NB. Clicking on an image will open a higher resolution image
The Origins of the Walter Family in Normandy
Theobald Walter was granted the hereditary title of 1st Butler of Ireland in the late 12th century, and subsequent generations adopted the surname 'Boteler' or Butler.
A diverse number of pedigrees compiled in the past have claimed various exalted ancestors for the Butlers, none of which have been proven. Various respected peerage publications exemplify the widely varied theories of the origins of this family:
Debrett’s Peerage (1825), states that ‘the original descent has been variously deduced: Herveius a companion of William the Conqueror; a younger son of the house of Clare; or, Walter, son of Gilbert Becket brother of Thomas á Becket Archbishop of Canterbury’.
Burkes ‘Peerage and Baronage’ (1st pub 1826, London) states that ‘Hervey Walter was heir to Hubert Walter who is mentioned in the Sheriff’s account for Counties Norfolk and Suffolk 3 Henry II, 1158.’ (this erroneous theory will be explored in detail)
‘The Baronage of England after the Norman Conquest’, by Sir William Dugdale, King of Arms (London 1675), also referred to the record in ‘3 Henry II’ (Pipe Roll)- Dugdale concluded: ‘upon the Sheriff’s accompt for Norfolk and Suffolk mention is made of Hubert Walter in those Shires, from whom succeeded Hervey Walter’. (again, an erroneous theory)
George E. Cokayne in his ‘The Complete Peerage’ (pub 1887-1896) did not even attempt to explain the possible ancestry of Hervey Walter.
The following analysis looks at the likelihood of the various ancestral origins claimed in numerous pedigrees produced through the centuries, and any evidence found.
ANALYSIS OF THE VARIOUS THEORIES OF THE ORIGINS OF THE WALTER FAMILY
As discussed, various pedigrees compiled over several centuries, have claimed various exalted ancestors for the Butlers, none of which have been proven. As evidence shows, Hervey was the name of the earliest known ancestor of the Butlers, born c.1080’s in Suffolk. And his son Hervey Walter was the father of two sons who reached exalted positions, Theobald Walter appointed first Butler of Ireland, and Hubert Walter who would become the most powerful man in England under the King, as Chief Justiciar, Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor. It should also be remembered that the Walter family owed their rise in status to their uncle Rannulf de Glanville who also rose in status after his promotion to Chief Justiciar under Henry II.
The lands held by the Walter family in Suffolk were linked with the powerful tenant-in-chief Robert Malet in the Domesday Book (1086), and this association should be kept in mind.
The following analysis looks at the likelihood of the various ancestral origins claimed in numerous pedigrees produced through the centuries, and the evidence found on each theory.
(i) the de Clares
(ii) the Beckets
(iii) the de Glanvilles
(iv) Hervey de Bourges and Hubert de MonteCanisy
1.THE de CLARES
Although there is no evidence to support such a claim, some researchers in the past have concluded that the Butlers and Walters descended from the de Clare family and their ancestors the Counts of Brionne.
The first to canvas the suggestion that the Ormondes descended from Henry I’s cupbearer, Gilbert fitzRichard de Clare, were William Roberts, Ulvester King of Arms in Ireland in 1644, supported by Rev. John T. Butler of Northants in the 1676-85, although it first appeared in print in a book entitled “Some account of the Family of the Butlers” printed in London by John Morphew in 1716, and it was accepted by the pedigree and peerage writers of the 18th century, and many more recent publications and online family trees have copied this unsubstantiated ancestry, but, as Butler historian Theobald Blake Butler claimed, no serious proof has ever been produced with regard to it.
Gilbert fitzRichard was the son of Richard fitzGilbert de Clare (1035-1090) whose father Gilbert Count of Brionne and Eu was one of the early guardians of Duke William of Normandy in his minority, before he was murdered. Gilbert Count of Brionne’s father was Geoffrey Count of Eu, the illegitimate child of Richard I of Normandy (King William’s great grandfather).
