On Thursday, June 23, 2022 at 10:58:42 PM UTC-7, Robert Allen wrote:
On Wednesday, September 1, 2010 at 5:34:35 PM UTC-7, John P. Ravilious wrote:
On Aug 28, 5:55 pm, The Hoorn <sbarnho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
John: First, great post! Second, have you uncovered any evidence
which explicitly states Emmeline de Abitot, daughter of Urso de
Abitot, wife of Walter de Beauchamp?
snip <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Dear Steve, et al.,
In answer to the last question in your post, I have in the
interim received information off-list from Rosie Bevan. While further
work is being done with the bulk of the data Rosie so kindly sent, I
can advise that she has provided the proof of the relationship.
There is a charter Rosie noted in R. R. Darlington, ed.,
Cartulary of Worcester Cathedral Priory (Pipe Roll Soc., 1968). On p.
180 is the text of a charter of William de Beauchamp (d. 1170) in
which he confirms a grant of a virgate of land given to Worcester
priory by his father, ' which Elfred, chaplain of my grandfather Urso
de Abbetot, held ' :
' Carta Willelmi de Bello Campo senioris de j. virgata terrae
versus Lawern.
Willelmus de Bello campo omnibus ministris suis et ballivis de
Wirecestre scira salutem, Sciatis me concessise et confirmasse
donationem illam, quam pater meus Walterus fecit Priori et Monachis de Wirecestria de una virgata terrae quam Elfredus capellanus Ursonis de Abbetot avi mei tenuit. Et volo, ut teneant eam liberam et quietam de geldis et omnibus secularibus exactionibus, sicut elemosinam patris
mei et matris meae. T. Isnardo, Rogero de Lenz &c. ' [1]
I did not have direct access to this volume, but found the same
charter in the Registrum edited by Hale (see citation below) and have reproduced the text above. The descent from the Domesday tenant Urso
de Abbetot (or Abitot) is confirmed.
My thanks to Rosie for yet another valuable contribution to the
newsgroup.
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] Hale, Registrum sive Liber Irrotularius et Consuetudinarius
Prioratus Beatae Mariae Wigorniensis:
with an introduction, notes and illustrations (London: printed by John Bowyer Nichols and Sons, for the Camden Society, 1865), p. 92a
I am pleased there is confirmation that William de Beauchamp (Bello Campo) who died about 1170 was the son of Walter Beauchamp whose wife was Emmeline de Abitot, daughter of Urso de Abitot.
I am having trouble confirming the name and birth date and parents of the wife of William de Beauchamp (d. 1170). At present I have her as Bertha/Maud/Matilda de Braose, daughter of William de Braose and Bertha of Hereford. There seems to be some date
discrepancies that are in conflict.
Bertha/Maud/Matilda de Braose's (daughter of William de Braose, 3rd Lord of Bramber) birth year is given at Wikitree as 1111. Geni gives her birth year in a range between 1130-1134. The year 1111 seems clearly wrong as her father, William de Braose,
3rd Lord of Bramber, seems to have been born after 1100 (Wikitree and Wickipedia gives his year birth year as 1112 and Geni gives his birth year as a range between 1100-1120).
Bertha de Hereford, wife of William de Braose, 3rd Lord of Bramber, is said to have been born between 1130-1132 (Wikipedia says 1132, Wikitree says 1130 and Geni says 1132. With these birth dates, is is biologically impossible for this Bertha de
Hereford to be the mother of a daughter born no later than 1134.
Returning to William de Beauchamp who died in 1170. There seems to be an agreement that he was born about 1105. The idea that he married a first wife who was the mother of his children that was 25 years younger than he was is hard to accept and if we
have to push his wife's birth date further forward to fit with her parent's birth dates it makes this marriage even more difficult to accept.
Further, William de Beauchamp (d.1170) and his wife's eldest son, William de Beauchamp was seemingly born prior to 1150 (Wikipedia does not give a date of birth, Wikitree says he was born about 1130 and Geni says he was born about 1142) which adds to
the date discrepancies.
Is there some primary source that confirms the given name of William de Beauchamp's wife? If so, was it Maud, Matilda or Bertha?
Is there some primary source that confirms that William de Beauchamps's wife was a daughter of William de Braose, 3rd Lord of Bramber and/or of Bertha de Hereford?
