Beatrice de Saint-Pol, mother of William, Count of Ponthieu
Douglas Richardson
Last week we were misinformed by a poster that Alice of France's
husband, Guillaume, Count of Ponthieu and Montreuil (died 1221), was
the son of Jean, Count of Ponthieu, by his 2nd wife, Laure de
Saint-Valery.
Actually it appears that Guillaume was the son of Jean, Count of
Ponthieu, by his 3rd wife, Béatrice de Saint-Pol (or if you please
Béatrix). The following is an extract of two original charters, both
of which mention Count Jean, his wife, Béatrice, and Count Jean's son,
Guillaume. In the second charter dated 1187, it is explicity stated
that Guillaume is "their son" (leur fils) referring back to Jean and
Béatrice. As such, there can be no doubt that Guillaume was the son
of Jean and Béatrice. Europaische Stammtafeln, 3 Pt. 4 (1987): 638
(sub Ponthieu) indicates that Jean and Béatrice were married sometime
before 4 Dec. 1170.
Perhaps someone fluent in French can translate the documents below for
the newsgroup. Thanks!
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
- - - - - - -
Date: 1186. Jean, comte de Ponthieu, Guillaume, son fils, et Béatrix,
son épouse, concedent à Baudin et Simon, son frere, à Baudoin, fils de
Godin, et aux fils de Simon, le monnoyage dans leurs terres. Témoins:
Enguerrand, sénéchal, et Guy, son frère, Gérard d'Abbeville, Dreux de
Ponches, Hugues de Fontaines, Aleaume de Fontaines, etc. [Reference:
L.-E. de La Gorgue-Rosny, Recherches Généalogiques sur les Comtés de
Ponthieu, de Boulogne, de Guines and Pays Circonvoisins 4 (1877): 37].
Date: 1187. Charte concernant un différent entre Jean, comte de
Ponthieu, Béatrix, sa femme, et Guillaume, leur fils; et les bougeois
d'Abbeville. Témoins: Hugues, abbé de Valeires; Boldon, doyen
d'Abbeville; Raoul de Vismes et Pierre Li Vaelers, prêtres; Guy, frère
du comte; Enguerrand, sénéchal de Ponthieu; Baudoin de Dorat; Aleaume
de Fontaines, chevaliers, etc. [Reference: L.-E. de La Gorgue-Rosny,
Recherches Généalogiques sur les Comtés de Ponthieu, de Boulogne, de
Guines and Pays Circonvoisins 4 (1877): 37-38].
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:04 PM
Subject: Beatrice de Saint-Pol, mother of William, Count of Ponthieu
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Last week we were misinformed
=====jumping to conclusions
by a poster
====this poster was me, quoting ES III/4 Tafel 638
that Alice of France's
> husband, Guillaume, Count of Ponthieu and Montreuil (died 1221), was
> the son of Jean, Count of Ponthieu, by his 2nd wife, Laure de
> Saint-Valery.
>
> Actually it appears
==== appears, that at least is a safe word
that Guillaume was the son of Jean, Count of
> Ponthieu, by his 3rd wife, Béatrice de Saint-Pol (or if you please
> Béatrix). The following is an extract of two original charters, both
> of which mention Count Jean, his wife, Béatrice, and Count Jean's son,
> Guillaume. In the second charter dated 1187, it is explicity stated
> that Guillaume is "their son" (leur fils) referring back to Jean and
> Béatrice.
====never heard of step-parents referring to 'their' children?
As such, there can be no doubt that Guillaume was the son
> of Jean and Béatrice. Europaische Stammtafeln, 3 Pt. 4 (1987): 638
> (sub Ponthieu) indicates that Jean and Béatrice were married sometime
> before 4 Dec. 1170.
====Mister Selectivity discards this Tafel in regards to the mother of
Guillaume, but accepts that marriage date????
>
> Perhaps someone fluent in French
==== A few days ago, who offered to translate from French?
can translate the documents below for
> the newsgroup. Thanks!
>
====Richardson, again, expects others to do his work for him and,
generously, quotes sources, but Mister Selectivity forgets the sources in ES
in regards to the Ponthieu family,
one is a source as recent as 1960.
Richardson, if you have access to ES you should have given those sources as
well, but then it is not the first time you try to send a messenger boy with
half the relevent details.
Would I quote Spencer Hines? Why not!
Hilarious!!
