Melisent of Rethel and her son/s
Leo
The county of Rethel may never have been Melisent's inheritance in the first place - her father Gervais held it after being deposed as archbishop-elect of Rheims and quitting the priesthood, but this was explicitly by seizure ["comitatum...sibi hereditarium arripuit"] despite the hereditary rights he obviously considered he had reclaimed as a layman. Rethel was probably already destined for the family of his sister Mathilde, married to Eudes of Vitry whose descendants certainly held it after Gervais died.
There is no suggestion in the account by Alberic of Troisfontaines that Rethel should have passed after the death of Gervais to his widow Elisabeth or to her (and presumably his) daughter Melisent. We don't know what inheritance Elisabeth of Namur's second husband Clarembaud de Rosoy may have wished to keep from Melisent, if any - he may have been party to the transfer of Rethel to the Vitry family, or he might for that matter have wanted control of something else for himself. All that Alberic says is that Clarembaud sent his step-daughter out of the country ("alienavit a terra") by giving her as wife to Robert Marmion; he says nothing about her purported inheritance, of Rethel or otherwise, and such a motive has been simply assumed by readers.
In any case Rethel was not a great countship, and Robert Marmion in Normandy would have had little incentive to contest its possession in right of his wife - as well as very little chance of success outside the Norman orbit.
Alberic might also have been colouring the story by imputing the Marmion marriage to the step-father Clarembaud. William of Tyre, one of Alberic's sources in this part of the chronicle, wrote that Gervais himself had married his daughter to a Norman lord ["Gervasius...unicam filiam cuidam nobili viro in Normannia matrimonio copulavit"]. Whoever was responsible for the choice of husband, presumably there was concern over the legitimacy of Melisent as the issue of a clergyman who had evidently released himself from his vows, without consent from Rome, that would help to account for the mismatch with a petty seigneur in Normandy. William of Tyre remarked that Gervais had married Elisabeth of Namur "contra instituta ecclesiastica". In an ordinary family this might have passed without too much scandal, but given the enormous local prestige of the Rethel connection once Balduin of Edessa (brother of Gervais) had become king of Jerusalem in 1118, this was a different matter. The embarrassment of a niece of the king from an irregular union taking the family's principal inheritance would have been enough reason to marry her into distant obscurity.
Adeliza of Louvain was the queen of England who gave a portion of Stanton to her relative Melisent - her letter to the bishop of Lincoln, notifying this, was preserved in the Reading cartulary. A later charter of Eynsham says that the king (apparently meaning Henry I) gave Stanton with his wife to Robert Marmion and then later the king (as if the same one) gave Melisent with Stanton to Richard de Camville - however, this second marriage happened after Henry's death in 1135 and the first marriage may have too. The statement of Adeliza that she had bestowed part of Stanton on Melisent suggests that this took place on her own authority when she was the widowed queen, and the undated letter advising the bishop of Lincoln is ascribed to 1139/44 by the editor of the Reading cartulary.
As for the Camvilles, Katherine Keats-Rohan (in _Domesday Descendants_) says that Melisent was mother of Richard II de Camville (died 1224) as well as a daughter Matilda (born ca 1145); Isabel/Melisent wife of Robert de Harcourt (whether she was daughter of Richard I or Richard II) is not mentioned, and all that Keats-Rohan records of a William de Camville is that a man of this name attested a charter of Roger de Mowbray ca 1150 - if this was Richard I de Camville's son then he must have been from his first marriage in order to attest independently by ca 1150, when a Camville son of Melisent de Rethel could have been no more than ca 6 years old.
However, this William would appear to have been a brother or other contemporary rather than son of Richard I de Camville, who founded Combe abbey in 1150. The original donation was of Smite, that was held by Richard from Roger de Mowbray, and the charter attested by William was Roger's confirmation of this adding a further small donation of his own. Richard's foundation charter names his son & heir Gerard, specifying that he consented, while mentioning other children but without naming them as participants in the gift. Gerard was the only one who attested the charter. This suggests that he was older than the others and most likely older than ca 6 at the time, presumably the only son who was old enough to be involved. It is unlikely that the William who attested the Mowbray charter would have been another son, and potential heir, of Richard omitted from his own document.
