Neel de St Sauveur
paul bulkley
The Saint Sauveurs were a family of some significance,
and some of their activities were well remembered.
It is understood that in 896 AD a small group appeared
in the Seine led by a chief named Hundeus. The
conventional domination of the locals took place in
the Basse-Seine area, and finally this group settled
down in Choisy-au-Bac. The group's leader was baptised
that Easter by Charles the Simple, and that man is
considered to have been the uncle of the Rollo
mentioned by William de Jumieges (H.Prentout P.120)
About 912 the King of France recognised Rollo as Duke
of the territory in which this group had established
itself. The territory of Saint Saviour in the
Contentin was granted to Rollo's cousin Richard
(Gustave Dupont P146). The island of Guernsey was
divided between Briquebec and St Sauveur, the latter
holding S.Peter Port, S.Andrew, S.Martin, S.Sampson,
in the forest and Torteval (G.D.P174)
Gerville, a member of the Antiquarian Society of
Normandy wrote in 1824 that there was a grant dated
912 written in latin. It conveyed a holding with an
obligation of homage and military service. This
holding comprised of a grant of St Sauveur with
considerable dependancies including Nehou, which at
that time consisted of woods, marshes, and arid land
situated in the Contentin near the River Ouve
(Gerville P.279)
Richard immediately built his castle, and added
thereto in 913 AD a Chapel which was consecrated by
Herbert Bishop of Coutances, and dedicated to the Holy
Trinity and Saint Sauveur.
During the life of Richard, his son Neel (Nigel)
received a grant of Nehou. The word Nehou is a
contraction of Neel and Hou (i.e. Nigel's Home)
Before 933, William Longue-Epee granted to Neel I half
the Isle of Guernsey "in beneficio", and Rolf de
Bayeux the other half. However in 933 AD Rolf
participated in a rebellion, and his half interest in
Guernsey was taken from him, and given to Neel I
(Histoire des Isles de la Manche by Pegot Ogier)
938 William Longue-Epee created Neel I Viscount of the
Contentin, hereditary to his family, and gave his
barony the title of Saint Saviour the Viscount.
942 Charter - Neel I granted woods in Sark to the
monks of Mount S.Michael (Gerville P279).
Neel I's son Richard II eventually became lord of St
Sauveur and Nehou, viscount of the Contentin, and lord
of Guernsey. Little is recorded of this individual. He
had a son Roger I.
998. Richard II established a Collegiate Church at St
Sauveur endowing it with four prebendaries. (Gerville
P280). Hugh Bishop of the diocese of Coutances
confirmed its foundation (Histoire des Evequaes de
Coutances - M.Lecanu P116)
Richard II died soon after, and his son Roger I
completed the foundation.
Roger I was living the latter half of the 900s, and
died about 1014. Family pedigree claims that Roger's
wife was a daughter of Duke Richard I, and that she
probably was widow of a Sire de Creully. Their son and
heir was Neel II.
It is said that Hamon-aux-Dents was the uterine
brother of Roger's son Neel, and it is also claimed
that both families St Sauveur amd Creully were closely
connected to the ducal line of Normandy (Pegot-Ogier,
M.Le Cointe, Gustave Dupont)
It is not difficult to accept these claims because of
the high position held by Neel II in the Duchy. And
Hamon-aux-Dents was the ancestor of Mathilda (wife) of
Robert Earl of Gloucester, the natural son of Henry I.
1002. Neel II fought the English at Barfleur. The Duke
rewarded him a large sum (Benoit ii 415)
NOTE: I have not had the opportunity to examine most
of the sources given. Any confirmation of source
material would be appreciated.
The next material will address the Saint Sauveurs of
the Contentine (1000-1050)
Sincerely Yours,
Paul Bulkley
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Peter Stewart
"paul bulkley" <designe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:200507171944...@web34202.mail.mud.yahoo.com...
