Reynold de Dunstanville: Part 2
Chris Phillips
(i) Eyton's version
By far the most detailed account of the family is in Eyton's "Antiquities of
Shropshire" (1854-60). Though now obviously rather old, it seems to have
been followed by nearly all subsequent authors, including the VCH and more
recently Sanders, "English Baronies" (1960).
Eyton gives the early generations simply as follows:
Reynold de Dunstanville [d. before 1114] = Adeliza de Insula
their sons: Robert [d.s.p.1167] and Alan [I] [d. before 1156]
Alan's sons: Walter [d.1190] and Alan [II].
Eyton's reconstruction leaves out the Reynold of 1130, because he identified
this Reynold with Henry I's illegitimate son, the later Earl of Cornwall.
He sees the Robert who gave Burpham church to Lewes [before 1121] as the
same who died in 1167, and interprets the note in the cartulary, that the
land is of the fee of his "nepos" Alan, as referring to his nephew, Alan II.
Round (Pipe Roll Society 10, p.15 1888) claimed to have demolished Eyton's
scheme, by pointing out that Robert's gift pre-dated 1121. But this point
really depends on the belief that the note in the cartulary is contemporary
with the gift (which Eyton did believe). If, as Farrer suggests, the note
was written later, after the tenure had changed hands, Round's objection
seems to lose its force. (Round also spoke as though Eyton had made the
Reynold of 1130 Robert's father, but this is not so.)
(ii) Farrer's version
On the other hand, Farrer, in "Honors and Knights' Fees" (1923-5),
reconstructed the family as follows:
Robert, who gave Burpham church to Lewes before 1121
Reynold, possibly son of Robert, 1121 and 1130
His sons Robert [d.s.p.1167] and Alan [I] [d. before 1156]
Alan's sons: Walter [d.1190] and Alan [II].
In this scheme, the statement that the first Robert was "nepos" of Alan is
explained by his being grandfather of Alan I, not uncle of Alan II.
It is not clear whether Farrer saw his Reynold as being the same who married
Adeliza de Insula. If so, his references to Reynold in 1121 and 1130 must be
viewed as anachronisms, coming 7 and 16 years after his death, respectively.
(He does not comment on this, although he does describe the first reference
as to Reynold's having been "allegedly" present in 1121.)
However, it seems to me that the most natural interpretation along these
lines would be to make the first Reynold the grandfather of the Reynold of
1130 (thus making room for Robert to be Alan I's grandfather, and Reynold's
father). (Or, equally, the first Robert could after all be viewed as the
_uncle_ of Alan I, and thus a brother of the second Reynold. In this case
Robert and Reynold II could both be sons of Reynold I and Adeliza.)
(iii) Eyton versus Farrer
Obviously, the crucial question of who the Reynold of 1130 was, is tied up
with whether one accepts Eyton's version or Farrer's. If Eyton's version is
accepted, it's difficult to see how he could fit in, unless he was Reynold
the king's son. Conversely, if he was not the king's son, Farrer's scheme
seems to be the most straightforward way of fitting him in.
Leaving aside the Reynold of 1130 for a moment, a couple of points perhaps
argue in favour of Farrer's version.
Chronologically, Eyton's version does look a bit strained, though not
impossible. It seems to imply Robert was active as early as 1110 (and
possibly even in the 1090s), and did not die until 1167. Robert's brother
Alan I apparently doesn't appear until the 1130s. Alan I's son Walter I
lived until 1190, and Walter's grandson Walter III did not come of age until
1213 [Sanders 28]. So the generations would be quite long, and some of the
people would be very aged, in Eyton's version. (Even more strikingly, VCH
Sussex iv 41 appears to have the widow of Alan II surviving until 1241, but
I'm not sure whether this is correct - see below.)
The two schemes differ as to whether the Alan mentioned in the Lewes
cartulary is to be identified as Alan I (Farrer) or Alan II (Eyton). It
seems to be established that Alan I held the Sussex manors, but it is not so
clear that Alan II did. Apart from the occurrence of the name Alan in 1165
(which Eyton himself explains as an anachronism), Walter seems to occur
consistently as the tenant in Sussex. VCH Sussex iv 41 does suggest that
Alan II "seems to have" held Bepton as a tenant of his brother Walter, but
no direct evidence for this is given. What is stated is evidence that
individuals identified as Alan II's grandsons held as tenants in the 1230s
and 1240s, but I can't help wondering whether these people have been
correctly fitted into the pedigree, because VCH says that Alan II's
daughter-in-law and - apparently - his widow were still living in 1241.
