de Stuteville family in the Durham Liber Vitae (rather long)
Chris Phillips
together?
C.T.Clay, in Early Yorkshire Charters ix (1952), gives the following
pedigree of the early generations of the de Stuteville family:
[Hope the layout comes out ok; have numbered generations just in case...]
[1] Robert I
[1] = (?) Beatrix
[2] Robert II
[2] = Erneburga
[3] [dotted] Nicholas d’Estouteville of Valmont, d.1177
[3] Robert III, b.c.1110, d.1183 = Helewise
[3] William, living 1147
[3] Roger, d.c.1190
[3] John
[3] dau = Robert de Daiville
[3] [dotted] Osmund
[3] [dotted] Burga = William Pantulf of Breedon-on-the-Hill
[2] Emma = Robert de Grentemaisnil
[2] [dotted] Graulfus
[2] [dotted] William
The evidence suggesting the marriage to Beatrix, and the existence of the
sons Graulfus and William, is an entry in the Liber Vitae of Durham,
described by Clay as commemorating Robert de Stuteuill’, Beatrix his wife,
and Robert, Graulfus and William their sons. Clay argues that the Liber
Vitae entry cannot relate to Robert II, as his son Robert III is known to
have been the son of Robert and Erneburga (not of Robert and Beatrix).
In a footnote, Clay mentions further entries in the Liber Vitae,
commemorating William de Estuteuile and Roger his brother, and again a
Gilbert Halsart and Joan de Stuteuilla.
The Liber Vitae has been published twice by the Surtees Society, firstly in
1841 (vol.13) as a transcript by Robinson (later said to be rather
inaccurate) and secondly as a facsimile in 1923 (vol.136).
The part of the list relating to the Stutevilles occurs in two variants,
the first legible but rather abbreviated, omitting surnames and
relationships (fo. 44,44v), and the second fuller but illegible in places
(fo.47v).
The briefer list reads:
Rob’t[us] de Stuteuill/ Beatrix uxor ei[us]/ Rob’tus/ Graulfus/ Will’s
filii eo[rum]/ [fo.44v:] Emma/ Rodb’t[us]/ Will’s/ Roger[us]/ Gaufrid[us]/
Aaliza/ Emma/ Roger[us]/ Odo/ Will’s/ Roger[us]/ Alfri [etc]
The fuller list is mostly rather illegible in the facsimile. Robinson’s
transcript is:
Rodbertus de Stuteuilla Beatrix uxor ejus Rodbertus Graulf Willelmus filius
[filii?] eorum Emme uxor Rodberti Rodbertus filius ejus Willelmus et
Rogerius et Gaufridus fratres (?) ejus Aaliz et Emma sorores eorum Rogerius
de ...mavilla Odo de Mansuel Willelmus de Estutevile Rogerius frater ejus
Alsi [etc].
I have no experience in interpreting records of this kind, but it seems to
me that the names from the first mma up to the second also belong to the de
Stuteville group. If so, they would imply the following pedigree:
[1] Robert
[1] = Beatrix
[2] Robert
[2] = Emma
[3] Robert
[3] William
[3] Roger
[3] Geoffrey
[3] Aaliz
[3] Emma
[2] Graulfus
[2] William
This is difficult to reconcile with Clay’s version, as the mother of
several of Robert’s children is definitely known to have been called
Erneburga (or Erenburga). The names of the children of Robert and Emma
overlap with those of Robert and Erneburga, but are not the same. Moreover,
the appearance, in the next line of the text, of brothers called William
and Roger de Stuteville is puzzling.
The only possibility that comes to mind is that the names in the Liber
Vitae are all one generation earlier than Clay thought. Clay argues that,
since Robert I was a benefactor of Durham priory, the entry probably
commemorates him, his wife and their children. Is it possible that,
instead, it commemorates his parents and the next two generations? One
virtue of this hypothesis would be the appearance of a daughter Emma (wife
of Robert de Grandmesnil) as daughter of Robert I, as shown by Clay.
But perhaps I am completely misinterpreting the text! I’d be very
interested to hear any opinions on this.
Chris Phillips