> The Saint Sauveurs of the Contentin (900-1000):
>
> The Saint Sauveurs were a family of some significance,
> and some of their activities were well remembered.
>
> It is understood that in 896 AD a small group appeared
> in the Seine led by a chief named Hundeus. The
> conventional domination of the locals took place in
> the Basse-Seine area, and finally this group settled
> down in Choisy-au-Bac. The group's leader was baptised
> that Easter by Charles the Simple, and that man is
> considered to have been the uncle of the Rollo
> mentioned by William de Jumieges (H.Prentout P.120)
The Norman leader Hundeus was baptised at Easter in 897 (25 March). This
happened at Denain in the diocese of Arras according to Bernard von Simson
in his edition of 'Annales Vedastini', MGH SSrG 12 (1909) p. 79 ("Karolus
vero Hundeum ad se deductum Duninio monasterio in pascha eum de sacro fonte
suscepit") and ibid note 7. However, Stéphane Coviaux, 'Baptême et
conversion des chefs scandinaves du IXe au XIe siècle', _Les fondations
scandinaves en Occident et les débuts du duché de Normandie_ (Caen, 2005) p.
80 identified the monastery differently, placing this event at Clingen in
the diocese of Speyer. In any case, his followers had ravaged along the
Meuse, not the Seine.
I don't know any basis for making Hundeus into an uncle of Rollo - this is
not from William of Jumièges as far as I recall. Certainly Dudo said nothing
of the sort, and he was the main source for subsequent medieval historians
of Normandy regarding Rollo.
The reference I suppose is to Henri Prentout's _Essai sur les origines et la
fondation du duché de Normandie_ (1911). Perhaps you can tell us what this
has to say - if not, perhaps you will tell us where you found the reference.
As it is, the research is presented as your own, but with the curious
disclaimer that you have not "had the opportunity to examine most of the
sources given". The conventional thing to do in these circumstances is to
cite the work/s where the references have been found and where the
bibliographic details can be checked.
If you won't do us this basic courtesy, how can you expect anyone to help
you?
Peter Stewart
Peter Stewart
interesting things - by the nuisance that Richardson has chosen to make of
himself for the newsgroup. Comments, this time, interspersed:
"paul bulkley" <designe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:200507171944...@web34202.mail.mud.yahoo.com...
> The Saint Sauveurs of the Contentin (900-1000):
>
> The Saint Sauveurs were a family of some significance,
> and some of their activities were well remembered.
<snip regarding Hundeus, already addressed>
> About 912 the King of France recognised Rollo as Duke
> of the territory in which this group had established
> itself. The territory of Saint Saviour in the
> Contentin was granted to Rollo's cousin Richard
> (Gustave Dupont P146). The island of Guernsey was
> divided between Briquebec and St Sauveur, the latter
> holding S.Peter Port, S.Andrew, S.Martin, S.Sampson,
> in the forest and Torteval (G.D.P174)
The inadequate reference is presumably to Gustave Dupont's _Histoire du
Cotentin et de ses îles_, 4 vols (Caen, 1870-1885). I haven't seen this but
have no reason to suppose that he called anyone a "cousin" to Rollo. Is this
an assumption borrowed from somewhere else, or is the claim directly
attributed to Dupont?
> Gerville, a member of the Antiquarian Society of
> Normandy wrote in 1824 that there was a grant dated
> 912 written in latin. It conveyed a holding with an
> obligation of homage and military service. This
> holding comprised of a grant of St Sauveur with
> considerable dependancies including Nehou, which at
> that time consisted of woods, marshes, and arid land
> situated in the Contentin near the River Ouve
> (Gerville P.279)
I can't find any work of Charles de Gerville published in 1824 - perhaps the
date is a typo and the reference is to his _Etudes géographiques et
historiques sur le département de la Manche_ (Cherbourg, 1854). Again, I
haven't seen this. However, given the (contentious) claim above that Rollo
was recognised as "duke" in Normandy "about 912", I assume this refers to a
supposed charter of his. There is no such document: according to Marie
Fauroux in her edition _Recueil des actes des ducs de Normandie de 911 à
1066_ (Caen, 1961), the earliest charter occurrence of a Norman ruler in any
territory held by Rollo is a subscription by his grandson Richard I to a
royal diploma of 963/4. The earliest documents relating to Saint-Sauveur
included in Léopold Delisle's _Histoire du château et des sires de
Saint-Sauveur-le-vicomte (Valognes, 1867) are dated ca 1015.
