GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2005-12 > 1134252648


From: "Leo van de Pas" <>
Subject: Re: Count Roger of Poitou
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 09:10:48 +1100
References: <20051210214329.GCKN29285.eastrmmtao03.cox.net@[24.254.237.64]>


Dear Patricia,

ES III/4 Tafels 637 and 640 tell how Roger, Comte de La Marche had a younger
brother, Arnoul/Arnulf who went to Scotland and is the founder of the
Scottish Montgomerie family.

I could not find a Reginald, but my feeling is that the Reginald you refer
to was fresh from France and his name may imply from where he came.

Best wishes
Leo van de Pas


----- Original Message -----
From: "Patricia Junkin" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2005 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: Count Roger of Poitou


> "A mid-twelfth-century charter of the earliest William de Vieuxpont to
> appear in Scottish record..anent Ogilface in Torphicen, was witnessed by,
> i.
> a., Reginald "of Ponthieu" (de Puntiu), Ponthieu being not far to the east
> of Eu, along with Richard de Vieuxponti, Roger Quirem, Roger 'of
> Carriden,
> and Godwin of 'Carriden..The Anglo-Norman Era in Scottish History, The
> Ford
> Lectures Delivered in the University of Oxford in Hilary Term 1977. G. W.
> S.
> Barrow.
> Can anyone suggest the relationbship of Reginald to Roger?
> Thanks,
> Pat
>
> ----------
>>From: "Douglas Richardson" <>
>>To:
>>Subject: Count Roger of Poitou
>>Date: Sat, Dec 10, 2005, 3:46 PM
>>
>
>> Dear CED ~
>>
>> Nice to see you back again.
>>
>> Of course, I meant to say Count Roger of Poitou, not Roger, Count of
>> Poitou.
>>
>> For further particulars on Count Roger of Poitou (often called Count
>> Roger le Poitevin), I might recommend you visit the following weblink:
>>
>> http://www.infokey.com/Domesday/Lancashire.htm
>>
>> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
>>
>> Website: www.royalancestry.net
>>
>> CED wrote:
>>> Douglas Richardson wrote:
>>> > Dear J.C.B. ~
>>> >
>>> > Thank you for your good post. Much appreciated.
>>> >
>>> > I have the 1094 charter of Roger, Count of Poitou in front of me,
>>> > along
>>> > with the witness list.
>>>
>>> To the Newsgroup:
>>>
>>> Does Richardson have a source which makes Roger of Montgomery
>>> (otherwise known as Roger le Poitevin) count of Poitou?
>>>
>>> CED
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My copy is taken from The Lancashire Pipe
>>> > Rolls ... and Early Lancaster Charters, edited by William Farrer,
>>> > published in 1902, pp. 289-296. The charter was issued by Count Roger
>>> > himself. It is clearly not a late date confirmation charter as
>>> > alleged
>>> > by Thompson. Count Roger states that he grants various properties to
>>> > the Abbey of St. Martin of Sees for the health of his soul, and that
>>> > of
>>> > "Roger Scroberiae" his father, his mother Countess Mabel, for his
>>> > brothers, and his kinsfolk ("amicis"). So, the charter is definitely
>>> > contempory to Count Roger, it being issued by Count Roger himself.
>>> >
>>> > The charter is witnessed by the said Count [Roger] and Sibyl his
>>> > daughter, Godfrey the Sheriff, Albert de Grelle, G. Boisell and Albert
>>> > his brother, Pain de Vilers, Orm Fitz Ketel, and others.
>>> >
>>> > Regarding the dating of the charter, 1094, which date was "given to
>>> > this charter by the monks of Sees," the editor, Mr. Farrer, states
>>> > that
>>> > the date is "supported by what is known of the grantor and the
>>> > subjects
>>> > of the grant." He further states: "It was during the period which
>>> > followed his rehabilitation in his English estates, after the
>>> > accession
>>> > of Rufus in 1088, and before the final downfall of the house of
>>> > Montgomery in 1102."
>>> >
>>> > Among other grants contained in the charter, Count Roger gave the
>>> > whole
>>> > town of Poulton in Amounderness. Farrer adds: "Both the Register of
>>> > Lancaster Priory, and the Pipe Rolls, prove that the Abbey of Sees had
>>> > been disseised in 1102, at any rate of the land in Poulton, if not the
>>> > church."
>>> >
>>> > Farrer continues: "The witnesses' names are most important, for we may
>>> > expect to find among them the names of some at any rate of the Count's
>>> > Lancashire knights and thanes."
>>> >
>>> > The first witness, Godfridus Vicecomes (or Godfrey the Sheriff) "was
>>> > one of ten knights who had been enfeoffed by the Count before
>>> > Domesday,
>>> > and was at the date of the Survey holding lands of the King in West
>>> > Derby Hundred."
>>> >
>>> > Regarding Albert de Grelle, Farrer says: "This is Albert Grelley, to
>>> > whom before the time of Domesday, jointly with Roger de Busli, [held]
>>> > the hundred of Blackburn [which] had been given by Count Roger. He
