Lacy - du Puiset
Reedpcgen
piques my interest ;-). The treasurer William de Rotherfield belonged to a
family that at the very best could only be considered minor gentry from a very
rural area.
Again, the only reason I could imagine that would lead Roger de Lacy to marry
her (if Maud were a Rotherfield) would be that she was extraordinarily
beautiful. If this were the case I would almost think some chronicler would
have mentioned it (it makes good story). Remember, Roger did have the highest
income in England (aside from the King) at that time [according to Sidney
Painter's study, and he made a specialty of the reign of King John].
It would be very believable, on the other hand, if Roger de Lacy married the
sister of Bouchard du Puiset, treasurer of York in 1189, which is when Roger de
Lacy would have married his wife Maud (1189-91). If Maud's brother were
treasurer at the time she married, Bouchard would be our only choice. A little
might therefore be said about this man and his ancestry.
[I would also like to remark that J. C. B. Sharp has communicated to me some of
the same things I am posting, but that my research is independent of his (but
it is in fact his communication that has spurred my to post this). I take it
to be a good sign, however, that he and I continue to arrive at similar
conclusions, and I am impressed at the depth of sources he consults.]
Aside from charters and deeds, for this period in England, the Rolls Series of
chronicles, etc., provides invaluable historical detail that would otherwise
remain unknown. Bouchard du Puiset, Archdeacon of Durham, was given the
treasurership of York at a council held at Pipewell Abbey on 16 September 1189,
when the King's brother Geoffrey, who then held the post, was given the
Archbishopric of York
[see _Chronica Rogeri de Houedene_ (more commonly known as Hovenden), ed.
William Stubbs (RS 51), iii, 16 ("Bucardo de Puteaco, nepoti Hugonis
Dunelmensis episcopi, thesaurariam Eboracensis ecclesiae");
and _Gesta regis Henrici secundi ... Benedict of Peterborough_ ed. William
Stubbs (RS 49), ii, 85 ("et Buchardo de Putheaco, nepoti Hugonis Dunelmensis
episcopi, thesaurariam ecclesiae Eboracensis"). In a note here, the great
historian Stubbs describes him as "Son of Everard de Puiset, and brother of the
count of Bar on the Seine."].
Bouchard was therefore called 'nepos' of Hugh de Puiset, Bishop of Durham, who
was himself treasurer of Durham by 24 July 1147 until 1153. Nepos must here
mean nephew, based on chronology and known family relationships. Hugh du
Puiset was described as the nephew of the King on 24 July 1147, which places
him accurately in the du Puiset family.
G[eoffrey]. V[aughn]. Scammel, _Hugh du Puiset, Bishop of Durham_ (Cambridge,
1956), pp. 312-13, tries to make Bouchard one of the Bishop's illegitimate
children. Scammel based this on a misinterpretation of the statement that
Bishop Hugh had three illegitimate children by various mistresses and that one
of them was the Archdeacon of Durham.
William of Newburgh [_Chronicles of the reigns of Stephen, Henry II, and
Richard I_ , ed. Richard Howlett (RS 82), ii, 440-1] stated that the Bishop had
three illegitimate sons by different women. Two who are certainly known are
(1) Henri du Puiset, a son of Adelaide de Percy ["Adelidis de Perci matris
meae"]. Henri died in England 1209/11, having married, in 1182, Denise de
Tilly, widow of Henry de Newmarch/Henri de Neufmarche [ES 3:660]; and (2)
Hugues, who was chancellor to Louis, King of France [William of Newburgh, ii,
441; and Benedict of Peterborough, i, 241, etc.].
William of Newburgh states that one of the sons was the Archdeacon of Durham
[p. 441], but as J. C. B. Sharp pointed out to me there is charter evidence
that proves the Bishop had a son named William who was Archdeacon of
Northumberland, so it would appear William of Newburgh was mistaken when naming
the ecclesiastical office, mistaking Northumberland for Durham (and therefore
the more prominent Bouchard). William the Archdeacon witnessed many of the
same familial deeds that Bouchard the Archdeacon did, so I take it that this
William the Archdeacon was the illegitimate son (the Archdeacon of
Northumberland). William of Newborough was clearly in error here (he did not
state the name of the Archdeacon).
Benedict of Peterborough [RS 49 (above), ii, 91-2], specifically states that
Bouchard was (1) nephew of the bishop [p. 91 "et Bucardus nepos Hugonis
Dunelmensis episcopi, cui rex dederat thesaurarium Eboracensis ecclesiae"]
and (2) brother of Hugh, Count of Bar who died November 1189, buried in Durham
[p. 92 ,1189 "Eodem anno, mense Novembris... Hugo de Putheaco,
comes de Bar, nepos Hugonis Dunelmensis episcopi, frater supradicti Bucardi,
obiit in Anglia apud Aldech et sepultus est Dunelmi in loco dicitur Galilaea."