> Richard immediately built his castle, and added
> thereto in 913 AD a Chapel which was consecrated by
> Herbert Bishop of Coutances, and dedicated to the Holy
> Trinity and Saint Sauveur.
>
> During the life of Richard, his son Neel (Nigel)
> received a grant of Nehou. The word Nehou is a
> contraction of Neel and Hou (i.e. Nigel's Home)
>
> Before 933, William Longue-Epee granted to Neel I half
> the Isle of Guernsey "in beneficio", and Rolf de
> Bayeux the other half. However in 933 AD Rolf
> participated in a rebellion, and his half interest in
> Guernsey was taken from him, and given to Neel I
> (Histoire des Isles de la Manche by Pegot Ogier)
>
> 938 William Longue-Epee created Neel I Viscount of the
> Contentin, hereditary to his family, and gave his
> barony the title of Saint Saviour the Viscount.
Delisle begins his account cited above by stating that the earliest viscount
of the Contentin in surviving records was named Roger, who lived under
William Longsword's son Richard I (died 996) and is known only for having
founded the church which later became the Benedictine abbey of
Saint-Sauveur.
> 942 Charter - Neel I granted woods in Sark to the
> monks of Mount S.Michael (Gerville P279).
Again according to Delisle, Néel I died ca 1040/2, a remarkable tale of
longevity if he was already granting charters a full century earlier.
It doesn't get any better: I will take this up again later when I have more
time.
Peter Stewart
Peter Stewart
"paul bulkley" <designe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:200507171944...@web34202.mail.mud.yahoo.com...
>
> The Saint Sauveurs were a family of some significance,
> and some of their activities were well remembered.
<snip>
> Before 933, William Longue-Epee granted to Neel I half
> the Isle of Guernsey "in beneficio", and Rolf de
> Bayeux the other half. However in 933 AD Rolf
> participated in a rebellion, and his half interest in
> Guernsey was taken from him, and given to Neel I
> (Histoire des Isles de la Manche by Pegot Ogier)
This reference is at least clearer: properly this is Pégot-Ogier's _Histoire
des îles de la Manche, Jersey, Guernesey, Aurigny, Serck_ (Paris, 1881). As
noted before from the fully documented history by Léopold Delisle, Néel I
died ca 1040 and could not have been granted half of Guernsey before 933.
<snip>
> Neel I's son Richard II eventually became lord of St
> Sauveur and Nehou, viscount of the Contentin, and lord
> of Guernsey. Little is recorded of this individual. He
> had a son Roger I.
>
> 998. Richard II established a Collegiate Church at St
> Sauveur endowing it with four prebendaries. (Gerville
> P280). Hugh Bishop of the diocese of Coutances
> confirmed its foundation (Histoire des Evequaes de
> Coutances - M.Lecanu P116)
>
> Richard II died soon after, and his son Roger I
> completed the foundation.
But your "Richard II" of the Cotentin is supposed to have been living in
998, wheras the church of Saint-Sauveur was founded before the death of
Richard I, count or duke of the Normans, in 996.
The proof given by Delisle is a panchart of Algar, bishop of Coutances ca
1136 stating that the church of Saint-Sauveur had been founded by a Viscount
Roger in the time of Count Richard I ("ecclesia Sancti Salvatoris...a
tempore vetuli Ricardi comitis et Rogeri vicecomitis, qui ecclesiam
inchoavit et liberam eam construxit") [op cit, pièces justificatives no. 48
p. 59].