Richard fitzGilbert married Rohese de Giffard daughter of Walter Gifford of Bolbec, Lord of Longueville, Normandy, a Norman baron who was one of the loyal supporters and known companions of William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings. Walter Gifford was one of the Norman magnates, who personally provided 30 ships for William’s invasion fleet. Walter’s grandmother was sister of Gunnor Duchess of Normandy (wife of Richard I of Normandy, and both daughters of King Harold I ‘Bluetooth’ Gornsson of Denmark) and as such was a relation of William. Gifford was granted 107 lordships as tenant-in-chief, 48 of which were in Buckingham which his son Walter inherited by 1085 and became 1st Earl of Buckingham.
As the de Clare family are well documented due to their relationship to William the Conqueror and his Norman ancestors, and held very high status in the Norman hierarchy, it would therefore seem unlikely that Theobald and his brother Hubert Walter’s ancestry and de Clare heritage would be undocumented and lost to history, given their own subsequent high status in the courts of Henry II and his sons and heirs Richard and John, particularly Hubert in his appointed roles as Archbishop of Canterbury and Chief Justiciar of England.
The Walters did not hold any lands previously held by Richard fitzGilbert de Clare in the Domesday survey. Richard fitzGilbert was well rewarded for his services to King William with grants of large quantities of land, as revealed in the Domesday survey. As tenant-in-chief, Richard fitzGilbert held 186 lands, including 86 lands in Suffolk, 49 in Essex (including Great and Little Dunmow), 36 in Surrey, and nine lands in other counties (Middlesex, Cambridgeshire, Devon, Bedfordshire and Wiltshire). He was also named as sub-tenant/lord in 1086 to 144 lands including some of his own and 33 in Kent held from Bishop Odo of Bayeux and the Archbishop of Canterbury. None of his Suffolk lands were later held by the Walter family.
It is also unlikely that the link could be through one of the lesser status younger sons/grandsons, as the connection with this highly ranked family would still have been documented.
Richard fitzGilbert de Clare had several sons including:
1.Roger fitzRichard- inherited the lands in Normandy
2.Walter de Clare Lord of Nether Gwent Wales, 1058-1138; founder of Tintern Abbey; dispute over whether he married, but left his estates to a nephew (son of Gilbert)
3.Gilbert ‘fitzRichard’ Lord of Clare, Earl of Hertford born 1054 at Clare, Risbridge, Suffolk and died in Wales c.1117 as Lord of Cardigan, who married Adeliza de Clermont (m.2. __de Montmorency, possibly named Bouchard or Hervey) and had several sons including-
(A)Sir Richard ‘fitzGilbert’ Lord of Clare (1094-1136) whose sons Gilbert ‘fitzRichard’ and Roger ‘fitzGilbert’ granted titles 1st and 2nd Earls of Hertford;
(B)Gilbert ‘fitzGilbert’ 1st Earl of Pembroke (1100-1149) father of Richard 2nd Earl of Pembroke, known as Strongbow, who invaded Ireland in 1170 (his daughter Isobel married William Marshall 4th earl of Pembroke).
(C)Walter de Clare died 1149 -little known, but does appear in records with brother Gilbert- no record of any marriage or issue (NB. born too late to be father of Hervey b.c.1080’s);
(D)Baldwin fitzGilbert, Lord of Bourne, born Risbridge, Suffolk, d.1171 Bourne. Lincolnshire;
4.Robert ‘fitzGilbert’ de Clare born 1064 Tunbridge, died 1136 Little Dunmow, Essex, (married Matilda de St Liz, b.1093 Huntingdon, so, thirty years younger than her husband), father of Walter fitzRobert Lord of Dunmow Castle (1124-1198) succeeding to his father’s position of steward under King Stephen. Walter witnessed Hubert Walter’s foundation charter for West Dereham Abbey in 1188.