(Whichever scheme we subscribe to, this would mean that the daughter-in-law
and grand-daughter-in-law of a man active by 1141 (Alan I) survived until
1241 - which is difficult to believe - moreover, on Eyton's reckoning, Alan
I would presumably have been born around 1100 - which makes the difficulty
even worse.)
One further point against Eyton's version is that while Robert gave to Lewes
before 1121 Burpham church, part of the Sussex holdings, these holdings seem
to have been held by Alan I before the death of Robert son of Reynold in
1167. So in Eyton's scheme Robert's holdings would seem to have passed
during his lifetime to his brother Alan I.
(iv) Who was the Reynold of 1130?
These points aside, a couple of arguments can be made against the Reynold of
the 1130 Pipe Roll being the king's son.
Douglas Richardson says that the king's son is not known to have been called
Reynold de Dunstanville in his lifetime. Certainly I haven't come across any
such references.
Another point is chronological. Robert de Torigny, writing about 1140, calls
Reynold the king's son and others "adhuc juvenes, sine casamento", which
makes 1130 difficult, and 1121 even more difficult. (On the other hand
Geoffrey White, in CP, suggests Reynold may have been older than implied in
Robert de Torigny's account).
It might also be argued from the fact that there is no mention of a Robert
or an Alan de Dunstanville (or any other male member of the family) in the
1130 Pipe Roll, that the Reynold who appears there is likely to be their
father. (But perhaps an argument from silence is dangerous).
One might also ask why the king's son should have had a large land holding
in Wiltshire at all. Against this is the fact that Earl Reynold does seem to
have held, at his death, some of the Dunstanville lands in Wiltshire,
including Castle Combe, the "caput" of the barony. It would be interesting
if anyone could shed any further light on this, or on the whole question of
Earl Reynold's relationship to the Dunstanvilles...
(Another interesting postscript to this - which could obviously bear on
whether Earl Reynold had any blood relationship with the Dunstanvilles - is
the question of the supposed marriage of his daughter Ursula to Walter de
Dunstanville. Eyton [ii 282] refers to this marriage as "a most scandalous
imposture and forgery" which had duped Dugdale and Vincent. Apparently it
had been alleged that this was how Shifnal, together with Castle Combe, had
passed (or in the latter case, passed back) into the Dunstanville family.
Eyton gives evidence, at any rate, for Shifnal having been held by Walter's
father, Alan I. Has anything further been discovered about this since
Eyton's time?)
(v) A Warenne link?
It seems to me that after all that, we're left with something like Farrer's
scheme as the more likely solution on the whole. This would make the Reynold
of 1130 and his sister Gundred members of the Wiltshire Dunstanville family,
and successors of the earlier Reynold and Adeliza de Insula, the apparent
heiress of the Domesday tenant. Reynold and Gundred might be children of the
Robert who gave the church of Burpham, Sussex, to Lewes Priory.
The link with Lewes, and the occurrence of the name Gundred, do seem
suggestive of some connection with the Warennes, as Douglas Richardson
proposed. In fact, Farrer suggested that the family's holdings in Sussex
might have been the marriage-portion of Reynold's mother (that is, Robert's
possible wife), and might as a result have passed to Alan I as younger son.
One more odd coincidence is that Eyton [ii 275] says Walter de Dunstanville
(the son of Alan I) had large estates in Normandy, "situated apparently in
the bailiwick of Dieppe and Arques", and mentions land at Roumesnil among
them. I haven't checked up on this at all, but this sounds pretty close to
the region of the Warennes' Norman possessions.
There are, however, a couple of problems.
The holdings in Sussex (like that of Shifnal in Shropshire) were part of the
Honor of Arundel, not the Honor of Warenne, which makes it difficult to see
them as the marriage portion of a Warenne daughter. (Perhaps one could try
to do something like making a connection a generation further back, by
giving Robert a Warenne mother-in-law instead of a Warenne wife...).
The other point is that the gifts to Lewes Priory _seem_ to have started
with Reynold and Adeliza. Chronologically it seems difficult to give either
of these a Warenne descent, as Robert de Dunstanville - presumably their
descendant - was active by 1110.
So at the moment, I can't quite see a way to make a Warenne connection fit
with the evidence. But if anyone has any further suggestions - about this or
about Earl Reynold's relationship with the Dunstanvilles - I'd be very
interested to hear them.
