William Fitz Osbern's alleged sons according to the register

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
paul bulkley

William Fitz Osbern's alleged sons according to the register

Legg inn av paul bulkley » 30 jul 2005 20:24:02

Dear Ginny, Todd and Luke:

I have just obtained a copy of Bearman's "Charters of
the Redvers Family", and it is quite clear that there
is no need for any crazy theory like mine!

Richard de Reviers (Redvers) was awarded numerous
properties by Henry Ist 1100/1101 in recognition of
his loyal service to Henry. Q.E.D.

The Redver's pedigree, according to Bearman and Keats
Rohan would appear to be something like this:

Hugh de Vernon married daughter of Fulk Fitz Osmond.
Children: Richard, William, and Baldwin.

Richard died 1060.
William is presumably the William de Vernon recorded
the late 1000s.
Baldwin

Baldwin had three children:
Richard de Reviers, Adeliz, and Hugh.

Richard de Reviers was the favored individual of Henry
Ist.

As no birth certificates are available, the above is
open to other opinions.

An interesting Charter 1258 (CDF) suggests further
investigation:
"Abbot Landri of St Pere (Diocese of Chartres)
recorded gift of Richard (knight)
Witness: Raber and William de Vernon"

Sincerely Yours,

Paul Bulkley



____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: William Fitz Osbern's alleged sons according to the regi

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 30 jul 2005 20:24:03

paul bulkley wrote:
Dear Ginny, Todd and Luke:

I have just obtained a copy of Bearman's "Charters of
the Redvers Family", and it is quite clear that there
is no need for any crazy theory like mine!

Richard de Reviers (Redvers) was awarded numerous
properties by Henry Ist 1100/1101 in recognition of
his loyal service to Henry. Q.E.D.

The Redver's pedigree, according to Bearman and Keats
Rohan would appear to be something like this:

Hugh de Vernon married daughter of Fulk Fitz Osmond.
Children: Richard, William, and Baldwin.

This is the same relationship reported in DP that I just called into
question. Does Bearman give any indication why these three are made
grandsons of Fulk, and not nephews as Robert of Torigny would have it
(at least with regard to Baldwin)? I don't have handy access to Robert,
but I don't think this is a 'nepos' problem - all authors I have seen,
from White to Van Houts to Keats-Rohan indicate that Baldwin was son of
Osmund's daughter, not his granddaughter.

taf

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»