See also Hovenden, ii, 63 and 65, where Hugh, Count of Bar, is again called
nepos of the Bishop, and Hovenden, iii, 19, which spells the place he died
"Acle" (Aclet, B.; Adet. I)].
ES 3:660 states that Ebrard [Everard] IV, sg. du Puiset, Vicomte de Chartres,
married Heloise de Roucy. They had four children: (1) Hugues VI, sn. du
Puiset, Vicomte de Chartres, and Comte de Bar-sur-Seine [d. XI 1189], m. 1168
Petronille, Cts. de Bar-sur-Seine; (2) Henri; (3) Galeran; and (4) Bouchard,
who entered holy orders [ES says "geistlich"].
This last child, Bouchard, who entered holy orders, would clearly be Bouchard
the Archdeacon of Durham as mentioned in Benedict of Peterborough. Ebrard IV
was brother of Hugues/Hugh du Puiset, Bishop of Durham and Earl of
Northumberland, so this would also place Bouchard as his nephew.
[The bibliographies for ES Tafel 659 and Tafel 660, show that they did a good
job in this instance, and cites an extensive number of French
sources--including charters, an article by Charles Guissard (Les seigneurs du
Puiset), John L. La Monte's "The Lords of Le Puiset on the Crusades," in
_Speculum_, EYC, CP, and, unfortunately (not citing to the various chronicles
in the Rolls Series), Scammel's biography. I say unfortunately because it
seems Scammel did not take all factors into account--but then genealogical
connections have not always been the forte of historians in years past.]
More about Bouchard:
Geoffrey de Coldingham stated that Bouchard could have succeeded Hugh du Puiset
as Bishop of Durham at Hugh's death on 3 March 1194/5, had Bouchard been
willing to pay the King money [_Historiae Dunelmensis scriptores tres:
Gaufridus de Coldingham..._ (Surtees Society 9), pp. 15, 18]. Pages 14-15 give
details of the Bishop being Earl of Northumberland, pages 15-16 of his death,
and page 18 details about Bouchard [p. 18, MCXCVI. "Eodem anno obiit
Burthardus Archidiaconus Dunhelmensis, VIII idus Decembris, qui dudum ex
promisso Regis [episcopatum] optinuisset, si tamen regiae voluntati, dato quod
petebatur argento, satisfacere voluisset."] Bouchard died on 6 December 1196.
Hoveden, iv, 14, also gives his death as 1196.
Bouchard witnessed a charter of the Bishop's illegitimate son Henry du Puiset,
founder of Finchale Priory [_The priory of Finchale. The charters of
endowment..._ (Surtees Society 6), pp. 5 ("Burchardo Archidiacono"), 9, 23, 24,
42, 44, and 54]. Bouchard also witnessed charters from his uncle the Bishop to
the son Henry du Puiset [_EYC 2:310 (no. 983 [dated 1189-90, as Bucardo
thesaurario Eboracensi]), 312 (no. 985 [as Burcardo ... archidiacenis, dated
before he became treasurer]), and 313 (no. 987 [as Bucardo thesaurario
Eboracensi)]. (What this shows is that at that time, the office of treasurer
of York was more important than that of Archdeacon, though this case is
reversed with other treasurers, so the fact that the Kirkstall account did not
mention that Maud's brother was an Archdeacon would not automatically
disqualify him as a candidate.)
A bit more about Bishop Hugh:
Hugh du Puiset [Pudsey in some English records], Bishop of Durham 1153-1195,
was Earl of Northumberland after William "the Lion," King of Scotland, having
purchased the Earldom from Richard I when the King was raising funds for his
crusade [Hovenden, ii, 47; _Hist. Dun. Script. Tres_, p. lxii]. The sum was
2,000 marks [CP 9:707-8; _Pipe Roll ... for the second year of ... Richard the
first..._ (PRS 39), p. 21]. The Bishop obtained possession of the Earldom by
March 1190, but did not pay the 2,000 marks before his death. When Richard I
returned to England in 1194, Hugh voluntarily surrendered the Earldom, the King
charging him to deliver it to Hugh Bardolf. No one then held the title until
1377, when Henry de Percy was granted that title (though the Earldom was a very
different thing by that time). Hugh du Puiset died 3 March 1194/5.
Here is a straight line descent, as given in ES 3:659-60:
1. Gilduin (Hilduin), Vicomte de Chartres, Comte de Breteuil, etc., d. 18 May
(1060) St-Vannes, m. Emmeline de (Chateaudun).