Chris Phillips
douglasr...@my-deja.com
Thanks for your insightful post on the Dunstanville family, of
Wiltshire. I do have one question. Do the Pipe Rolls actually say
that Reynold de Dunstanville was alive in 1130. I ask that question
because I see you have assumed that he was. The reference to his
sister Gundred in the 1130 Pipe Roll doesn't imply Reynold was living.
It does imply that she was, though. If Reynold was not alive, would
that change your reconstruction?
Two other comment. First, the name "de Insula" is the Latin form of
the French surname "de Lisle." I always translate the name from the
Latin to the French. However, for reasons not known to me, some
historians/genealogists don't translate the name. By 1400, the name
became just "Lisle" and later evolved into "Lyle."
Second, I suspect the name Penchenai is the same as the French surname
Picquiny. There was at least one early intermarriage between the
Picquiny family and a Devonshire family ancestral to the Brewes (or
Braose) family. If so, it wouldn't surprise me to find another English
marriage for a Picquiny in this period.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <002201c0684d$25048e80$f5149fd4@oemcomputer>,
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Ivor West
John Benson in the 1930s but may have missed that in the first
generation an earlier Walter, together with his brother Robert,
attested to charters in 1094, 1096 and 1098, (Cal. Docs. France,
1234). This probably places them in the 1060/1070 generation of
William I de Warenne. If Reginald and Gundred are Robert's issue they
would fall in Earl Reginald's generation (1100). Scrope also places a
Hugh in the first generation.
Alan I's son is therefore Walter II, buried at Wombridge c1194 (Pipe
Rolls) who, according to Eyton, married Hawise de Prahens, who married
secondly Ingeram de Pratellis (but then known as Sibella) (Bracton
Notebook, 101, 1220). These latter two held Idsall, Shrops,
1210 -1212. (Red Book, 1218). (For what it's worth, Ingeram is the son
of Osbert de Preaux who married Matilda de Warenne, daughter of the
3rd earl.)
I have dug out my notes on Dunstanville to see what there was on the
Missenden Abbey Cartulary. Charters X and XI should apparently refer
to the manor of Shiplake which Muriel, daughter of Geoffrey
fitzWilliam and Emma de Langetot, brought to Alan [II]. Alan and Emma
are the parents of Alan [III], Walter [IIIa], Geoffrey, Emma, Alice
and Cecilia. Emma de Langetot married secondly Robert Danvers. Whether
this is all there is, and whether they are all in the cartulary or
some are comment, I can't say.
Alan I gave Newtimber to Lewes (Cal. Docs France, 1391), attested 1141
and his brother Robert attested 1144 (Round, Anc. Chart., 19) and was
granted Heytesbury and Colyton by Henry II (Pipe Rolls, 1159 - 1166).
He also attested a charter of Roger Nonant 1154 - 1161. He died 1167/8
(Watkin, "Totnes Priory").
DNB assumes that Earl Reginald is the same as the Reginald, sister of
Gundreda, mentioned in the Pipe Roll of 1130. The next reference to
Reginald seems to be at King Stephen's court in 1136 where he is
called "Reginald, the king's son", ("Geoffrey Mandeville", p263). DNB
goes on to say that William of Malmesbury claims that Reginald was
created Earl of Cornwall by his half- brother, the Earl of Gloucester.
But I think that Charles Henderson's account in "The Records of the
Borough of Truro" (JRIC, iii, 109) is more likely. Henderson relates
that King Stephen conferred the earldom of Cornwall on Alan of
Britanny and the lieutenancy on William fitzRichard. Reginald married
William's daughter, Beatrice fitzWilliam, c1140. William then switched
sides to Empress Matilda and induced Reginald to assume the title Earl
of Cornwall. They were consequently attacked and ejected from their
Cornish castles by Alan of Britanny (Gesta Stephanis, p64) which they
later recovered. Reginald witnessed Matilda's charters first as "filio
Regis" and later as "comite filio Regis" after Reginald was confirmed
in his earldom by Matilda.
Reginald's daughter, Ursula, who is said to have married either Alan I
or Walter II, may be apochryphal but his son, Nicholas, is definitely
in the record. He attests the charter where Reginald grants lands in
free marriage to William de Boterell who married Isabel de Say (her
third husband - she had previously married William fitzAlan and
Geoffrey de Vere):
"Reginaldus Henrici Regis filius comes Cornubiae ... sciatus me
concessisse et dedisse Willielmus de Boterell filio Aliciae Corbet
materere mee ... in liberum maritagium quod dederam predicto Willielmo
cum materera mea."
