Henry Project Comments

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Stewart Baldwin

Henry Project Comments

Legg inn av Stewart Baldwin » 18 jun 2006 23:38:58

Recent discussions about the new "Medieval Lands" websites have
invited comparison with other websites on royal genealogy, including
the "Henry Project" on which I have worked off and on for about five
years now. This has caused me to think a bit more about how this
project started, and where it is now.

Back in the late 90's when this newsgroup started out, there were many
general discussions about medieval genealogy databases, and in
particular, how one might attain that Holy Grail of medieval
genealogical databases: THE AUTHORITATIVE and completely reliable
medieval genealogical database which would give THE CORRECT
relationship for all medieval individuals, preferably in GEDCOM for
easy importation into personal databases. Obviously, this last
statement is an exaggeration, but it certainly seemed at times like
that was what was being requested. A common suggestion back then was
the everybody-submits-what-they-want database. Of course, we already
have such databases, and their most notable contribution has been to
accelerate the propogation of errors. Other suggestions included
trying to remove the errors from existing databases, a suggestion
which I view as unrealistic for databases which have already
accumulated a huge volume of errors.

I thought then, and still believe now, that the only way to do a
reliable database on medieval genealogy was to keep errors from
getting in on any large scale, right from the very beginning. (Of
course, avoiding errors altogether is not realistic.) Keeping the
errors to a minimum is a matter of quality control. The original idea
for the Henry Project was that an "editorial board" would exercise
this quality control and ask for submissions. In order to limit the
project to a reasonable size, it would be limited at first to the
ancestors of Henry II of England in the first ten generations (thus
the name of the project).

So, judged on the terms under which it was originally proposed, the
Henry Project would have to be considered a failure. What was I
thinking? In hindsight, it was foolish of me to think that my own pet
project would also become the pet project of whatever critical mass of
individuals would be needed to make the result self-sustaining.
However, I still think that the editorial-board approach would work
well on a project with a scope narrow enough to be realistic but wide
enough to attract a critical mass of individuals having sufficient
expertise in the chosen area.

The original FAQ for the Henry Project (which can still be viewed at
the website) did not call for any primary documentation, but only
asked for secondary sources which cited the primary documentation,
especially in cases which were fairly routine. Thus, some of the
pages which I wrote early in the project have pretty thin
documentation. In particular, I would regard the Flanders pages
currently uploaded as being among the weaker pages on the website, and
I have been working on revising them and adding the pages which would
connect them to the other pages currently uploaded. (Peter Stewart
pointed out some of the problems with these pages right after I first
uploaded them, but I never got around to revising them.) In addition,
when I first started this project, my own skills in Latin were
insufficient. Fortunately, I was well aware of this deficiency, and I
took steps to correct this, eventually taking four semesters of
college Latin courses. I would now characterize my Latin as
reasonably good, and improving, but still not where I would like it to
be.

As I wrote more pages, the amount of primary documentation which I
included gradually increased. Still, even on recently downloaded
pages, the amount of detail included can vary from one page to
another. One reason for this is that I have deliberately spent more
time on those pages involving conroversial issues and less time on
those for which the main genealogical points are noncontroversial.
Thus, for example, the thinly documented Geoffroy of Gâtinais has a
longer page than his son Foulques le Réchin, even though much more
primary evidence is available for the latter. Also, Peter Stewart has
commented on the use of MGH for certain primary sources when better,
more recent editions of the same sources have been published. I am
well aware of this problem and will discuss it in more detail in a
separate posting.

So where is the Henry Project now? While it certainly contains errors
which need correcting, I think it has avoided the unmanageable sort of
errors which have plagued many databases, making it a good guide on
the families which it covers, while providing a basic framework that
can be easily updated and expanded. The most "genealogically
important" major correction which I think is needed is that I think
that the supposed connection of Siegfried "the Dane" of Guînes with
Arnulf I of Flanders needs to be changed to "improbable". The Henry
Project does not contain a whole lot of what could be called "original
research", nor is it intended to do so. (I emphasize this point
because I think that "Medieval Lands" has made some untenable claims
in this direction.) Most of the pages (e.g., the account of the
bastards of Hanry I) simply outline the main points already determined
by other researchers. For another example, the page on Geoffroy of
Gâtinais gives the first detailed account in English (so far as I
know) of the case for making Geoffroy a son of Hugues du Perche and
gives a more detailed discussion of certain individual points, but it
does not really have anything that could be regarded as new research.
The main page in the Henry Project which I think goes well beyond what
had been done before (again, so far as I know) is the page on count
Juhel Bérenger of Rennes, for whom even very recent studies seem to be
heavily based on various secondary sources which ultimately go back to
Merlet's very flawed account.

Finally, there is the obvious question of where the Henry Project is
headed. The answer is that I still plan to write additional pages as
I can find the time (and the bibliographical resources) to do so. I
recently posted a clue to one change which has apparently been
overlooked. When I posted my still provisional page for Baldwin I of
Flanders, nobody commented on the fact that he is in the eleventh
generation from Henry II, and therefore technically outside of the
scope of the Henry Project. Late last year, I decided to eliminate
the ten generation limit from the scope of the project, for a couple
of reasons. First, the limit is somewhat artificial. Second, the
elimination of the ten generation limit does not constitute a major
expansion of the project, assuming that it only follows the solidly
documented lines (as is my present intention) and does not try to
follow the countless conjectural lines of descent which have been
proposed by various authors. For example, I have nearly completed
pages ready for Charlemagne, Louis the Pious, Charles the Bald, and
the latter's daughter Judith. These will not be uploaded until I have
the (revised and new) Flanders pages ready to connect them to. (As
usual, I will not attempt to guess when that might be.)