> Roger I was living the latter half of the 900s, and
> died about 1014. Family pedigree claims that Roger's
> wife was a daughter of Duke Richard I, and that she
> probably was widow of a Sire de Creully. Their son and
> heir was Neel II.
But Dudo, who met Richard I and worshipped the ground beneath his feet,
carefully recorded all of the "holy" duke's offspring: two sons and as many
daughters by unnamed concubines, no children at all by his first wife Emma
(despite the unsustainable speculations of Katherine Keats-Rohan about
this), then five sons and three many daughters by his mistress & second wife
Gunnora. The connection of the ducal family to Saint-Sauveur may have been
that Néel I married a daughter of Count Robert of Mortain (or Avranches) by
his first wife Bilihildis, but this is not certain.
Néel II was a son of Néel I, not of Roger - see Delisle, no. 9 p. 11 "Signum
Nielli vicecomitis. Signum Nielli, filii ejus").
> It is said that Hamon-aux-Dents was the uterine
> brother of Roger's son Neel, and it is also claimed
> that both families St Sauveur amd Creully were closely
> connected to the ducal line of Normandy (Pegot-Ogier,
> M.Le Cointe, Gustave Dupont)
>
> It is not difficult to accept these claims because of
> the high position held by Neel II in the Duchy. And
> Hamon-aux-Dents was the ancestor of Mathilda (wife) of
> Robert Earl of Gloucester, the natural son of Henry I.
This is incomprehensible: there may be many other explanations of the role
of Néel II, not least from the high position consolidated by his father as
one of the governors of Normandy during the minority of William the Bastard
(Conqueror-to-be). How the marriage of another man's descendant to a royal
bastard makes for plausibility here I don't understand.
> 1002. Neel II fought the English at Barfleur. The Duke
> rewarded him a large sum (Benoit ii 415)
Néel II was still described as young in a charter of Duke William of
1035/48, see Fauroux no. 111 p. 272 "Niewllus juvenis" - scarcely credible
if the man was fighting as early as 1002.
> NOTE: I have not had the opportunity to examine most
> of the sources given. Any confirmation of source
> material would be appreciated.
>
> The next material will address the Saint Sauveurs of
> the Contentine (1000-1050)
Perhaps it would be advisable to check your references before posting
again - these people have been dead for most of a millennium, so there's not
exactly a rush over their details, real or illusory.
Peter Stewart
paul bulkley
during the period 1000 - 1050 is as follows:
Roger I St Sauveur died about 1014.
Neel II St Sauveur died 1041 (two sons Nigel III and
Roger).
Neel III St Sauveur banished 1047.
1014: Neel II was placed in charge of the fortress of
Tillieres and castellan of Charrnel where he was
associated with Auvrai le Geant (Gustave Dupont) He
was considered a great warrior and responsible for the
defeat of the Bretons.
He was witness to Charters of Normandy Dukes, also a
charter of Gonnor (widow of Richard I (CFD 702-795).
On the death of Duke Robert, he was one of the nobles
charged with government of the duchy during the
minority of the Bretons.
1028-1034: Duke Robert granted to S.Michael Abbay half
the Isle of Guernsey, the dues of the other half to
the benefit of Neel II. This deed was witnessed by
Neel the Viscount and Neel his son (CFD 705)
1040: Charter of Gradulfe Abbot of St Wandrille was
witnessed by Neel II the Viscount (Yeatman)
1041: Neel II died. Pedigree suggests that he married
Gohilda (daughter) Raymond Borel - Count of Barcelona.
There were two sons Neel III and Roger.
1040/42: Neel III is first recorded to have signed a
deed of William Count of the Normans describing
himself "Nigel the Younger"
1040/47: Neel III was involved in a bitter quarrel
with Ranulf of Bayeux which developed into war fare.
Possibly he resented losing half the patrimony of
Guernsey due to the Duke restoring the Ranulf the
moity taken from Ranulf's ancestor. Regardless Neel
III could not be satisfied, there was a subsequent
rebellion (battle of Val des Dunes), and finally he
was banished (M Le Cointe) His estates escheated to
the duke.
Neel III certainly made his peace with William, but
relinquished his honours, and became a monk in the
Abbay of Mount S.Michael. Evidence of Neel being a
monk is provided by two charters of the Abbay -a grant
of land by Neel III of land in Preaux, and a grant of
St Columbe, both to the Abbay of St Michael (Delisle)
Neel III married a daughter of Duke Robert of Normandy
(great great grand daughter of Richard Duke of
Normandy), and if this is correct presumably a sister
of William I of England. Children included Neel IV of
Halton and possibly a daughter who married William de
Vernon.
Neel III was described as patruus of Hugh of Chester.
If correct, it would support the claim that he was a
brother in law of William I of England. (Pegot-Ogier)
(Gustave Dupont)
1048: Duke William gave to Abbay St Martin Marmoutier
six churches in Guernsey, and Neel III confirmed.
1049: Neel IV suppressed the Collegiate Church, and
replaced it with an Abbay for the Benedictines.
1050: Neel IV led an attack of Angers.
There are two more Neels to discuss - Neel V and Neel
VI. These individuals will be addressed over the
period 1050-1150.If the two subscribers who expressed
interest in the St Sauveur family have any questions,
I will be happy to respond.
Peter Stewart
> My understanding of the St Sauveurs of the Contentin
> during the period 1000 - 1050 is as follows:
>
> Roger I St Sauveur died about 1014.
> Neel II St Sauveur died 1041 (two sons Nigel III and
> Roger).
> Neel III St Sauveur banished 1047.
Before charging on with this numbering for the Néels of Saint-Sauveur, it
might have been worthwhile to address the problem that your Néel I of the
previous post is not documented. Since this has been ignored, anyone who
wishes to avoid confusion should therefore subtract 1 from the numbers given
to the men of this name.
> 1014: Neel II was placed in charge of the fortress of
> Tillieres and castellan of Charrnel where he was
> associated with Auvrai le Geant (Gustave Dupont) He
> was considered a great warrior and responsible for the
> defeat of the Bretons.
William of Jumièges relates that Néel I fought off an invasion of the
Cotentin by the English. According to the same source, his charge of the
fortress at Tillières was shared with Rodulf de Tosny and the latter's son.
Afterwards Duke Robert launched a raid into Brittany from a fortress at
Cherrueix (not "Charnel"), and in retaliation the Count Alan and his Bretons
attacked Avranches, defended by Néel along with Alvred (not "Auvrai") the
Giant. This does not mean that Néel was made castellan of Cherrueix. What is
the source for that statement?
> He was witness to Charters of Normandy Dukes, also a
> charter of Gonnor (widow of Richard I (CFD 702-795).
> On the death of Duke Robert, he was one of the nobles
> charged with government of the duchy during the
> minority of the Bretons.
The minority of William the Bastard, who was NOT a Breton much less more
than one of them.
> 1028-1034: Duke Robert granted to S.Michael Abbay half
> the Isle of Guernsey, the dues of the other half to
> the benefit of Neel II. This deed was witnessed by
> Neel the Viscount and Neel his son (CFD 705)
Your source has misread the document: this is no. 73 on pp. 212-214 in the
edition by Marie Fauroux cited previously. A moiety of Guernsey was already
held by Néel I, and all that was granted concerning him was the other moiety
still held by Duke Robert plus the rights he had reserved over the holding
of Néel, to Mont-Saint-Michel abbey ("id est medietatem insule quae dicitur
Greneroy ad integrum, et ex altara [sic] medietate quam quidam fidelis
noster, nomine Nigellus, in beneficio tenet, omnes consuetudines quas in
meos usus retinebam, hoc est melaium et omnia quaecumque ex ipso beneficio
meis usibus proveniunt").