Witnesses included "Nicholao filio meo", "Baldwino et Ricardo
nepotibus meis" [earls of Devon and grandsons of Reginald], "Willielmo
de Vernun" [earl of Devon, uncle of last two], "Willielmo fratre meo"
[William de Tracy], "Hugo de Dunstanville" [brother of Alan I], and
"Herberto filio Herberti" [husband of Sybil (or is it Alice?) Corbet].
(Cartae Antiquae B2, in App II, Maclean: Trigg Minor, i, 675.).
The mention of Reginald's brother William, who was later styled "de
Tracy" may be, as John Benson suggested, similar to that of "de
Dunstanville", that is, an identity styled after the families which
had the guardianship of the king's natural sons. Perhaps the familes
received land grants which reverted to the wards at full age.
Ivor West
Ivor West
Ivor West
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
User Name : Ivor West
User email address : p100.f2098.n246.z2
User FidoNet address : 2:246/2098.100
User email address : Ivor...@p100.f2098.n246.z2.fidonet.org
=============================================================
douglasr...@hotmail.com
Thanks for your interesting post on the Dunstanville family. I
haven't checked Eyton's good history of the Fitz Herbert family, but I
believe William "brother" of Reynold Fitz Roy, Earl of Cornwall, would
likely be a half brother, William Fitz Herbert. As I recall, he had
such a brother on whom he settled some fees in Cornwall. I believe
William Fitz Herbert left descendants. In any case, Earl
Reynold's "brother" William could not be William de Tracy, as you
suggest, as William de Tracy is said to have died soon after his
father, King Henry I's death in 1135.
As best I can tell, Earl Reynold was never known as Reynold de
Dunstanville as an adult. He was known as Reynold Fitz Roy, or on rare
occasion as Reynold de Mortain. Consequently, the individual named
Reynold de Dunstanville mentioned in the 1130 Pipe Roll would not be
the Earl. Likewise, as best I know, Earl Reynold's half-brother,
Robert, Earl of Gloucester, was never known as Robert de Caen as an
adult either.
Regarding Mr. Benson, I haven't found his work very reliable. His
work should be used with care.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <0AO%5.75197$eT4.5...@nnrp3.clara.net>,
douglasr...@hotmail.com
Thanks for your interesting post on the Dunstanville family. I
haven't checked Eyton's good history of the Fitz Herbert family, but I
believe William "brother" of Reynold Fitz Roy, Earl of Cornwall, would
likely be a half brother, William Fitz Herbert. As I recall, he had
such a brother on whom he settled some fees in Cornwall. I believe
William Fitz Herbert left descendants. In any case, Earl
Reynold's "brother" William could not be William de Tracy, as you
suggest, as William de Tracy is said to have died soon after his
father, King Henry I's death in 1135.
As best I can tell, Earl Reynold was never known as Reynold de
Dunstanville as an adult. He was known as Reynold Fitz Roy, or on rare
occasion as Reynold de Mortain. Consequently, the individual named
Reynold de Dunstanville mentioned in the 1130 Pipe Roll would not be
the Earl. Likewise, as best I know, Earl Reynold's half-brother,
Robert, Earl of Gloucester, was never known as Robert de Caen as an
adult either.
Regarding Mr. Benson, I haven't found his work very reliable. His
work should be used with care.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <0AO%5.75197$eT4.5...@nnrp3.clara.net>,
"Ivor West" <i...@freeuk.com> wrote:
douglasrichardson
Dear Ivor:
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
User Name : douglasrichardson
User email address : p100.f2098.n246.z2
User FidoNet address : 2:246/2098.100
User email address : douglasr...@p100.f2098.n246.z2.fidonet.org
=============================================================
douglasrichardson
Chris Phillips
> Chris Phillips' review follows the same general lines as that made by
Many thanks for the further comments. I hadn't come across anything by John
Benson (although as I said before, I haven't gone into the sources very
deeply). Do you have a reference to his work?
> ... but may have missed that in the first
> generation an earlier Walter, together with his brother Robert,
> attested to charters in 1094, 1096 and 1098, (Cal. Docs. France,
> 1234). This probably places them in the 1060/1070 generation of
> William I de Warenne. If Reginald and Gundred are Robert's issue they
> would fall in Earl Reginald's generation (1100).