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
Pierre Aronax
"Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> a écrit dans le message de
news: 5cf47a19.0302...@posting.google.com...
<...>
> The following is an extract of two original charters,
<...>
> Perhaps someone fluent in French can translate the documents below
<...>
These are neither extracts of original charters nor original documents, but
modern summaries of the documents. Before jumping to any conclusion, it
would be better to see the actual wording of the charters, particularly of
the second one, rather than basing an opinion on a summary which can
perfectly be inaccurate on the particular point of the relationship between
the individuals mentioned. Without having seen the document, I point
particularly to attention that the original charter is probably in Latin:
"leur" in French is clearly a plural, but the possible Latin equivalent,
"suus", can be both singular or plural. Of course, the charter uses perhaps
an unambiguous plural form, like "eorum": but to know that it is
indispensable to see the original text.
Pierre
Pierre Aronax
"Pierre Aronax" <pierre...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
3e4234e9$0$10756$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net...
>
> "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com> a écrit dans le message de
> news: 5cf47a19.0302...@posting.google.com...
>
> <...>
> > The following is an extract of two original charters,
>
> <...>
>
> > Perhaps someone fluent in French can translate the documents below
>
> <...>
>
> These are neither extracts of original charters nor original documents,
but
> modern summaries of the documents. Before jumping to any conclusion, it
> would be better to see the actual wording of the charters, particularly of
> the second one, rather than basing an opinion on a summary which can
> perfectly be inaccurate on the particular point of the relationship
between
> the individuals mentioned. Without having seen the document, I point
> particularly to attention that the original charter is probably in Latin:
> "leur" in French is clearly a plural, but the possible Latin equivalent,
> "suus", can be both singular or plural.
I mean by that: this possessive pronoun can refer to one or more individuals
as possessors. But from a grammatical point of view the form is of course
singular.
Pierre
Douglas Richardson
I completely agree. Yes, by all means, we should definitely look at
the original charters if possible. Monsieur Gorgue-Rosny gives the
source of these charters in his book. When I have a chance, I'll
check his book again and see where he says he found the charters.
Assuming he correctly abstracted these charters, the second charter I
think gives unambiguous evidence that Beatrice was Guillaume's mother.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
"Pierre Aronax" <pierre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3e4234e9$0$10756$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net>...
Douglas Richardson
I always give higher weight to an original primary document than I do
to a modern secondary source. That is the appropriate thing to do.
The two charters below are excellent contemporary evidence. If you
have contemporary primary documents to refute these charters, by all
means, please post them and make your case. There is no "opportunism"
here - just the evidence.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Date: 1186. Jean, comte de Ponthieu, Guillaume, son fils, et Béatrix,
Leo van de Pas
To speak up while you are so obviously ill-informed, or want to be
ill-informed, does your reputation as a Primary Researcher no good. Don't
forget, I read Pierre Aronex message
and so did others, you cannot pretend not having seen it. Or are you THAT
dishonest?
LFM van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royala...@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Pierre Aronax
> Dear Pierre ~
>
> I completely agree. Yes, by all means, we should definitely look at
> the original charters if possible. Monsieur Gorgue-Rosny
Rather Monsieur de La Gorgue-Rosny.
> gives the
> source of these charters in his book. When I have a chance, I'll
> check his book again and see where he says he found the charters.
>
> Assuming he correctly abstracted these charters, the second charter I
> think gives unambiguous evidence that Beatrice was Guillaume's mother.
<...>
But the digest of the first charter gives evidence of the contrary, so the
two summaries (and perhaps the two charters, but for the moment it is only a
presumption) are contradictory, or at least ambiguous. Assuming (it is only
an hypothesis, I didn't see the charter) that the last charter says
something like: "Johannes comes, Beatrix uxor sua et Wilhelmus filius suus",
how do you translate that if, precisely, you don't already know if William
is or is not the son of Béatrice? You can summarize the document in French
speaking of "Jean, comte, Béatrice, sa femme, et Guillaume, LEUR fils" or
speaking of "Jean, comte, Béatrice, sa femme, et Guillaume, SON fils". Both
digests would be equally correct, but you have to choose since you can not
preserve the ambiguity of the Latin in French. Perhaps the Latin charter (if
it is in Latin as I suspect it to be) has a slightly different and not
ambiguous phrasing, but that is something one can know only by checking it.
Pierre
Pierre Aronax
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: Beatrice de Saint-Pol, mother of William, Count of Ponthieu
> Dear Leo ~
>
> I always give higher weight to an original primary document than I do
> to a modern secondary source. That is the appropriate thing to do.
> The two charters below are excellent contemporary evidence.
<...>
However, what you quoted are NOT contemporary evidences but only modern
analisies of contemporary evidences. Since what you are looking for is the
precise wording by which the relationship of the individuals was indicated
in the documents, and since this wording seems to be contradictory in the
two documents, a modern analysis is not enough: you need the exact text of
the charter itself before going to a conclusion.
> If you
> have contemporary primary documents to refute these charters,
<...>
Again, you didn't quote the charters, only their summaries in French, which
is at the last ambiguous. We still not know what the charters exactly says.
In French, the summary of the first document means that Guillaume was son of
John only, in spite of the fact that Béatrice is mentioned in the text; on
the contrary, the analysis of the second document means that Guillaume was
son of John and Béatrice. So the different wordings of the two summaries are
contradictory: an other reason which requires to check the exact phrasing of
the charters themselves.
Pierre
Douglas Richardson
As a followup to my original post on the matter of Guillaume, Count of
Ponthieu's parentage, I've located the following charter dated 1190.
In this charter, John, Count of Ponthieu, conveys land to St.
Martin's, Troarn, which gift is witnessed by the Count's sons, John,
Robert, and William. Round indicates that the order of the sons
named in this charter suggests that Guillaume was the third son of his
father, Jean, Count of Ponthieu, not eldest.
An abstract of this charter has appeared in Calendar of Documents
Presserved in France, by J. Horace Round. I presume it also has
appeared in a French source, L'Abbaye de Saint-Martin de Troarn
(Caen,1911) by R.N. Sauvage, which work unfortunately I have not seen.
The abstract of the charter provided by Round reads as follows:
No. 485. Date: 1190. Source: Cartulary of Troarn, fo. 100d. Trans.
Vol. III, fo. 354.
"Charter of John son of count William of Ponthieu notifying that, by
consent of Richard king of the English, and by that of his eldest son,
John, and his other sons Robert and William, he gives to the abbey of
St. Martin etc., the vill and island called Raimberthome, etc. and the
patronage of the church of Sr. Mary, Raimberthome etc.
Hanc autem donationem feci ego Johannes filius Willelmi comitis
Pontivi anno ab incarnatione Domini MC nonegesimo [1190], anno primi
regni regis Anglorum Ricardi, per voluntatem ipsius, et saisiavi de
omnibus predictis Durandum abbatem Troarni etc. ante Willelmum filium
Radulfi senescallum Normannie apud Cadomum in scacario, presentibus et
libere concedentibus filiis meis Johanne et Roberto et Willelmo.
Predicti autem abbas et monachi Troarni videntes urgentes necessitates
meas dederunt michi pro hac concessione mille et ducentas libras
Andegavenses. Testibus: Henrico episcopo Baiocensi, Henrico abbate
Sagiensi, Roberto abbate Sancti Andree de Goufern; Roberto
archidiacono de Notingham; Roger de Arreia; domini Willelmi senescalli
Normannie; etc." [Reference: Calendar of Documents Preserved in
France, 1 (1899): 172].
The above charter was confirmed by King Richard I on 19 June 1190 [see
Round, pg. 172; cf. Nicholas Vincent, ed., Acta of Henry II and
Richard I, pt. 2 (List and Index Soc., Special series, vol. 27)(1996),
pg. 162].
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
royala...@msn.com (Douglas Richardson) wrote in message news:<5cf47a19.0302...@posting.google.com>...
Douglas Richardson
Since posting the charter below, I've determined that the "John son of
William Count of Ponthieu" who issued the charter in 1190 was actually
John, Count of Alencon, seigneur of Sees and Sonnois (died 1190/91).
This John was uncle to Jean, Count of Ponthieu (died 1191), whose son
and heir, Guillaume, married in 1195 to Alice of France. The correct
placement of the older Jean is indicated by a chart of the Counts of
Ponthieu found in Europaische Stammtafeln, 3 Pt. 4 (1989), Tafel 638.
The older Jean, Count of Alencon, had sons, Jean [Count of Alencon],
Robert [Count of Alencon], and Guillaume [seigneur of la
Roche-Mabile].
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
royala...@msn.com (Douglas Richardson) wrote in message news:<5cf47a19.03020...@posting.google.com>...