Throckmorton / Spinney / Durvassal / de Camville

[Dd Pk]

Does anyone know if any conclusions have been reached about the lineage of Sir John Throckmorton and Eleanor Spinney (late 1400s), in particular the possible descent from Charlemagne?

A number of previous threads have thrown doubt upon a number of generations in this lineage - for example that Milicent de Camville was the mother of William... also that marriages of Spinneys to Bruley and Durvassal might be unsupported.

A number of weak links in the chain it seems.

As an 'amateur bungler' (a term borrowed from one particularly sharp contributor to these threads!) I confess I'm unable to keep up once the discussion gets deep into the weeds about the primary evidence etc.

Is anyone able to summarise? Offer advice on what an amateur bungler should reasonably do in the face of disputed lineage?

Thanks all.

[joseph cook]

On this particular line, I have no new info, although research in this type of family at this time is difficult, and frequently un-rewarding, so I am not surprised.

Advice? Sure. My advice is this: If you are a beginner genealogist and see that a source (say "Smith") says one thing, and "Jones" says another, I suggest an amateur should do the following:

In your notes write "Smith, citing ___ says that ....; but Jones claims ___ arguing that ___" and that's it. You have saved time for other amateurs who may read or reference your tree, and you have left yourself breadcrumbs to evaluate additional sources in the future against these arguments. There is no need to "pick" a winner or balance against them; for as you said, how could you? And with more time and more experience, you will learn which secondary sources may be clear winners over others (An 1880 family history book is almost always trumped by a 2022 NEHGR article which cites and then argues why the family history is wrong, for example).

You never want to cede to authority alone, but you'll learn more things like why Robert Charles Anderson is more reliable than say, Gustav Anjou.

--Joe C

[D Pk]

Hi Joe

Thank you for replying - it's very kind of you and I really appreciate your advice.

Do you have any suggestions as to where I might start if I'm to take an interest in genealogy in this period? Any good introductory guides? Somewhere I could get acquainted with the terminology, get a sense of the sources being quoted?

Best wishes,
David

[Will Johnson]

I don't see any particular descent from Charlemagne, even alleged behind this couple
Perhaps you could outline that so we can destroy it utterly

[D Pk]

Perhaps you could outline that so we can destroy it utterly

OK, please be constructive though - I'd love to see what the informed view is of the REAL lineage, or at least have a better understanding of what the arguments are for and against.

I should add I got the lineage from Underhill to Louis IV from a doc written on the Underhill family by one of their descendents, O'Connor (you can get a copy here - the lineage is on the final page https://www.wikitree.com/photo/pdf/Underhill-68)

Ed. 1486 Underhill = Margaret Middlemore 1495, daughter of
Thomas Middlemore = Eleanor Throckmorton, d/o [or another Thomas Middlemore who married Anne Littleton, but whose grandparents appear to be the Throckmorton / Olney couple below]
Margaret Olney = Sir Thomas Throckmorton, son of
Sir John Throckmorton = Eleanor de la Spine (Spinney, Spyne, etc.) d/o
Katherine Holt = Sir Guy de la Spine, son of
Alice de Bruley = William de Spine, son of
William de Spine = Margery Durvassal, d/o
Thomas Durvassal, son of
Philip Durvassal = Felicia de Camville, d/o
Thomas de Camville, son of
William de Camville, son of
Aubrey Marmion = William de Camville, son of
Richard de Camville (d.1176=) = Milicent de Rethel (THIS SEEMS TO BE A PARTICULAR POINT OF DISPUTE - WM. PROBABLY SON OF RICHARD'S FIRST WIFE, ALICE?]
Milicent d/o Gervase, Count of Rethel = Elizabeth of Namur, d/o
Godfrey Count of Namur, son of
Albert III of Namur, son of
Albert II of Namur, son of
Albert I of Namur = Ermentrude of Lorraine, d/o
Charles Duke of Lorraine, son of
Louis IV d'Outremer, King of France, son of
Charles le Simple, son of
King Louis the Stammerer, son of
Charles the Bold, son of
Louis the Pious, son of
Charlemagne

Apologies if this isn't the standard form for describing this, I'm no academic.