The URL for the Henry Project is:
http://sbaldw.home.mindspring.com/hproject/henry.htm

Stewart Baldwin

Peter Stewart

Re: Henry Project Comments

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 19 jun 2006 01:30:11

Thank you, Stewart, for your thoughtful and - as always - highly
responsible comments.

To clarify the passing references I have made over the past week, I
heartily endorse everything you have said below, and especially in this
context the following:

"So where is the Henry Project now? While it certainly contains errors
which need correcting, I think it has avoided the unmanageable sort of
errors which have plagued many databases, making it a good guide on the
families which it covers, while providing a basic framework that can be
easily updated and expanded."

The major point of reservation I would make is still a very minor one
in comparison to the gross errors of research and presentation being
discussed elsewhere: I think you have relied too heavily on Karl
Ferdinand Werner's work on the early counts of Anjou, and have been
misled by him into a false chronology for Fulco I Rufus that throws out
some of the material on his descendants.

I mention this now, when it will take me a while to get round to
documenting the details, because I see that you are proposing as nearly
completed some pages for Charlemagne and important descendants of his,
where Werner's work is again likely to be prominent amongst the
secondary works that are used. In the Carolingian studies from 1967 and
later his approach to sources was more mature and careful than in his
papers in _Die Welt als Geschichte_ from the late 1950s, when he was
making a name for himself - but he still depended too much on
Brandenburg's work, and on onomastics to guide his conjectures, and he
tends to come up with forced solutions that go beyong the evidence,
perhaps mainly for the sake of sustaining his reputation by
differentiating himself from others.

Peter Stewart


Stewart Baldwin wrote:
Recent discussions about the new "Medieval Lands" websites have
invited comparison with other websites on royal genealogy, including
the "Henry Project" on which I have worked off and on for about five
years now. This has caused me to think a bit more about how this
project started, and where it is now.

Back in the late 90's when this newsgroup started out, there were many
general discussions about medieval genealogy databases, and in
particular, how one might attain that Holy Grail of medieval
genealogical databases: THE AUTHORITATIVE and completely reliable
medieval genealogical database which would give THE CORRECT
relationship for all medieval individuals, preferably in GEDCOM for
easy importation into personal databases. Obviously, this last
statement is an exaggeration, but it certainly seemed at times like
that was what was being requested. A common suggestion back then was
the everybody-submits-what-they-want database. Of course, we already
have such databases, and their most notable contribution has been to
accelerate the propogation of errors. Other suggestions included
trying to remove the errors from existing databases, a suggestion
which I view as unrealistic for databases which have already
accumulated a huge volume of errors.

I thought then, and still believe now, that the only way to do a
reliable database on medieval genealogy was to keep errors from
getting in on any large scale, right from the very beginning. (Of
course, avoiding errors altogether is not realistic.) Keeping the
errors to a minimum is a matter of quality control. The original idea
for the Henry Project was that an "editorial board" would exercise
this quality control and ask for submissions. In order to limit the
project to a reasonable size, it would be limited at first to the
ancestors of Henry II of England in the first ten generations (thus
the name of the project).

So, judged on the terms under which it was originally proposed, the
Henry Project would have to be considered a failure. What was I
thinking? In hindsight, it was foolish of me to think that my own pet
project would also become the pet project of whatever critical mass of
individuals would be needed to make the result self-sustaining.
However, I still think that the editorial-board approach would work
well on a project with a scope narrow enough to be realistic but wide
enough to attract a critical mass of individuals having sufficient
expertise in the chosen area.

The original FAQ for the Henry Project (which can still be viewed at
the website) did not call for any primary documentation, but only
asked for secondary sources which cited the primary documentation,
especially in cases which were fairly routine. Thus, some of the
pages which I wrote early in the project have pretty thin
documentation. In particular, I would regard the Flanders pages
currently uploaded as being among the weaker pages on the website, and
I have been working on revising them and adding the pages which would
connect them to the other pages currently uploaded. (Peter Stewart
pointed out some of the problems with these pages right after I first
uploaded them, but I never got around to revising them.) In addition,
when I first started this project, my own skills in Latin were
insufficient. Fortunately, I was well aware of this deficiency, and I
took steps to correct this, eventually taking four semesters of
college Latin courses. I would now characterize my Latin as
reasonably good, and improving, but still not where I would like it to
be.

As I wrote more pages, the amount of primary documentation which I
included gradually increased. Still, even on recently downloaded
pages, the amount of detail included can vary from one page to
another. One reason for this is that I have deliberately spent more
time on those pages involving conroversial issues and less time on
those for which the main genealogical points are noncontroversial.
Thus, for example, the thinly documented Geoffroy of Gâtinais has a
longer page than his son Foulques le Réchin, even though much more
primary evidence is available for the latter. Also, Peter Stewart has
commented on the use of MGH for certain primary sources when better,
more recent editions of the same sources have been published. I am
well aware of this problem and will discuss it in more detail in a
separate posting.

So where is the Henry Project now? While it certainly contains errors
which need correcting, I think it has avoided the unmanageable sort of
errors which have plagued many databases, making it a good guide on
the families which it covers, while providing a basic framework that
can be easily updated and expanded. The most "genealogically
important" major correction which I think is needed is that I think
that the supposed connection of Siegfried "the Dane" of Guînes with
Arnulf I of Flanders needs to be changed to "improbable". The Henry
Project does not contain a whole lot of what could be called "original
research", nor is it intended to do so. (I emphasize this point
because I think that "Medieval Lands" has made some untenable claims
in this direction.) Most of the pages (e.g., the account of the
bastards of Hanry I) simply outline the main points already determined
by other researchers. For another example, the page on Geoffroy of
Gâtinais gives the first detailed account in English (so far as I
know) of the case for making Geoffroy a son of Hugues du Perche and
gives a more detailed discussion of certain individual points, but it
does not really have anything that could be regarded as new research.
The main page in the Henry Project which I think goes well beyond what
had been done before (again, so far as I know) is the page on count
Juhel Bérenger of Rennes, for whom even very recent studies seem to be
heavily based on various secondary sources which ultimately go back to
Merlet's very flawed account.

Finally, there is the obvious question of where the Henry Project is
headed. The answer is that I still plan to write additional pages as
I can find the time (and the bibliographical resources) to do so. I
recently posted a clue to one change which has apparently been
overlooked. When I posted my still provisional page for Baldwin I of
Flanders, nobody commented on the fact that he is in the eleventh
generation from Henry II, and therefore technically outside of the
scope of the Henry Project. Late last year, I decided to eliminate
the ten generation limit from the scope of the project, for a couple
of reasons. First, the limit is somewhat artificial. Second, the
elimination of the ten generation limit does not constitute a major
expansion of the project, assuming that it only follows the solidly
documented lines (as is my present intention) and does not try to
follow the countless conjectural lines of descent which have been
proposed by various authors. For example, I have nearly completed
pages ready for Charlemagne, Louis the Pious, Charles the Bald, and
the latter's daughter Judith. These will not be uploaded until I have
the (revised and new) Flanders pages ready to connect them to. (As
usual, I will not attempt to guess when that might be.)

The URL for the Henry Project is:
http://sbaldw.home.mindspring.com/hproject/henry.htm

Stewart Baldwin

Roger LeBlanc

Re: Henry Project Comments

Legg inn av Roger LeBlanc » 19 jun 2006 05:01:01

I don't want to miss the opportunity to comment that Stewart Baldwin's
tenacity in sticking with his Henry Project has been a pleasant
surprise. It seemed to me that it got off to a slow start but a look at
the ancestor table and the number of completed pages is impressive. I
recall at the inception that it was hoped there would be more input from
others, but as I understand it, the results are largely the work of one
man, and probably with more realistic and attainable goals than some are
shooting for.
I have to guiltily admit I thought the Henry Project would fizzle out,
due to the apparent lack of interest from this group. Perhaps Stewart
can infer from the lack of criticism that he has done an excellent job.
It occurs to me that the scope of his project grew, with the lists of
children and spouses including conjectural ones, (and also conjectured
parents) and discussions of disputed individuals such as Gundrada and
Judith of Flanders, that we really have an under-rated resource here.
I have thought (hoped) that the Project might be slowly expanded, so it
is very good news that it will eventually include earlier generations.
Well done Mr. Baldwin,

Roger LeBlanc

Gjest

Re: Henry Project Comments

Legg inn av Gjest » 19 jun 2006 09:49:20

Roger LeBlanc wrote:
I don't want to miss the opportunity to comment that Stewart Baldwin's
tenacity in sticking with his Henry Project has been a pleasant
surprise. It seemed to me that it got off to a slow start but a look at
the ancestor table and the number of completed pages is impressive. I
recall at the inception that it was hoped there would be more input from
others, but as I understand it, the results are largely the work of one
man, and probably with more realistic and attainable goals than some are
shooting for.
I have to guiltily admit I thought the Henry Project would fizzle out,
due to the apparent lack of interest from this group. Perhaps Stewart
can infer from the lack of criticism that he has done an excellent job.
It occurs to me that the scope of his project grew, with the lists of
children and spouses including conjectural ones, (and also conjectured
parents) and discussions of disputed individuals such as Gundrada and
Judith of Flanders, that we really have an under-rated resource here.
I have thought (hoped) that the Project might be slowly expanded, so it
is very good news that it will eventually include earlier generations.
Well done Mr. Baldwin,

Hear, hear.

MA-R
Roger LeBlanc

pierre_aronax@hotmail.com

Re: Henry Project Comments

Legg inn av pierre_aronax@hotmail.com » 19 jun 2006 10:31:42

Stewart Baldwin a écrit :

<...>
So, judged on the terms under which it was originally proposed, the
Henry Project would have to be considered a failure. What was I
thinking? In hindsight, it was foolish of me to think that my own pet
project would also become the pet project of whatever critical mass of
individuals would be needed to make the result self-sustaining.
However, I still think that the editorial-board approach would work
well on a project with a scope narrow enough to be realistic but wide
enough to attract a critical mass of individuals having sufficient
expertise in the chosen area.
...


You are certainly right: a collegial editorial-board would be the
ideal... in an ideal world. It is a scope difficult to achieve, and you
have done a great work even if you were alone to do it. For what is of
the collegiality, ther is still this group where the pages can be
commented.

Pierre

Stewart Baldwin

Re: Henry Project Comments

Legg inn av Stewart Baldwin » 25 jun 2006 22:41:51

On 18 Jun 2006 17:30:11 -0700, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com>
wrote:

I mention this now, when it will take me a while to get round to
documenting the details, because I see that you are proposing as nearly
completed some pages for Charlemagne and important descendants of his,
where Werner's work is again likely to be prominent amongst the
secondary works that are used. In the Carolingian studies from 1967 and
later his approach to sources was more mature and careful than in his
papers in _Die Welt als Geschichte_ from the late 1950s, when he was
making a name for himself - but he still depended too much on
Brandenburg's work, and on onomastics to guide his conjectures, and he
tends to come up with forced solutions that go beyong the evidence,
perhaps mainly for the sake of sustaining his reputation by
differentiating himself from others.

At the present time, the only part of Werner's work on the immediate
descendants of Charlemagne which I have looked at in any detail is the
descent through Judith (wife of Baldwin I), i.e., Louis the Pious and
Charles the Bald, and the various Vermandois descents to ancestors of
Henry II. The list below mentions those links of Werner's which I
would regard as "less than routine" along with a very brief comment on
my current thoughts. As you can see, I sometimes I agree with Werner
and sometimes not. Comments are welcome.

ALPAIS
Alpais, wife of count Bego of Paris, is called "filia imperatoris" in
annalistic accounts of the death of Bego (815 or 816), but the emperor
who was her father is not identified before Flodoard, writing in the
tenth century, who makes Louis the Pious her father. Since Louis was
emperor at the time of Bego's death, I am inclined to accept this (as
does Werner), perhaps with some minor qualification, but it has been
suggested for chronological reasons that she was a daughter of
Charlemagne.

GERARD and RATHER
These two counts are each called a "gener" of Pépin I of Aquitaine,
son of Louis the Pious, in an account of the events immediately after
the death of Pépin in 838, given by "the Astronomer", author of an
anonymous life of Louis. For chronological reasons, Werner would
interpret "gener" (usually "son-in-law") as "brother-in-law" and make
two of Louis's daughters into the wives of these two men. I am
inclined to qualify this as possible, but far from certain. There
does not seem to be any consensus on how to interpret this
information.

ROTRUDE, abbess elect of Sainte-Radegonde
Werner seems to imply that Flodoard's History of the Church of Reims
(iii, 27) proves that she was a daughter of Charles the Bald.
Although a footnote in MGH SS 13: 548 states this, I do not see the
relationship stated in the text. Is it stated in some indirect way?

ROTHILDE
Daughter of Charles the Bald and wife of count Roger of Maine, I
believe that the case for her is strong.

BEATRIX, mother of HUGUES the Great
As Peter Stewart has pointed out before on this newsgroup, there is no
good case for regarding her as a daughter of Heribert I of Vermandois.

HERIBERT I and HERIBERT II of Vermandois
Given the lack of direct testimony for the father-son relationship
between these two (see a thread last year from Steve Barhoom and Peter
Stewart), I am inclined to include some weak qualification for this
relationship, calling it "highly probable" (or some similar
qualification).

HERIBERT II's wife.
The fact that she was a sister of Hugues the Great is solid enough,
but I see no good evidence for assigning a name to her.

ADELE, wife of GEOFFROY GRISEGONELLE
I regard the evidence that she was a daughter of Robert of Troyes
(rather than his sister) to be convincing.

Stewart Baldwin

Peter Stewart

Re: Henry Project Comments

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 27 jun 2006 04:37:32

"Stewart Baldwin" <sbaldw@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:uvvt92l1ii1cg5a3ppkvqe3cfa5gagmslf@4ax.com...
On 18 Jun 2006 17:30:11 -0700, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com
wrote:

I mention this now, when it will take me a while to get round to
documenting the details, because I see that you are proposing as nearly
completed some pages for Charlemagne and important descendants of his,
where Werner's work is again likely to be prominent amongst the
secondary works that are used. In the Carolingian studies from 1967 and
later his approach to sources was more mature and careful than in his
papers in _Die Welt als Geschichte_ from the late 1950s, when he was
making a name for himself - but he still depended too much on
Brandenburg's work, and on onomastics to guide his conjectures, and he
tends to come up with forced solutions that go beyong the evidence,
perhaps mainly for the sake of sustaining his reputation by
differentiating himself from others.

At the present time, the only part of Werner's work on the immediate
descendants of Charlemagne which I have looked at in any detail is the
descent through Judith (wife of Baldwin I), i.e., Louis the Pious and
Charles the Bald, and the various Vermandois descents to ancestors of
Henry II. The list below mentions those links of Werner's which I
would regard as "less than routine" along with a very brief comment on
my current thoughts. As you can see, I sometimes I agree with Werner
and sometimes not. Comments are welcome.

I don't have time to go through these in detail, but I note that you have
not included some of the glaring inadequacies in Werner's study of
Charlemagne's descendants that are indeed "routine" in the current
literature.

The problems are mainly due to Werner's carelessness in following Erich
Brandenburg, and this has been repeated by Christian Settipani's uncritical
(and often unsourced) copying from Werner that propogates their errors
amongst people relying on his work for Carolingian genealogy today.

I have posted several instance to SGM before now - another example is in the
attribution of Charles the Bald's twin sons Pippin and Drogo to his second
wife, Richildis, complete with bogus dates for their birth in 872/3 and
death in 873/4, see Brandenburg (1998 edition) p. 114, nos. IV 43 & 44;
Werner (1967) p. 454 nn. 43-46; and Settipani (1993) p. 313 (giving
unverified assertions, not even citing his tertiary source for the
information).

If Brandenburg had read the relevant footnote for the epitaph he cited in
MGH Poetae latini III pp. 677-678 he should have realised there are strong
reasons for placing the deaths of these twins before August 866, and that
their mother must therefore have been Ermentrudis, the first wife of
Charles. The alternative is to postulate at least one other unrecorded son
of Charles and Ermentrudis who had died before then, since the bishops at
her coronation in August 866 referred to "some" (plural) sons who had been
taken from life prematurely ("filios...aliquos Deus adhuc aetate immatura de
hoc saeculo rapuit"). Without counting Pippin and Drogo, we are left with
only a singular known son who had died before August 866.

There are plenty of similar, and more immportant, oversights in the work of
Brandenburg that have been adopted by Werner and subsequently by Settipani.
The task for anyone wanting to achieve scholarly results in this field is to
go over the sources, not relying on anyone else's interpretation of the
evidence.

Peter Stewart

Ginny Wagner

Household Accounts of Henry II

Legg inn av Ginny Wagner » 27 jun 2006 17:58:02

From pages 337 through 340 of the index:

INDEX OF PERSONS.

Sheriffs of Counties term. Hen. II.; viz. of-

Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire. -
Henry de Essex (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1156)
Simon fil. Petri (Mich. 1156-Mich. 1160)

Gaufr fil Radulfi \ (Mich 1160-Mich. 1161)
Ricard. fil. Osberti /

Ricardus fil. Osberti (Mich. 1161-Mich. 1163)
Hugo de Lalega (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1165)

Hugo de Lalega \ (Mich.1165-Mich. 1169)
Ricard. fil. Osberti /

Hugo de Lalega \ (Mich. 1169- Easter 1187)
Wills fii. Ricardi fil. Osberti /

David Archidiaconus \ (Easter 1170- Mich. 1179)
Wills fil. Ricardi /

Wills fil. Ricardi (Mich. 1173-Mich. 1179)
Willelmus Rufus (Mich. 1179-Easter 1187)
Oger fil. Ogeri (Easter 1187-Mich. 1189)

Berkshire.-
Ricardus de Camvill (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1157)
Gilb. de Pinchigni (Mich. 1157-Xtmas 1160)
Adam de Catmera (Xtmas 1160-Easter. 1170)
Hugo de Bochland (East. 1170-Mich. 1176)
Hugo de So Germano (Mich. 1176-Mich. 1185)
Uxor ejusdem pro eo (Mich. 1185-Mich. 1186)
Rog. fil. Reinfridi (Mich. 1186-Mich. 1189)

Buckinghamshire, v. Bedfordshire

Cambridgeshire & Huntingdonshire.-
Paganus (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1163)
Hamo Peche (Mich. 1163-East. 1166)
Philip de Davintre (East. 1166-East. 1170)

Ebrard de Beche \ (Easter 1170- Easter 1177)
Warin de Bassingeburn /

Walt. fil. Hugonis (East. 1177-Mich. 1182)
Radulf Bardulf (Mich. 1182-Mich. 1185)
Nich. fil. Roberti (Mich. 1185-Mich. 1189)

Cornwall.-
Eustace fil Stephani (Mich. 1175-Mich. 1179)
Alan de Furnellis (Mich. 1179-Easter. 1186)
Hugo Bardulf (East. 1185-Easter. 1187)
Wills de Bochland (East. 1187-Mich. 1189)

Cumberland (or Carlisle).-
Robert fil. Troite (Mich. 1157-Mich. 1172}
Adam fil. Robi Troite (Mich. 1172-Mich. 1174)
Robert de Yaux (Mich. 1174-East. 1185)
Hugh de Morewich (East. 1185-Mich. 1186)
Nicholas frater ojusdem (Mich. 1186-Mich. 1188)
Wills fil. Adeliui (Mich. 1188-Mich. 1189)

Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire.-
Rob. de Perario (Mich. 1154-Mich. 1156)
Rand. fil. Engelram (Mich. 1156-Mich. 1165)
Bobs fil. Randulfi (Mich. 1165-East. 1170)
Wills fil. Radulfi (East. 1170-Mich. 1180)
Radulf Murdach (Mich. 1180-Mich 1189)

Devonshire.-
Ricardus Comes (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1156)
The same, but called Richard de Redvers (Mich. 1156- Mich.
1157)

Wills de Boterell (Mich. 1157-Mich. 1160)
Hugo de Ralega (Mich. 1160-Mich. 1167)
Robs fil. Bernardi (Mich. 1167-East. 1173)
Comes Reginaldus (East. 1173-June 1175)

Pagan Capellanus, et \
Alan de Eurnellis pro (June-Mich. 1175)
Comite Reginaldo /

Wills Rufus (Mich. 1175-East. 1177)
Hugo de Gundevill (East. 1177-Mich. 1179)
Wills Briewerre (Mich. 1179-Mich. 1189)

Dorset and Somerset.-
Richard de Raddon (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1157)
Warner de Lisoriis (Mich. 1157-Mich. 1161)
Rob. de Bellocampo (Mich. 1161-Mich. 1163)
Gerbert de Perci (Mich. 1163-Easter 1166)
Robs Pucherel (Easter 1166-Easter 1170)
Alured de Lincoln (East. 3170-Mich. 1175)
Rob. de Bellocampo (Mich. 1175-Easter. 1182)
Wills de Bendeng (East. 1182-Mich. 1184)
Robs fil. Pagani (Mich. 1184-Mich. 1188)
Hugo Bardulf (Mich. 1188-Mich. 1189)