Yes; I did mention this, which is referred to by Farrer. I wasn't quite
sure whether this Robert was the same who occurs elsewhere from 1110. But if
so, I wondered whether the Walter might perhaps be the same as the Walter de
Pencheni, who confirmed the gift of Winterbourne church, made by his mother
Adeliza (presumably Adeliza de Insula, wife of the first Reynold de
Dunstanville). But that's sheer speculation.
I would say that the Walter and Robert of the 1090s could perhaps be of the
same generation as William I of Warenne's children, who were adult by about
1090. If this Robert is the same as the one who appears in 1110 (the
possible father of the Reynold de Dunstanville of 1130), it is perhaps less
likely that he could have married a daughter of Reynold de Warenne (son of
William I de Warenne), as - apparently - a Castle Combe cartulary says that
one of the Dunstanvilles did.
>Scrope also places a
> Hugh in the first generation.
I think I'd better have a look at Scrope when I get a chance.
> Alan I's son is therefore Walter II, buried at Wombridge c1194 (Pipe
> Rolls) who, according to Eyton, married Hawise de Prahens, who married
> secondly Ingeram de Pratellis (but then known as Sibella) (Bracton
> Notebook, 101, 1220). These latter two held Idsall, Shrops,
> 1210 -1212. (Red Book, 1218). (For what it's worth, Ingeram is the son
> of Osbert de Preaux who married Matilda de Warenne, daughter of the
> 3rd earl.)
I think Alan I's son Walter died 1190, and this Walter's son Walter died
1194 (thus Sanders anyway, who calls them Walter I and Walter II).
> I have dug out my notes on Dunstanville to see what there was on the
> Missenden Abbey Cartulary. Charters X and XI should apparently refer
> to the manor of Shiplake which Muriel, daughter of Geoffrey
> fitzWilliam and Emma de Langetot, brought to Alan [II]. Alan and Emma
> are the parents of Alan [III], Walter [IIIa], Geoffrey, Emma, Alice
> and Cecilia. Emma de Langetot married secondly Robert Danvers. Whether
> this is all there is, and whether they are all in the cartulary or
> some are comment, I can't say.
Sorry, I should have said that I did see references to Dunstanvilles in some
of the charters, but the editors did not construct a pedigree. I think the
connection of the family with Missenden only came in with Muriel, which when
I looked at the cartulary seemed too late to be relevant. However, having
been puzzled by the chronology of the Victoria County History of Sussex
(Bepton), which seems to imply Muriel was still alive in 1241 - a hundred
years after her supposed father-in-law, Alan I, was active - maybe this
would be worth going back to. It's of some relevance in working out which
Alan is referred to in the Lewes cartulary as the "nepos" of Robert de
Dunstanville.
(Actually, looking back at my notes, the VCH says that it was Muriel who
married secondly Robert Danvers, not Emma. I suppose Emma would be even more
difficult chronologically.)
> Witnesses included "Nicholao filio meo", "Baldwino et Ricardo
> nepotibus meis" [earls of Devon and grandsons of Reginald], "Willielmo
> de Vernun" [earl of Devon, uncle of last two], "Willielmo fratre meo"
> [William de Tracy], "Hugo de Dunstanville" [brother of Alan I], and
> "Herberto filio Herberti" [husband of Sybil (or is it Alice?) Corbet].
> (Cartae Antiquae B2, in App II, Maclean: Trigg Minor, i, 675.).
Hugh, the brother of Alan I, is another addition to the ones I came across.
Douglas Richardson wrote:
> I haven't checked Eyton's good history of the Fitz Herbert family, but I
> believe William "brother" of Reynold Fitz Roy, Earl of Cornwall, would
> likely be a half brother, William Fitz Herbert. As I recall, he had
> such a brother on whom he settled some fees in Cornwall. I believe
> William Fitz Herbert left descendants.
Geoffrey White's Appendix D to Complete Peerage vol.11 identifies this
William as another illegitimate son of Henry I by ("presumably") Sibyl
Corbet, who appears as a brother of Sibyl, Queen of Scotland (he sees
Reynold, William and Sibyl as full siblings). White adds that he held 4 fees
in Cornwall under Reynold, and had a wife Alice.
Chris Phillips
Chris Phillips
Chris Phillips
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
User Name : Chris Phillips
User email address : p100.f2098.n246.z2
User FidoNet address : 2:246/2098.100
User email address : Chris.P...@p100.f2098.n246.z2.fidonet.org
=============================================================