OK - do your worst!

[taf]

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 7:45:18 AM UTC-7, D Pk wrote:

> Aubrey Marmion = William de Camville, son of
> Richard de Camville (d.1176=) = Milicent de Rethel (THIS SEEMS TO BE A PARTICULAR POINT OF DISPUTE - WM. PROBABLY SON OF RICHARD'S FIRST WIFE, ALICE?]

Based on a quick review of the archives, the crux of this is that we know that Richard and Milicent had a son Richard, and that when the younger Richard died, at least one of his properties ended up being held in its entirety by his sister Isabel.

The default inheritance at the time passed 1) to the eldest son, 2) to the progeny of the eldest son (following the same pattern as will be described here for the prior generation), 3) to each successive younger son, or if dead, the heir(s) of their body (e.g. their children, grandchildren, etc., followign the same pattern), 4) shared among all of the daughters (or the heir(s) of their body representing the share of any deceased daughter), 5) each successive full-brother or the heir(s) of their body, 6) shared among any full-sisters or their heirs, 7) it then goes back to the prior generationon whichever side the property came from . . . etc.

The important information is that half-siblings were excluded from default inheritance. Viewed in isolation, the fact taht Isabel inherited from her brother Richard would effectively prove that the others were half-siblings, if it was clear she inherited via the default pattern. However, there were other non-default mechanisms for land to pass. Specifically, when lands was granted, the grantor could define a non-default pattern of inheritance - for example, it could define that it is to descend to each successive male heir of the grantee (independent of full/half-sibling status), or even, if the younger Richard held the land via grant rather than inheritance, it could have been specified that were he to die without heirs of his body, Isabel was next in line, in which case the full-/half- status of everyone involved becomes irrelevant. Further, it is possible that Isabel did not inherit the land, but instead she was holding it because she was enfeoffed it by whichever full-brother inherited it.

All that being said, the preferred answer is the simplest one, so we must consider William to have been a half-brother of Richard and Isabel unless evidence is found that suggests otherwise. Why then was William made son of Milicent? Because 1) people were unaware that the father had other wives, and 2) the tendency of people to choose among alternatives based on which option has the 'better' ancestors, rather than which is better supported.

taf

[D Pk]

Thanks Taf for that clear and patient explanation. I think it was your comment to this effect on an earlier post that first alerted me to the problem with this line.

There were also other question marks over the succession I outlined - marriages to Durvassal, etc. It would be good to know what is likely to be correct, and what unlikely to be so. As an amateur new to the business of medieval genealogy it's all very daunting. On the one hand some of these relationships seem to be accepted as orthodoxy, on the other I can't find any evidence for them... but then I'm not familiar with the more academic sources availalble. What to do? I mean, I'd like to know what's what ... if I can't be royal, I'd at least like to be right!

[Peter Stewart]

On 21-Jun-22 3:52 AM, taf wrote:
> On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 7:45:18 AM UTC-7, D Pk wrote:
>
>> Aubrey Marmion = William de Camville, son of
>> Richard de Camville (d.1176=) = Milicent de Rethel (THIS SEEMS TO BE A PARTICULAR POINT OF DISPUTE - WM. PROBABLY SON OF RICHARD'S FIRST WIFE, ALICE?]
>
> Based on a quick review of the archives, the crux of this is that we know that Richard and Milicent had a son Richard, and that when the younger Richard died, at least one of his properties ended up being held in its entirety by his sister Isabel.

This leads to a tangential question of precisely when Richard de
Camville died.

According to Nicholas Vincent in ODNB, "in the summer of 1191 [he] was
appointed joint governor of Cyprus, with Robert of Thornham (d. 1211).
However, he fell ill soon afterwards, and having rejoined the king at
Acre in the Holy Land, died there in June 1191."

June 1191 is usually given as the date of Richard's death but this is
not exactly certain from the primary evidence and it is circumstantially
in some doubt.