>>> > has
>>> > been generally regarded as the first baron of Manchester, but the
>>> > evidecne to prove it is practically nil. As, however, his son Robert
>>> > Grelley certainly held the barony during the latter part of Henry I's
>>> > reign, and was holding a small portion of the escheated fief of Erneis
>>> > de Burun in Lindsay in 1114-1116, of the King in chief, it is evidence
>>> > that he or his father did not suffer banishment with Count Roger."
>>> >
>>> > Regarding Pain de Vilers, Farrer states: "The first reputed baron of
>>> > Warrngton. He aftewards held fees under Count Stephen of Mortin in
>>> > cos. Nottingham and Lincoln. In the latter county he was tenant of
>>> > Upton, between the years 1114-1116."
>>> >
>>> > Given the fact that the charter appears to date to the period,
>>> > 1088-1102, I can accept the date 1094 assigned to it by the monks of
>>> > Sees. This date is supportable by the knowledge that Godfrey the
>>> > Sheriff and Albert de Grelle were both living before the Domesday
>>> > Survey (1086). Also, we know that Orm Fitz Ketel's wife, Gravelda,
>>> > was
>>> > born in or before her father, Earl Gospatric's death in 1075.
>>> >
>>> > Farrer's comments regarding Orm Fitz Ketel reflect the mush of bad
>>> > information about his family available in print in 1902. He states:
>>> > "[He] was the son of Ketel Fitz Eldred, who before 1093 held various
>>> > estates under Ivo Taillebois, both in the barony of Egremont, co.
>>> > Cumb.
>>> > and in Kendal. Orm married Gunnild, daughter of Gospatrick, sometime
>>> > Earl of Northumberland (who held the manor of Ulverston before the
>>> > conquest), and was ancestor of the Curwan family of Workington."
>>> >
>>> > I'm not aware of any evidence that Ketel Fitz Eldred held property
>>> > under Ivo Taillebois before 1093, in either Cumberland or Kendal.
>>> > Ketel Fitz Eldred first surfaces in the the records in the 1120's, and
>>> > can not possibly be the father of Orm Fitz Ketel, living in 1094.
>>> > Rather, I believe that Orm Fitz Ketel's father is the Orm who held
>>> > various estates in Lancashire in 1066, whose descendants were
>>> > evidently
>>> > later dispossessed by Normans. If correct, we might suppose that Orm
>>> > Fitz Ketel likely lost his father, Orm's lands in Lancashire upon the
>>> > banishment of Count Roger in 1102. If so, this would explain why Orm
>>> > Fitz Ketel fails to appear in records in the period after 1102. His
>>> > connection if any to Ketel Fitz Eldred who occurs in the 1120's in
>>> > Cumberland remains elusive.
>>> >
>>> > Given the above information and the charter itself, I fail to see how
>>> > Kathleen Thompson can allege this is a confirmation charter dated c.
>>> > 1130, unless we are talking about two different charters. Count Roger
>>> > specifically states that he is giving ["Rogerus Comes Pictavencis ...
>>> > dedit"], not confirming, the properties to the Abbey of Sees.
>>> >
>>> > Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
>>> >
>>> > Website: www.royalancestry.net
>>> >
>>> > J.C.B.Sharp wrote:
>>> > > In a very significant article Kathleen Thompson has collated all of
>>> > > the
>>> > > extant versions of the charter dated by Farrer to 1094 (Monasteries
>>> > > and
>>> > > Settlement in Norman Lancashire: unpublished charters of Roger the
>>> > > Poitevin, Transactions of the Record Society of Lancashire &
>>> > > Cheshire,
>>> > > CXL, 201-225). She concludes that what Orm witnessed was most likely
>>> > > a
>>> > > confirmation and that the date was closer to 1130.
>>> > >
>>> > > It is important to understand that the barony of Kendal did not
>>> > > exist
>>> > > before the time of King Richard I, and that there is no evidence
>>> > > that the
>>> > > Lancaster family were tenants in chief before that time.
>>> > >
>>> > > Ivo Taillebois clearly held directly from the king. He was given a
>>> > > large
>>> > > fee and a careful analysis shows that most fell eventually to the
>>> > > crown.
>>> > > So he had no heir, although this does not rule out the possibility
>>> > > that
> he
>>> > > married off a daughter or two. In particular he held the important
>>> > > castle
>>> > > of Appleby which was included in the share of his widow Lucy but
>>> > > came to
>>> > > the crown on her death. The same thing happened to his property in
>>> > > Normandy at Cristot which was given to Saint-Etienne Caen (Haskins,
> Norman
>>> > > Institutions, 9).
>>> > >
>>> > > The fact that Ketel's charter giving the same churches to St Mary
>>> > > York as
>>> > > Ivo had given is worded as a grant rather than a confirmation is not
>>> > > conclusive. At this date it could have been either.
>>> > >
>>> > > J.C.B.Sharp
>>> > > London
>>
>


This thread: