prudent.

> OK she just married her 1st cousin once removed as the other allegation is
> that Ivo Taillebois' youngest son was Roger but doubled back on that line
> also. I would think with religous intensity at that time on marriages and
> involving kings relations there would be a papal dispensation, would there
> not??? This is another reason I am having a hard time buying the line of
> Gilbert FitzReinfrid!

Yes, but is the fault at the bottom of the pedigree, or the top. Who
_says_ that Roger is son of Ketil? His own name suggests otherwise.
Given that Ivo de Taillebois land passed through his daughter Beatrice,
tracing this family from a son of Ivo is problematic. It is perfectly
true that they would not have permitted a first, or even second cousin
marriage, but given the surviving references to Gilbert Fitz Roger Fitz
Reinfrid, it hardly seems a stretch to conclude that the pedigree is
flawed in making Roger the son of Ketel, son fo Eldred.

> Here again you have a line that goes from a fitz to a Lancaster to
> Lancaster to a fitz and back to a Lancaster again.

How so?

> There is another interesting side connection with this and that is of the
> Saville and Botelers of Skelton, Gilbert fitzReinfrids line marries back
> and forth with the Lindseys and the Brus and it is the Botelers of Skelton
> but held of Edmund Boteler gggrandson Edmond Boteler of Ireland that is
> claimed no relation, bet if we dig deep enough we will find that it is and
> thru Gilbert FitzReinfrid.

This has me completely lost. I just can't follow these streams of
consciousness. By the time I get to the end, I don't know to what "is
and is thru Gilbert FitzReinfrid" is refering. I fear this will come
out sounding like a grammar flame or as condescention, neither of which
is the intent, but here goes. Please use shorter sentences that convey
individual ideas (one subject, one verb), with clear association between
the subjects and verbs, and among the pronouns and nouns. If these
ideas are to be tied together, use paragraph-level structure for that.
While this may initially take you more time to type, it will reduce the
need to repeat it to make your point understood, as you will have to do
here.

taf

This thread: