William fitz Osbern's alleged sons, according to the registe

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Chris Phillips

William fitz Osbern's alleged sons, according to the registe

Legg inn av Chris Phillips » 25 okt 2004 21:38:44

Can anyone make any sense of this passage in the Complete Peerage? (vol. 4,
p. 310, note a, discussing the parentage of Richard de Reviers)

"In the register of Carisbrooke (Monasticon, vol. vii, p. 1041) it is said
that Richard de Reviers was nepos of William fitz Osbern, after whose death
(his sons John and Richard having d. v.p.) the Isle of Wight was inherited
by the said Richard, tunc Comes Exonie."

Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, pp. 487, 488, gives William fitz Osbern only
three children: William who succeeded to the Norman lands, Roger who
succeeded to the English lands, and Emma who married Ralph, Earl of Norfolk.
As is well known, Roger forfeited his lands as a result of a conspiracy
hatched at Emma's wedding.

Is the statement in the Carisbrooke register a complete flight of fantasy,
or am I (or is someone else) misinterpreting something?

Chris Phillips

Rosie Bevan

Re: William fitz Osbern's alleged sons, according to the reg

Legg inn av Rosie Bevan » 26 okt 2004 04:30:25

Dear Chris

The reference is to a passage in the Monasticon Anglicanum v. 6:2, p.1041.
It would appear to have been written after the death of Isabella, Countess
of Aumale in 1293 and before 1307, which is when Edward I died.

"Memorandum quod Willielmus bastardus, conquestor terrae Anglicanae, habuit
Willielmum filium Osberni, marescallum suum; qui conquisivit insulam Vectam
temporer quo dictus Willielmus bastardus conquisivit terram Angliae. Et
fecit dictum Willielmum filium Osberni comitem Herefordiae. Qui quidem
Willielmus filius Osberni habuit duos filios Johannem et Ricardum, qui
obierunt vivente patre eorum: post quorum mortem et Willielmi patris eorum
descendebat haeredititam illa Ricardo de Rivers, nepoti praedicti Willielmi
filli Osbertni, tunc comiti Exoniae. De quo Ricardo venit Baldwinus filius
ejus. De quo Baldwino, quia obiit sine haerede de se, descendit haereditas
illa Isabellae sorori ejus, quam Willielmus de Fortibus desponsavit. Qui
quidem Willielmus et Isabellae obierunt sine haerede de se; et dicta
Isabella supervixit : postquam dominus rex Edwardus nunc, de ea illam
adquisivit."

The details are accurate for what we know to be true - Baldwin was son of
Richard and from him descended the last Baldwin who died without issue,
leaving Isabella his sister, wife of William de Fortibus.

Baldwin confirmed the possessions which the monks of Carisbrooke had held in
the time of William fitz Osbert and Richard de Redvers his father (it is
reproduced in full in Bearman, p.69), and there are confirmation charters by
William de Vernon (who mentions Peverel de Argenteom and William his
brother). Presumably the cartulary of Carisbrooke contained much more from
which its annalist drew the history.

As so little is known about the ancestry of the Redvers family it would be
well to keep an open mind on this one.

Cheers

Rosie



----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Phillips" <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:38 AM
Subject: William fitz Osbern's alleged sons, according to the register of
Carisbrooke


Can anyone make any sense of this passage in the Complete Peerage? (vol.
4,
p. 310, note a, discussing the parentage of Richard de Reviers)

"In the register of Carisbrooke (Monasticon, vol. vii, p. 1041) it is said
that Richard de Reviers was nepos of William fitz Osbern, after whose
death
(his sons John and Richard having d. v.p.) the Isle of Wight was inherited
by the said Richard, tunc Comes Exonie."

Keats-Rohan, Domesday People, pp. 487, 488, gives William fitz Osbern only
three children: William who succeeded to the Norman lands, Roger who
succeeded to the English lands, and Emma who married Ralph, Earl of
Norfolk.
As is well known, Roger forfeited his lands as a result of a conspiracy
hatched at Emma's wedding.

Is the statement in the Carisbrooke register a complete flight of fantasy,
or am I (or is someone else) misinterpreting something?

Chris Phillips




Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»