A later charter by Gerard, undated but ascribed by anarchivist to 1176/83, was attested by his brothers Walter, William and Richard, in that order. According to ODNB, Richard II was the son of Melisent (I'm not sure of the basis for this). Walter and William could have been full brothers of Gerard, but if so it's a little odd that they, if not also their younger half-sibling Richard, would have been left unnamed in the Combe foundation charter of 1150. Unless there is firmer evidence to the contrary, it would seem fair to assume that Gerard was the only son living in 1150 from Richard I's first marriage to the lady he named as Adelicia.
To me all this means that I am going to disconnect William de Camville from those I have as his parents at present.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
John P. Ravilious
=========================
Dear Leo,
Just now returning to the fold, I noted your post questioning the
'traditional' assignment of the issue of Richard de Camville "I" to
his 2nd wife, Millicent (or Melisende) de Rethel. Most researchers
(myself included) have left all the children as being by Millicent,
but I think you are quite correct in questioning this, and the end
result likely will be separating a number of English descendants of
the Camvilles from this long-accepted link to Carolingian ancestry.
The placement of Isabel (wife of Robert de Harcourt) is solid.
This has to do with Millicent's maritagium of Stanton (later Stanton
Harcourt) passing with Isabel's marriage to the Harcourt family. As
to Richard's son Richard "II" de Camville, the earliest mention I find
is in a charter of 'Ricardus de Camvilla' when he granted a third
part of the 'dîmes' of his lands at Hautot-l'Auvray to Jumièges
priory, the charter being dated at Arques, 1170 ("du 5 avril au 27
mars 1171"). Richard's son, Richard "II", was the 3rd witness.
' Sciant presentes et posteri quod ego Ricardus de Camvilla,
assensu heredum meorum, dedi Deo et sancte
Marie sanctoque Petro et monachis Gemmeticensibus in
elemosinam terciam partem decimarum que sunt in terra
mea apud Hottoth (2) et in finibus ejusdem ville, pro salute
anime mee et uxoris mee Adelicie et sequentis
uxoris mee Milesente, patris et matris mee et Rogeri
fratris mei et aliorum predecessorum meorum, perpetuo
possidendam. Quam donationem cum duabus
partibus ejusdem decime quas ab antiquo ex lar-
gitione predecessorum meorum predicta ecclesia cum
ecclesia ejusdem ville possederat, sigilli mei impres-
sione munivi et subscriptorum virorum testimonio
corroboravi : Rogeri, capellani mei ; Hunfredi, cle-
rici mei ; Ricardi, filii mei : Gisleberti de Cantelu ;
Roberti de Coldreto ; Hugonis de Barrevilla ; Osberni
de Odemara; Ricardi Hachet ; Willelmi de Barrevilla;
Stephani de Chevremont. Actum apud Archas (1), anno
ab incarnatione Domini. M°. C°. septuagesimo. Amen. '
[Chart. Jumièges, II:1-2, no. CI7, cites '(Arch. de la Seine-
Inférieure, fonds de Jumièges, série H non classée). ? B. Copie du
commencement du \1u< s., dans le
Cartulaire A, p. 198, n° 336 (Ibidem). Mentionné dans : Histoire de
l'abbaye royale de Saint-Pierre de Jumièges (é.iit. abbé J. Loth), I,
278. ']
This charter serves to provide chronological context as to
Richard "II" de Camville being alive and acting as a witness in 1170,
but does not prove his maternity. This is in fact proved by a charter
cited in Sir Christopher Hatton's Book of Seals. " Ricardus de
Camuill' " granted a charter to Richard Pipard restoring his lands in
Stanton Harcourt, co. Oxon. which his (Pipard's) grandfather Sir Leger
had held by the gift of Richard de Camville and Milicent his wife,
dated at Stanton (est. 1176-1191, but probably before 1176) [Loyd,
Book of Seals, p. 29, No. 428].
I had long ago assigned this charter to Richard "I", but your
post prompted me to review the actual text. The grant was made to
Richard Pipard (brother of Robert) of ' all the land which Sir Leger,
their grandfather, held on the day he died in my manor of Stanton of
the gift of Richard de Camuill' my father and Milecent' my mother
' ["totam terram quam Ligerus miles auus eorundem tenuit die qua obiit
in manerio meo de Stanton' donatione Ricardi de Camuill' patris mei et
Milecent' matris Mee..."] [Loyd, Book of Seals, p. 29, No. 428].