I have seen no evidence that William de Braose's father, Philip de Braose had a daughter Maud/Matilda/Bertha or that he had a daughter who married a de Beauchamp, but if William de Beauchamp (d. 1170) married a de Braose daughter, the dates would fit
better if this was a daughter of this Philip de Braose.
Has this issue we examined in detail at this site and is there some consensus on how to reconcile these people and dates?
From further reading and research over the past 24 hours, I think I have answered most of the questions raised by my previous post. My conclusions are:
1. The daughter of William de Braose, 3rd Lord of Bramber, who married a William de Beauchamp was named Berta/Bertha. Most likely that additional names ascribed to her as Maud or Matilda come from a confusion with Maud de St. Valery who married the son
of William de Braose, 3rd Lord of Bramber.
2. The William de Bello Campo/Beauchamp who married Berta/Bertha de Braose was not the William de Bello Campo/Beauchamp (1105-1170), but rather his son, William de Bello Campo/Beauchamp (died c.1197)
The analysis that lead me to these conclusions is as follows:
Follow the proven ownership of the manor of Tetbury. According to an article on the Manor of Tetbury at British History Online, the manor of Tetbury came into the ownership of the de St. Valery family with Reynold de St. Valery owning it about 1148.
Reynold/Renold de St. Valery died about 1066 at which time it came into the ownership of his son, Bernard de St. Valery who died in 1197. Then Tetbury was granted to William de Breuse (it is speculated to be either upon or because of his marriage to
Maud de St. Valery, daughter of Bernard). This William de Breuse/Braose was William III de Braose (born about 1150; died about 1211), [not his father William de Braose (born about 1112, died about 1192) who married Bertha of Hereford]. Tetbury was
conficated from William de Breuse in 1208 due to his quarrel with King John. Tetbury was then granted to Peter FitzHerbert in 1212. After William III de Breuse/Braose's death in 1211, his heirs disputed ownership of Tetbury with the King. By 1215 the
ownership of Tetbury was with Giles de Breuse, son of William de Breuse.
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/glos/vol11/pp264-269
In supplement to the above account of Tetbury there is the Inquisition apparently following the death of John de Thorndon in 1305 (19 June 33 Edward I) which involves the ownership of Tettebury and other property. It says that William de Breouse, long
since deceased, held the manor of Tettebury of the King in chief by the service of a knight's fee and he gave the rent "a hundred and sixty years and more past to William de Bello Campo, great grandfather of the said Earl [i.e., William de Bello Campo,
the grantor of Tetbury to John de Thorndon] and Berta, daughter of said William de Brewose, in free marriage."
So, combining the two records, William de Braose, 3rd Earl of Bramber, was granted the manor of Tetbury sometime shortly after the death of Bernard de St. Valery in 1097, quite possibly upon or because of the marriage of William II de Braose to Maud de
St. Valery, daughter of Bernard. Tetbury was taken back from this William de Braose by King John, but it was restored to the heirs of Wiliam de Braose by 1215, namely to Giles de Braose, son of said William de Braose (d. 1211). Sometime during William
de Braose's ownership he granted the "rent" from Tetbury to William de Bello Campo and Berta, his wife, daughter of said William de Braose. The above inquest records was quite likely inaccurate to say that this William de Braose who granted the rent to
William de Bello Campo was the great grandfather (rather than father) of the William de Bello Campo who granted to John de Thorndon and to say that the grant of the rents by William de Braose to William de Bello Campo was 160 or more years before 1305 (
rather than lesser time). This is only me speculating, but perhaps the "great grandfather" and the "160 years" was a confusion by the person taking the inquest with the earlier ownership of Tetbury in the de St. Valery family.
What does seem clear from these records is that the William de Bello Campo/Beauchamp who received the rents by grant from William de Braose was not the William de Bello Campo/Beauchamp (1105-1170) who died prior to Tetbury coming into the ownership of
the de Broase family.
I think the conclusion to draw from the above information about Tetbury manor is that it was William II de Beauchamp, not William I de Beauchamp, who married Berta/Bertha de Braose, daughter of William de Braose and Bertha of Hereford. I have not found
any evidence that this Berta/Bertha de Braose was also known as Maud or Martha and suggest the addition of the given names of Maud and/or Matilda was a confusion with Maud/Matilda de St. Valery who married William de Braose, son of William de Braose and
Bertha of Hereford.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)