> 1040: Charter of Gradulfe Abbot of St Wandrille was
> witnessed by Neel II the Viscount (Yeatman)
>
> 1041: Neel II died. Pedigree suggests that he married
> Gohilda (daughter) Raymond Borel - Count of Barcelona.
> There were two sons Neel III and Roger.
"Pedigree" may suggest all it likes, but this is mere romance. The only
daughter of Count Ramón Borell said to have married a Norman was the wife of
Roger 'the Spaniard' de Tosny. The wife of Néel I has been conjecturally
placed as a daughter of Count Robert of Avranches, much more plausible from
onomastics in the Saint-Sauveur family and otherwise.
> 1040/42: Neel III is first recorded to have signed a
> deed of William Count of the Normans describing
> himself "Nigel the Younger"
The date range for this charter according to Fauroux was 1035/48, given in
an earlier post.
> 1040/47: Neel III was involved in a bitter quarrel
> with Ranulf of Bayeux which developed into war fare.
> Possibly he resented losing half the patrimony of
> Guernsey due to the Duke restoring the Ranulf the
> moity taken from Ranulf's ancestor. Regardless Neel
> III could not be satisfied, there was a subsequent
> rebellion (battle of Val des Dunes), and finally he
> was banished (M Le Cointe) His estates escheated to
> the duke.
Néel II became involved in the attempted coup by Guy of Burgundy against the
rule of his íllegitimate cousin William. This is told by Wace and well
enough supported elsewhere: I fail to see how any account of Néels career,
however brief, could omit to mention it. The moiety of Guernsey was
confiscated AFTER Val des Dunes, not before. He was made to do penance by
giving some churches on the island with other possessions to the abbey of
Marmoutier, and his barony was restored. For how long he regained his former
position as viscount of the Cotentin is not clear - Eudes au Chapel and
Robert Bertran, seigneur of Bricquebec also held this in his lifetime, but
Néel was using the title at the time of his penance ca 1048 and again by the
time of his death in August 1092.
> Neel III certainly made his peace with William, but
> relinquished his honours, and became a monk in the
> Abbay of Mount S.Michael. Evidence of Neel being a
> monk is provided by two charters of the Abbay -a grant
> of land by Neel III of land in Preaux, and a grant of
> St Columbe, both to the Abbay of St Michael (Delisle)
Delisle did not give any such charters as far as I can see, nor did he
relate any other evidence of Néel becoming a monk. There are some charters
from the cartulary of Mont-Saint-Michel subscribed by this viscount, but
none suggesting that he was tonsured there. Where do you claim this evidence
to be found?
> Neel III married a daughter of Duke Robert of Normandy
> (great great grand daughter of Richard Duke of
> Normandy), and if this is correct presumably a sister
> of William I of England. Children included Neel IV of
> Halton and possibly a daughter who married William de
> Vernon.
William the Conqueror's only recorded sister by his father Duke Roebrt was
Adela, whose husbands did not include Néel II.
> Neel III was described as patruus of Hugh of Chester.
> If correct, it would support the claim that he was a
> brother in law of William I of England. (Pegot-Ogier)
> (Gustave Dupont)
Why? "Patruus" means paternal uncle, a brother of the father. Earl Hugo of
Chester was the son of Richard, viscount of Avranches, who was in turn a son
of Turstin le Goz. Néel II did not belong to this agnatic line, but anyway
this would not have made him a brother-in-law of the Conqueror. Hugo's
mother was a maternal half-sister of William, so that Richard of Avranches
was brother-in-law to the latter.
> 1048: Duke William gave to Abbay St Martin Marmoutier
> six churches in Guernsey, and Neel III confirmed.