Thus we have proof that (1) Richard "II" de Camville was the son
of Millicent de Rethel, and (2) that he held lands in Stanton
(Harcourt), Oxon. It may be that his sister Isabel's maritagium was
held of her brother Richard; presumably the lordship passed to the
Harcourts following Richard "II" de Camville's death, but this
requires further research.
Given the above, and the charter of Gerard de Camville you cited
previously (esp. as regards to the order of witnesses) I would suggest
that the only certain issue of Richard de Camville and Millicent de
Rethel were (1) Richard de Camville of Stanton, co. Oxon. and Benham,
co. Berks. (d. on Crusade, 1191) and (2) Isabel de Camville, wife of
Robert de Harcourt. Further research concering Maud de Camville (wife
of William de Ros and ancestress of Ros of Hildersham) is likely
merited on this issue.
Cheers,
John
wjhonson
>
> Given the above, and the charter of Gerard de Camville you cited
> previously (esp. as regards to the order of witnesses) I would suggest
> that the only certain issue of Richard de Camville and Millicent de
> Rethel were (1) Richard de Camville of Stanton, co. Oxon. and Benham,
> co. Berks. (d. on Crusade, 1191) and (2) Isabel de Camville, wife of
> Robert de Harcourt. Further research concering Maud de Camville (wife
> of William de Ros and ancestress of Ros of Hildersham) is likely
> merited on this issue.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
------------------
We know that Gerard had other brothers, old enough to be witnesses on
his confirmation charter dated 1176x83. They are named as "Walter,
William, [and lastly] Richard" (my comment in []s)
I would suggest this is their birth order.
It's unusual to me that on Richard I's above 1170x1 he only names
Richard II. Gerard, his heir, in addition to Walter and William were
then living.
My solution is that this charter of Richard I's was in respect of land
that he held of the inheritence of Milicent which would have passed to
R II and thus why R II is named, that he is confirming this [dis]
inheritence. That would explain why the other older brothers are not
named.
Thus the three older brothers were by Alice, and only the child
Richard was by Millicent.
Yes? No? Codfish?
Will "Codfish" Johnson
John P. Ravilious
====================
Good morning Will,
I would agree that the order in the charter of Gerard de Camville
[1] provides the order of seniority.
Note however, that the charter of Richard de Camville (1170) in
favor of Jumièges priory does not name any of his issue: it does
mention the gift with made 'with the assent of my heirs' ["assensu
heredum meorum"]. The charter was witnessed by his son Richard de
Camville: I would suggest this was because he was the only one of
Richard's sons present with him at Arques on that occasion. I would
not draw any other conclusion on this particular aspect from the
charter in question.
I think the family then could be roughly charted as follows:
1) Adelicia = Richard de Camville = 2) Melisende/Millicent
I d. ca. 1176 I de Rethel
______________I_______ __I________________
I I I I I
Gerard Walter William Richard Isabel
I I I d. 1191 = Robert de
I I I I Harcourt
Richard Maud Geoffrey John I
I = Thomas de Camville (dsp) V
I de Astley of Clifton
I I I
Idoine V V
= Sir William
Longespee
(d. 7 Feb
1249/50)
I
V
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] The charter of Gerard de Camville is abstracted on Access to
Archives:
' DEEDS AND PAPERS DR10/194 [dated ca:] 1176-83
Parchment, 7½ x 5¼ ins.
Language: Latin
Contents:
Charter of Gerard de Camvilla, addressed to Richard bishop of
Chester, confirming to God and St. Mary of Cumba and the monks of the
Cistercian order there serving God, the gift which his father Richard
de Camvilla made to the said abbey, namely the whole land of Smita to
found an abbey of the Cistercian order, with demesne and other
appurtenances in wood and plain, in ways and paths, in land and water,
in meadows and pastures, and in free alms quit from all earthly
service and secular exactions.
Witnesses: Walter de Camvilla, William de Camvill', Richard de
Camvill' his brothers, John de Curci, Simon de Blossevilla.
Seal on tag: circular, brown, c. 2¾ ins. diameter. A ?lion
passant.
Note: For date and seal: see Sir Christopher Hatton's Book of
Seals, p. 8. ' [A2A,
Shakespeare Centre Library and Archive: Gregory of Stivichall [DR10/1
- DR10/467], Combe alias Smite: DR10/194]
See A2A website:
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=188-dr10_1-1&cid=1-1-1-15-6&kw=camvilla#1-1-1-15-6