Essex & Hertfordshire.-
Rics de Luci (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1157)
Maurice de Tiretei (Mich. 1157-Xtmas 1160)
Rad. de Marci (Xtmas 1160-Mich. 1161)
Maurice de Tiretei (Mich. 1161-Mich. 1163)
Otud de Bovill (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1164)
Nicholas Decanus (Mich. 1164-Easterll69)
Steph. de Bellocampo (East. 1169-East. 1170)
Robs Mantell (Easter 1170-Mich. 1181)
Oto fil Willelmi (Mich. 1181-Mich. 1189)

Gloucestershire.-
Walter de Hereford (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1157)
Wills de Bellocampo (Mich. 1157-Mich. 1163)
Wills Pipard (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1167)
Gilbert Pipard (Mich. 1167-Mich. 1171)
Rads fil. Stephani (Wills frater ejus pro eo) (Mich.
1171-Mich. 1175)
Wills fil. Stephani (Mich. 1175-Mich. 1189)

Hampshire, or Southampton.
Turstinus (Michaelmas 1155-Mich. 1159)
Ricardus fil. Turstini pro patre suo (Mich. 1159-Mich. 1160)
Ricardus fil. Turstini (Mich. 1160-East. 1170)
Hugo de Glandevill (East. 1170-Mich. 1179)
Galfs fil. Azonis (Mich. 1179-Mich. 1189)

Herefordshire.-
Walter de Hereford (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1159)
Mauricius (Mich. 1159-Mich. 1160)
Wills de Bellocampo (Mich, 1160-Mich. 1169)
Walterus Clericus pro eodem (1169-Mich. 1170)
Wills de La Lega (Mich. 1170-Mich. 1171)
Gilbert Pipard (Mich. 1171-Easter. 1173)
Wille de Braose (East. 1173-Mich. 1175)
Randulf Puher (Mich. 1175-East. 1182)

Milo de Mucegros \ (Easter-Mich. 1182)
Roger fil. Mauncil/

Milo de Mucegros (Mich. 1182-East. 1183)
Wills Torel (Easter 1183-Easter 1185)
Rads de Ardene (Easter 1185-Mich. 1189)

Huntingdonshire, v. Cambridgeshire, and Huntingdonshire
(supra, p. 337)

Kent.--
Radulf Picot (Mich. 1155-Xtmas 1160)
Hugo de Doura (Xtmas 1160-East. 1168)
Gervase de Cornhull (East. 1168-Mich. 1174)
Robs fil. Bernard (Mich. 1174-Mich. 1183)

Wills fil. Nigelli \(1183-Mich. 1184)
Wills fil. Philippi /

Alan de Valoins (Mich. 1184-Mich. 1189)

Lancaster.-
Gaufr. de Valoins (Mich. 1164-East. 1166)
Wills de Yesci (Mich. 1166-Easter. 1170)
Rog. de Herleberg (East. 1170-East 1173)
Ranulf de Glanvill (East. 1173-East. 1174)

Ranulf de Glanvill \(East 1174-Mich. 1174)
Rads fil. Bernardi /

Rads fil. Bernardi (Mich. 1174-East. 1185)
Gilbert Pipard (East. 1185-Mich. 1189)

Leicestershire & Warwickshire.-
Robs fil. Hugonis (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1158)

(L) Robs fil. Harnulfi \ (Mich. 1158-East 1159)
(W) Wills de Bellocampo /

Rads Basset (East. 1159-Mich. 1162)

Wills Basset pro \ (Mich 1162-Mich. 1163)
Rads fratre suo /

(L) Wills Basset \ (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1164)
(W) Robs fil. Gaufridi /

Wills Basset (Mich. 1164-East. 1170)
Bertram de Verdun (East. 1170-East. 1185)
Michael Belet (East. 1185-Mich. 1189)

Lincolnshire-
Jordan de Blossevill (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1157)
Walt. de Amundevill (Mich. 1157-Mich. 1163)
Peter de Golsa (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1165)

Wills de Insula pro \ (Mich 1165-Mich. 1166)
Petro de Golsa /

Alured de Poilton (Mich. 1166-Mich. 1167)
Philip de Kime (Mich. 1167-East. 1170)

Walt. de Grimesby \(Mich 1174 -Mich. 1174)
Alured de Poincon /

Walt. de Grimesby (Mich. 1174-Mich. 1175)
Drogo fil. Radulfi (Mich. 1175-East. 1177)
Wills Basset (Easter 1177-East. 1185)
Nigel fil. Alexandri (East. 1185-1189)

Middlesex & London.-
Johs fil. Radulphi (Oct. 1154-Mich. 1155)
Gervase and John (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1156)

Reiner fil. Berenger \ (Mich 1156-Mich. 1157)
Wills fil. Isabel /

Beiner fil. Berenger \
Gaufr. Bursarius (Mich 1157-1158)
Josce Vintarius /
Ricardus Vetulus /

Reiner fil. Berenger \ (Mich. 1158-Mioh. 1159)
Johs fil. Radulfi /
et socii /

Beiner fil. Berenger \ (Mich 1159-Mich. 1160)
Wills fil. Isabel /

Johes fil. Radulfl (Mich. 1160-Mich. 1161)