Roger of Howden's chronicle says that Richard I appointed the joint
governors on or shortly after Saturday 1 June ("Perfecta autem sunt
omnia hæc in insula de Cypre mense Junii, prima die ejusdem mensis,
Sabbato in vigilia Pentecosten. Perfectis igitur omnibus ... tradidit
insulam de Cypre Ricardo de Camvilla et Roberto de Turneham in
custodia"). This was repeated in almost the same words in the gesta of
Richard I wrongly ascribed to Benedict of Peterborough, now often
attributed to Roger of Howden. We know that Richard I left Cyprus for
Acre on Wednesday 5 June.

Roger's chronicle later says that in the same month Richard de Camville
fell ill and travelled without the king's permission to the siege of
Acre, where he died ("Eodem mense Junii, Ricardus de Camvilla, quem rex
Angliæ constituerat unum de justitiariis suis in insula de Cypre,
infirmabatur, et sine licentia regis venit ad obsidionem Accon, et ibi
mortuus est".) It is not fully clear from this whether or not the death
was meant to have occurred in the same month as the desertion of his
post in Cyprus or was just an afterthought from placing his demise at Acre.

The pseudo-Benedict gesta also repeats this, but earlier had listed
Richard among those who died in the third year of the siege ("In tertio
anno obierunt apud Acram, Radulfus de Aubeni, Nigellus de Mumbray
projectus in mare, Simon de Wale projectus in mare ... Item; in tertio
anno Ricardus de Camvil apud Acram"). This was later repeated in the
Fitzhugh chronicle (aka John Brompton's chronicle), adding the name of
Hugo III, duke of Burgundy, to those who died in the third year ("In
tercio anno obierunt apud acram Radulfus Daubeney, Ricardus de chamuil
... Hugo dux Burgundie", see here, folio 197:
https://parker.stanford.edu/parker/catalog/vd272wq5988).

The siege of Acre began in August 1189 and Hugo died in August 1192, so
that if Richard de Camville died in the same year counted from the start
of the siege (which was over within two years anyway) he must have
survived at least until August 1191.

Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[D Pk]

Hi Peter, thanks for this... am I mistaken in thinking there are two Richard de Camvilles - father and son? The father dies 1176 in Italy and his son dies at Acre in 1191?

[Peter Stewart]

On 21-Jun-22 5:14 PM, D Pk wrote:
> Hi Peter, thanks for this... am I mistaken in thinking there are two Richard de Camvilles - father and son? The father dies 1176 in Italy and his son dies at Acre in 1191?

Yes, the father died in Apulia on his way back to England after being
sent as one of Henry II's ambassadors to tell William II of Sicily that
his request to marry the king's daughter Joan had been agreed. They had
arrived in Palermo in August 1176, but it is unknown how long afterwards
Richard and his colleague Baldwin Buleot both died while heading home.
Joan arrived after them, and was married in the following February.

[Peter Stewart]

On 21-Jun-22 7:56 PM, Peter Stewart wrote:
> On 21-Jun-22 5:14 PM, D Pk wrote:
>> Hi Peter, thanks for this... am I mistaken in thinking there are two
>> Richard de Camvilles - father and son? The father dies 1176 in Italy
>> and his son dies at Acre in 1191?
>
> Yes, the father died in Apulia on his way back to England after being
> sent as one of Henry II's ambassadors to tell William II of Sicily that
> his request to marry the king's daughter Joan had been agreed. They had
> arrived in Palermo in August 1176, but it is unknown how long afterwards
> Richard and his colleague Baldwin Buleot both died while heading home.

I should have made this a bit clearer - it is known that the two men
died between August and December 1176, since the bishop of Norwich who
had led their embassy to Palermo arrived back in England before
Christmas, as also did the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of
Ely who had escorted Joan to Saint-Gilles in Provence where she had been
handed over to the envoys of her husband-to-be.