They had been his churches - see above. Marmoutier abbey was dedicated to
Saint Martin but is not given both names.
> 1049: Neel IV suppressed the Collegiate Church, and
> replaced it with an Abbay for the Benedictines.
Three decades later, ca 1080, Néel II founded the Benedictine abbey of
Saint-Sauveur - see Delisle, op cit, pièces justificatives no. 38 p. 42.
> 1050: Neel IV led an attack of Angers.
What is the source for this?
> There are two more Neels to discuss - Neel V and Neel
> VI. These individuals will be addressed over the
> period 1050-1150.If the two subscribers who expressed
> interest in the St Sauveur family have any questions,
> I will be happy to respond.
Perhaps you could respond to the points I have raised before ploughing on.
In the interests of genuine enquiry regarding this family, I hope your
sources will be properly revealed and the next instalment will be withheld
until some progress is at least attempted.
Peter Stewart
WJho...@aol.com
p_m_s...@msn.com writes:
> Perhaps you could respond to the points I have raised before ploughing on.
> In the interests of genuine enquiry regarding this family, I hope your
> sources will be properly revealed and the next instalment will be withheld
> until some progress is at least attempted.
>
> Peter Stewart
Hopefully we will see a re-statement of the post with all of Peter's
corrections and additions so stated along with sources. Now that would be something
really useful.
Will Johnson
Peter Stewart
<WJho...@aol.com> wrote in message news:203.5e3841...@aol.com...
What corrections or additions are you unable to link to sources?
Peter Stewart
Todd A. Farmerie
> Neel III married a daughter of Duke Robert of Normandy
> (great great grand daughter of Richard Duke of
> Normandy), and if this is correct presumably a sister
> of William I of England. Children included Neel IV of
> Halton and possibly a daughter who married William de
> Vernon.
There is no evidence that Niel of St. Sauveur was identical to Nigel of
Halton, from whom many Cheshire families claim descent. Further, there
is no evidence for this Vernon marriage (note that in your other post
you marry Niel to a daughter of William).
taf
Trent Hatten
taf
> I know it's 17 years since ya'll last posted on this thread, but I would like to ask if any of you gentleman are still interested in this genealogy.
1. The St Sauveur counts were an authentic family, though much of what you find about them in online pedigrees (and 19th century antiquarian publications) is wishful thinking or entirely made up.
2. Because they were a prominent family, there has been a long history of making name's-the-same identifications of Anglo-Norman barons with members of the family, and these identifications appear to range from possible but completely devoid of evidence other than the name to (again) groundlerss wishful thinking.
Regarding the origin of William Fitz Nigel of Halton, mentioned in the thread, Keats-Rohan implicitly suggests identification with a WIlliam filius Nigel de Haia, and states that he is named as 'nepos' by Walter de Gand. The latter relationship probably in some manner gave rise to the 19th century sources (and modern online pedigrees, and Wikipedia) that claim William married Agnes, Walter's sister, a relationship that would not be encompassed by 'nepos'. Keats-Rohan does not include this Agnes among her listing of the children of Gilbert, Walter's father.
taf
Trent Hatten
I have tons of questions, actually. I've been researching my family tree for about 3 years, and I think my family may be the last descendants in the male line.
taf
> I have tons of questions, actually. I've been researching my family tree for about 3 years, and I think my family may be the last descendants in the male line.
taf
taf
1) the suppositition that the Nigel who was father of baron WIlliam fitz Nigel was the same man as Neel de St Sauveur. This is just a name's-the-same identification, without solid foundation, and not accepted by any recent scholars I am aware of. Nigel, father of William, is a mysterious person, entirely undocumented except in his son's patronymic.