Ernald Scutarius \ (Mich. 1161-Mich. 1162)
Vitalis Clericus /

Reiner fil. Berenger \(Mich 1162-East. 1169)
Wills fil. Isabel /

Johes Bucuinte \
Baldwin Crispus (East. 1169-Xtmas 1172)
David de Cornhill /
Boger Blund /

Rads Aurifaber \
Rads Vinitor (Xtmas 1172- June 1174)
Andr. Bukerell /
Aelardus /

Brichtmer de Haverliill \ (June 1174-June 1176)
Peter fil. Walteri /

Wills fil. Isabel (June 1176-Mich. 1177)

Walerannus \ (Mich. 1177-Mich. 1178)
Johes fil. Nigelli /

Wills fil. Isabel \ (Mich 1178-Mich. 1179)
Ernulf Buzell /

Wills fil. Isabel \(Mich 1179-Mich. 1181)
Reginald le Viel /



Wills fil. Isabel (Mich. 1181-East. 1187)

Henry de Cornhill \ (East. 1187-Mich. 1189)
Rics fil. Reineri /

Norfolk and Suffolk.-
(N) Wills de Nevill \( Mich 1155-Mich. 1156)
(S) Wills deFraxineto /

Wills de Caisnei (East. 1157-Mich. 1163)
Oger Dapifer (Mich. 1163-Easter, 1170)

Barth, de Glanville\
Wimar Capellanus (East. 1170-Mich. 1175)
Wills Bardul /

Wimar Capellanus (Mich. 1175-East. 1187)
Willis fil. Hervei (East. 1157-Mich. 1189)


Northamptonshire.-
Simon fil. Petri (Mich. 1155-Xtmas 1160)
Hugo Gubiun (Xtmas 1160-Mich. 1163)
Simon fil. Petri (Mich. 1163-East. 1170)
Robs fil. Sawini (East. 1170-Mich. 1174)
Hugo de Gundevill (Mich. 1174-East. 1177)
Thos. fil. Bernardi (East. 1177-Mich. 1183)
Rads Morin pro eodem (Mich. 1183-Mich. 1184)
Galfs fil. Petri (Mich. 1184-Mich. 1189)

Northumberland.-
Wills de Vesci (Mich. 1157-Easter 1170)
Roger de Stutevill (East. 1170-East. 1185)
Roger de Glanvill (East. 1185-Mich. 1189)

Nottinghamshire, v. Derbyshire

Oxfordshire.-
Henr. de Oilli (Mich. 1155-June 1161)
Manasser Arsich (East. 1161-Mich. 1163)
Thomas Basset (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1164)
Adam de Catmera (Mich. 1164-East. 1170)
Alard Banastre (East. 1170-Mich. 1175)
Robs de Turevill (Mich. 1175-Mich. 1179)
Galfrid. Hosatus (Mich. 1179-East. 1182)
Robs de Witefeld (East. 1182-Kast. 1185)
Alan de Furnellis (East. 1185-East. 1187)
Robs de la Mara (East. 1187-Mich. 1189)

Rutland.-
Rics de Humez (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1157)
Robs fil. Gubolt (Mich. 1157-Mich. 1159)
Rics de Humez (Mich. 1159-Mich. 1161)
Robs. fil. Gubolt (Mich. 1161-Mich. 1163)
Rics de Humez (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1164)

Robs fil. Gubolt \ (Mich. 1164-Mich 1166)
(Rics de Humez pro eo)/

Rics de Humez (Mich. 1166-Mich. 1178)

Simon Basset pro \ (Mich. 1178-Mich. 1179)
Rico de Humez /

Wills Malduit \ (Mich. 1179-June 1188)
Camerarius /

Amalric Dispensator (June 1188-Mich. 1189)

Shropshire.-
Wills fil. Alani (June 1155-Mich. 1159)
Wido Extraneus (Mich. 1159-Xtmas 1164)
Gaufridus de Ver (Xtmas 1164-Mich. 1169)
Wills Clericus, pro eo (Mich. 1169-Mich. 1170)
Wido Extraneus (Mich. 1170-Mich. 1179)
Hugo Pantulf (Mich. 1179-Mich. 1189)

Somerset, vide supra Dorset

Southampton, vide supra Hampshire

Staffordshire.-
Robs de Stafford (Mich. 1154-Mich. 1160)
Alexander Clericus (Mich. 1160-East. 1166)
Herveius de Stratton (East. 1166-Mich. 1184)
Thomas Noel (Mich. 1184-Mich. 1189)

Suffolk, vide supra Norfolk

Surrey.-
Paganus pro Willo Martell (Mich 1155- Mich. 1156)
Paganus (Mich. 1156-Mich. 1163)
Gervase de Cornhill (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1182)

Henricus fil. Gervasii \ (Mich. 1182-Mich. 1183)
de Cornhill pro eo /

Henricus de Cornhill (Mich. 1183-Mich. 1189)

Sussex.-
Mauger de Malcuvenant (Mich. 1155-1156)
Ricardus de Humez (Mich. 1156-Mich. 1157)
.. Radulfus Picot (Mich. 1157-Mich. 1160)
Hilary, Bishop of Chichester (Mich. 1160-Mich. 1162)
Henry, Archdeacon of Chichester (Mich. 1162-Mich. 1163)
Rogerus Hai (Mich. 1163-East. 1170)
Reginald de Warren (East. 1170-Mich. 1176)
Roger fil. Reinfrid (Mich. 1176-East. 1187)
Willelmus Rufus (East. 1187-Mich. 1189)

Warwickshire, v. supra Leicestershire

Westmoreland.-
Rand. de Glanvill (Mich. 1174-Mich. 1179)
[Elsewhere treated as part of Yorkshire.]