[Peter Stewart]

Actually the death of the elder Richard de Camville can be narrowed a
little further - the English ambassadors were received by William II of
Sicily in Palermo on 23 August 1176, and on 9 November Joan was handed
over to William's envoys in Saint-Gilles by the bishop of Norwich
himself, on his way home from Sicily.

Presumably Richard had died during this interval. According to the
cartulary of Eynsham he died "in terre de Pulle", but it's not very
likely that this happened in Apulia well out of the way between Sicily
and Saint-Gilles. However, he may have crossed into Calabria for some
reason - the bishop sailed from Messina, rather than directly from
Palermo, to Saint-Gilles (two ships carrying gifts from William to Henry
sank on the voyage, and maybe Richard had gone over to the mainland to
collect some of these).

[Peter Stewart]

The question was raised off-list how it could be known that Richard did
not die on the way to Palermo rather than after arriving there - we have
an account of the very arduous outward journey of the ambassadors that
must have been given by John of Oxford, the bishop of Norwich, since he
was the only one of the four to return home in 1176.

According to him they did pass by the duchy of Apulia when going by sea
from Gaeta to Messina, but since this route was down the west coast of
the Italian peninsula (i.e. from the lower calf to the toe rather than
along the heel) it is not literally correct.

He did however specify that they reached Sicily on 13 August and that he
arrived in Palermo with all three of his fellow envoys a few days before
they were received by the king (on 23 August from William's letter to
Henry II), but that two of his colleagues died in the autumn and the
third fell ill so that he had to travel homeward alone. After being
present when Joan was handed over to the Sicilians in Saint-Gilles on 9
November he reached the court at Nottingham on Christmas eve. Presumably
Richard had died between late August and the beginning of November.

[joseph cook]

If memory serves ( I do'nt have it handy), part of this line appears in RD500, but a line of descent is established for Ethelred II Unready, not Charlemagne.

--Joe C

[Peter Stewart]

I must be missing something - I thought the supposed descent from
Charlemagne went through the elder Richard de Camville's second wife,
Melisend of Rethel, assuming she had been the mother of his son William.
From memory she had two documented lines to Charlemagne through her
paternal grandmother Elisabeth of Namur.

[joseph cook]

All you are missing is that my memory is faulty. Throckmorton and Spinney had a daughter Agnes Throckmorton whose daughter Agnes Winslowe married John Giffard. It is this John Giffard ancestry that is shown in RD500.

For the Throckmorton/Spinney marriage itself, I seem to have this:

1. Agnes Throckmorton b.c.1420
2. Sir John Throckmorton b.c.1380 died 4/23/1445
3. Eleanor de Spineto, died aft. May 1449
4. Thomas Thockmorton, M.P, J.P b.c.1350
5. Agnes Besford born c.1355-1360 d.After 1428
6. Guy de Spineto, Baron died after Dec 1390
7. Katherine ?
8. Robert Throckmorton
9. Lucy ?
10. Alexander Besford, M.P. died before 1404
11. ?
12. Sir William de la Spine
13. Alice
16. Giles de Throckmorton
17. Agnes Fraunceys
20. Alexander Besford
21. Joan ?
24. William de la Spine
25. Margery ? [not a Durvassal as claimed]
32. Robert de Throckmorton died after 1335
33. Joan Weston
34. John Fraunceys
40. Alexander de Besford born bef. 1259. died bef 1341
41. Margery de Thorndon born c. 1279
64.Simon de Throckmorton b.bef 1266
65. Isabel de Donnisby, sister of Philip Donnisby of DOnnisby, Staffs.
66. Richard Weston
80. Alexander de Besford b. bef. 1227
81. Margaret de Nauton
82. John de Thorndon
83. Parnel ?
128. Robert de Throckmorton died bef 1266
129. Prudence de Compton
160. Water de Besford b.c.1200
161.Helen ?
164 Maurice de Thorndon
256 Adam de Throckmorton
257. Matilda de Dersington
258. Robert de Compton
320 Vivian de Besford
512 Robert de Throckmorton b.bef 1180
640 Osbert de Besford
1280 Vivian de Besford b.c.1125

--Joe C