2) that the Hatton founder was brother of Nigel, WIlliam's father. This claim is based on a monastic foundation myth that reports that the father of William was accompanied from Normandy by five brothers. One of these, Wulfatus, in later genealogies morfed into an entirely undocumented Wolfric de Hatton, founder of the Hatton family. There seems to be no authentic history here, particularly given that the five claimed brothers of Nigel all bore Anglo-Saxon names (i.e. they were native men, presumably early landholders under the Norman William fitz Nigel)
3) that the Hattons descend from Wolfric. The earliest versions of the pedigrees connecting to 'Wolfric' make that man father of William de Hatton, who died almost 150 later (subsequently modified by insertion of additional generations). This seems to just be a made up connection, to attach the later family to the Wulfatus of the monastic foundation legend (not there associated with Hatton).
I could add another one, but have insufficient information to evaluate the situation.
4) that the poster's Hatten family descends in the male line from the Hatton lords, which I take to be the basis of the proposed male-line descent. The senior male line of the Hattons went extinct at the start of the 14th century, and though most of these families produced lines from younger sons, these lines are usually poorly documented, and the presumption that a later person with a similar surname must have descended from the earlier landed family of the same name is unsafe, to say the least.
taf
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Trent Hatten
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Peter Stewart
uncle of Rollo is an interpolation by Orderic in William of Jumièges'
_Gesta Normannorum ducum_ ("Rogerius Toenites de stirpe Malahulcii, qui
Rollonis ducis patruus fuerat"). Since Orderic did not name any brother
of Malahulc, this of course does not help in identifying Rollo's father.
As for a line of agnatic descent from Malahulc - assuming he was
correctly described in the 12th century - for any family other than the
Tosnys, to whom Orderic drew the bare connection, I don't know of a source.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
taf
> As for a line of agnatic descent from Malahulc - assuming he was
> correctly described in the 12th century - for any family other than the
> Tosnys, to whom Orderic drew the bare connection, I don't know of a source.
taf
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Peter Stewart
be a fantasy of English busy-bodies and genealogists-for-hire such as
John Pym Yeatman (whose works I never consult without a nose-peg handy)
hawking "ancient" bloodlines to gullible patrons or for pretentious
wannabes. There was no shortage of these nuisances in the 19th century.
His claim that Malahulc was also known as "Halduc de Tresney" is rotten
garbage.
If you mean the agnatic descent stated by Orderic from Malahulc to the
Tosny family, I have no reason to doubt that this was accepted as true
in the 12th century and probably for a long time before it was briefly
documented. The story seems quite plausible to me, accounting for the
special status of the early Tosny family and the otherwise mysterious
promotion by Rollo's son William of their kinsman Hugo from a mere monk
at Saint-Denis to be archbishop of Rouen in 942. The objection that the
name Hugo indicates the man must have been a Frank rather than a Norman
is - frankly - barking: Rollo was baptised as Robert, we don't know any
pagan name for his son William, and Hugo was another Frankish magnate's
name very likely to have been given to a convert. Hostages were
freqently exchanged between Normans and Franks, as well as captives
taken, and I see no particular difficulty with a grandson of Rollo's
uncle being educated as a monk at Saint-Denis.
Peter Stewart
Peter Stewart
Sir John Hayward published in 1613, where he called Roger de Tosny
"Roger Tresuye" - at any rate, that is the earliest approximation I can
find to name Yeatman misrepresented as belonging to Rollo's uncle and a
variant of Tosny (p. 73 of the book cited upthread by Todd: "The
chronicle of Normandy states that another name of this uncle was Halduc
de Tresney, another form of the name Toesni").
Citing "The chronicle of Normandy" is a shameless imposture even by
Yeatman's self-serving standards.
Peter Stewart
Peter Stewart
edition of Hayward's life (here:
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=qC08AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA12), but Yeatman
more probably came across the name as "Tresny" in an edition from 1809
(here: https://books.google.com.au/books?id=MMY_AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA443).
Peter Stewart
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
I was refering to the Saint-Sauveur descent.
I am surprised to learn that the Tosny descent is plausible.