Wiltshire.-
Comes Patricius (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1160)
Ricardus Clericus (Mich. 1160-Mich. 1162)
Milo de Danteseia (Mich. 1162-Mich. 1163)
Richard de Wilton (Mich. 1163-Mich. 1179)
Robert Malduit (Mich. 1179-Easter 1187)
Hugo Bardulf (Easter 1187-Mich. 1189)

Worcestershire.-
Wills de Bellocampo (Mich. ]155-Mich. 1169)
Hugo Puher pro eodm (Mich. 1169-Mich. 1170)
Randulf de Lench (Mich. 1170-Mich. 1174)
Robert de Luci (Mich. 1174-Mich. 1175)
Michael Belet (Mich. 1175-Easter 1185)
Robs Marmiun (Easter 1185-Mich. 1187)

Henr. de Suinesfen, et \
Henr. de Chunegesbi (Mich. 1167-Mich. 1188)
pro Eobo Marmiun /

Robs Marmiun (Mich. 1188-Mich. 1189)

Yorkshire.-
Bertram de Bulemer (Mich. 1155-Mich. 1163)
Eandulfde Glanville (Mich. 1163-East. 1170)
Robs de Stutevill (East. 1170-Mich. 1175)
Eandulf de Glanvill (Mich. 1175-Mich. 1189)

Ship-Masters of Southampton.-
Ralph Vitulus (1158-1178), 39 n, 177, 202, 222
Wm. Tirevache (1172), 167
Walter Vifculus (1172), 169
Samson Wasceline (1173-1187), 177, 202,216, 218, 252, 267,
270, 271 n, 278
Herbert fitz Geldewin (1173-1187), 177, 266,279
Robert de Baion (1174), 184
William de Baion (1175), 188
Berenger de Hampton (1176), 202
Hugh Palmer (1176) 202
Roger de la Wicha (1177), 215
Ralph Vitulus, junior (1177), 215, 231
Humphrey Hai (1183), 252
William de Braiose (1184-1188), 255, 284,284n
Alan Trenchemere (1184-1188), 255, 288, 289
Vitalis (1187), 279
Hugh of Hampton (1187), 279
Godefrid Mansel (1187), 279
Alan fitz Alan (1188), 284

Shrewsbury, Robert de (1177-1189), 212, 298,298 n
Sicily, William, King of (1172-1176), 166, 202, 205, 206
--, --, Matilda, al. Margaret, of Navarre, mother of, 166
---, --, Joan of England, wife of, 202, 205-6,
v. England, Kings of, etc. Sigillo, Nicholas de (1157-1173),
27, 33, 51, 55, 57, 176, v. Huntingdon, Archdeacons of

Silly, Robert and Hugh de (1168), 112
Silvester, Master (1186), 272
Simon Cellarer (Justiciar 1168), 117
Simon, Earl, 200, v. Northampton
Simon fitz Peter (1158-1166), 33, 63 bis, 68, 85,
(L. N. 90,108, 215), v. Marescalli
Simon fitz William (1157), 7
Sisseney, Gosbert de (T. 1174), 186
Solariis, al. Soliers al. Soliars, William de (1176-1188),
206 n, 209, 290
Soissons, B***, Prior of St. Crispin at (1170),145
Soissons, Henry, Comte of (1160), 49
Soissons, Hugh, Bishop of (1160), 49
Soligny, v. Suleny
Stafford, Archdeacon of, Ealph (1171), 163
Stafford, Eobert de (1166), (L. N. 135), 210
Stanton, William de (1185, 1187), 265, 281
Stepelton, Philip de (1188), 287
Stephanus Camerarius, v. Camerarii Regis
Stephanus Capellanus (1157), 30, v. Fougeres
Stephen, King of England, v. England, Kings
of, etc.
Storteford, Richard de (Magister Scholarum London,1184), 259
Strange, Guy Le (1155-1177), 6, 80, (L. N. 144,147),
175,185, 198, 210
Strigoil and Pembroke, Earl of.
Richard fitz Gilbert, surnamed Strongbow (ob. 5 April,
1176), (L. N. 70), 16, 109, 118, 165-6, 172, 176,196, 202
Stuteville, Nicholas de (1155-1177), 8, 132, 221
--, Robert de (1158-1181; ob. c. Dec. 1184), viii.; 33, (L.
N. 309, 311, 321), 145, 172, 174, 177 n, 178, 179 w, 180,
187, 192 bis, 196, 203, 209, 212, 233, 239, 241, (E. D. 1),
273
--, William de (probably brother of Robert, occ. 1166-1177),
(L. N. 309), 159, 160, 172, 182, 194, 196 ter, 204 w, 210,
214
--, Roger de (probably brother of Robert, 1173-1185), 172,
201, 203, 205, 210, 214, 261
--, William de (eldest son of Robert, occ. 1173-1189), 172,
261, 298
--, Robert de (probably younger son of Robert, occ. 1173,
1175, 1176), 172, 194, 200
Subligny, al. Suleny, Gilbert de (drowned at sea 1170), 135
--, John de (1173-1176), 177-8, 186-7, 192, 206 n, 235
--, --, Alice, wife of, 235
--, --, Hasculf, son of, 235

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»