2. Ebrard I, Comte de Breteuil, Vicomte de Chartres, d. 12 Feb. 1061/66, m.
Humberge.
3. Hugues I "Blavons," chatelain du Puiset, Vicomte de Chartres, d. 23 Dec.
1094, m. Alix de Monthlery, Dame de Villepreux, daughter of Guy I, Sire de
Monthlery by Hodierne, Dame de Gometz et de la Ferte-Alais.
4. Ebrard III, sn. du Puiset, Vicomte de Chartres, d. in battle in Palestine 21
Aug. (1099), m. Adelaide de Corbeil, daughter of Comte Bouchard III.
5. Hugues III, sn. du Puiset, Vicomte de Chartres, Comte de Corbeil, d. in
Palestine 1132, m. Agnes de Blois, daughter of Etienne, Comte de Blois, by Ada
of England.
6. Ebrard IV, sn. du Puiset, Vicomte de Chartres [brother of Hugues/Hugh du
Puiset, Bishop of Durham, and brother of Bouchard, Archdeacon of Orleans and
chancellor of the Bishop of Chartres], m. Heloise de Roucy.
7. Bouchard du Puiset [brother of Hugues IV, Comte de Bar-Sur-Seine], who I
would identify as the Archdeacon of Durham who became treasurer of York in
1189.
I find the possibility that the sister of Bouchard could have married Roger de
Lacy interesting, but that the name Maud does not occur elsewhere in the du
Puiset family and no daughters are given in this generataion, though they are
in the following generation raises some doubt [I have not checked the ancestry
of Heloise de Roucy for the name Maud]. Margaret, daughter of Hugh "de" Puiset
[Hugonis de Puteac]
granted a moiety of her land in the parish of St. Denis in a charter dated to
1195/1215. And Hugh de Pusaat held land in Walmegate in 1191. I take this to
be the Marguerite, daughter of Hugues IV du Puiset, Coun tof Bar-sur-Seine
[shown on ES 3:660; married (1) Simon de Bricon, sn. de Rochefort, and (2)
Eudes d'Apremont-sur-Saone]. [Please forgive my lack of diacritical markings.]
pcr
Reedpcgen
theory that Bouchard was perhaps an illegitimate son of Bishop Hugh has mislead
many intelligent scholars, and I think there is no need for it. [This is in
reference to Geoffrey Vaughn Scammell's biography of Hugh du Puiset, p. 313.
The book grew out of an essay that won an award at Cambridge in 1952.]
(1) Though in one chronicle it is stated that the Bishop had three illegitimate
sons, two identified by name, the other simply called Archdeacon of Durham,
this chronicle does not state that the third son was named Bouchard. Further,
the editor states in the margin that the chronicle is in error, and that
Bouchard is nephew of the Bishop.
(2) It is known from charter evidence that the Bishop had an illegitimate son
named William, who was Archdeacon of Northumberland. So if this William is
definitely a son (bringing the total to three), what room is left for the
theory that Bouchard was also son?
(3) Archdeacon William was a frequent witness to charters of the Bishop and his
son Henry, as was Bouchard, also styled Archdeacon, which would be logical as
Bouchard was a kinsman.
(4) We have several independent statements that Bouchard was 'nepos' of the
Bishop. Nepos cannot here mean grandson based on chronological grounds. The
question then remains, was it meant as nephew, cousin, or a vague relationship
to kinsman?
(5) We have one specific statement that Bouchard was brother of the Count of
Bar-sur-Seine, and that that count was also 'nepos' of the Bishop. As he held
the title by his wife, there is only one du Puiset at this time who meets the
criteria, and he is in fact given in French sources as nephew of the Bishop.
The editor of that chronicle also stated that Bouchard was nephew of the Bishop
and brother of the count, giving more specifics.
(6) I take the fact that ES stated that the nephew Bouchard was a priest, or
had entered Holy Orders (but ES did not specifically state he became Archdeacon
of Durham) to mean French sources indicate this fact. Whereas ES (apparently
following Scammell, who is listed in the bibliography) shows a dashed line
under the illegitimate children of the Bishop to "Buchard +6.XII 1196
Archidiaken z Durham". So ES has also introduced this misleading theory based
on Scammell.
Taking all of these facts into consideration, and agreeing with the editors of
the chronicles which contain the primary evidence, I think the conclusion that
Bouchard was nephew of the Bishop, and not his son, is inescapable. It is
because Scammell (albeit in his early years) could have posited a theory in
spite of the facts that I was critical of him in my post.
pcr