5.Richard fitzRichard born 1062, died 1107, Abbot of Ely
6.daughters: Avise m.1. Robert Lord of ‘Belvoir and Stafford’ de Toeni; Rohese (de facto).1. Eudo ‘le Dapifer’ de Rie, 2. Hughes l’comte de Damm Montdidier; Hawise m. Raoul I de Fougeres; Elizabeth m. Eustace Bourne
There have been erroneous suggestions of a son of Gilbert fitzRichard named Hervey, sometimes attributed as the ancestor of the Butlers.
Firstly, if there had been such a son, he would have been born too late to have been the father of Hervey Walter ( who was born c.1110).
Secondly, there are no records of a Hervey de Clare, son of Gilbert fitzRichard de Clare. The idea probably stemmed from a record of a Hervey listed with his ‘brothers’ Gilbert fitzGilbert, Walter and Baldwin as witnesses to a charter to Thorney Monastery in Cambridgeshire by their mother Adeliza de Clermont, wife of Gilbert fitzRichard de Clare, but was actually a younger half-brother by their mother’s second marriage.
Monasticon Anglicanum, v.1, p.601:
Thorney Monastery (Cambridgeshire) – Number X- Dated c.1137
Charter of Lady Adeliz mother of Count Gilbert (fitzGilbert)
Adeliz, wife of Gilbert fitz Richard, and Gilbert and Walter and Baldwin and Rohesia children of Gilbert, …
Witnesses, Gilbert son of Gilbert. Walter, Hervey, Baldwin, his brothers, and Rohesia their sister.
notable in the charter to Thorney Monastery, is that ‘Hervey’ is not
listed as one of the children of Gilbert fitzRichard (ie. Gilbert
(fitzGilbert), Walter, Baldwin and Rohesia) at the beginning of the charter,
yet he is listed as a brother of Gilbert fitzGilbert, Walter, Baldwin and
Rohesia, in the list of witnesses. The reason is simply that Hervey was a
Gilbert fitzRichard died c.1114-1117, and his widow Adeliza remarried to a man variously named de Montmorency or MountMoraci or MountMaurice, by whom she had a son named Hervey de Montmorency who accompanied his nephew Richard de Clare (son of Gilbert fitzGilbert) known as Strongbow, to Ireland in 1170, and was appointed Constable of Ireland in 1172, married Nesta daughter of Maurice fitzGerald, and retired to a monastery (Trinity, Canterbury) dying without issue, according to the contemporary historian Giraldus Cambrensis/Gerald of Wales, in his ‘Expugnatio Hibernica’ (p.120) who named him Hervey de Mountmaurice/’heruy of Mountynorthy’. Giraldus Cambrensis noted that “not one of the four Pillars of the Conquest of Ireland, namely Robert fitzStephen, Hervey de Montmaurice, Reymond le Gros and John de Courcy, ever had children of their espoused wives”. He stated that Hervey was paternal uncle to Earl Richard (Strongbow). He also gave a very unflattering description of Hervey’s personality and morals, indicating some personal animosity. Hervey’s charter for the foundation of the convent of Dunbrothy (Dunbrody, Co. Wexford, Ireland) named him as ‘Hereveius de Monte Moricii’.
It is probable this charter of ‘Adeliza de Monte Moraci, domina de Deneford’ is the only documentary source that lists ‘Hervey’ as a brother of Gilbert fitzGilbert, and therefore the inclusion of a son named Hervey ‘de Clare’ in the de Clare family history may have been incorrectly interpreted by past researchers for Hervey ‘de Montmorency’, son of Adeliza by her second husband, and therefore only a half-brother to Gilbert fitzGilbert, Walter and Baldwin de Clare, Adeliza’s sons by her first husband Gilbert fitzRichard.
Based on this charter document, there was no son of Gilbert fitzRichard de Clare named Hervey de Clare, only the much younger Hervey de Montmorency, born after 1117, and therefore could not be the father of Hervey Walter.
Nor could either of the Walter de Clares be an ancestor of the Butlers- Walter the elder left no male heirs, and Walter the younger was born too late to be the father of Hervey [Walter].
A further argument against a descent from the de Clare family- Hervey Walter and son Theobald adopted the same coat-of-arms as the de Glanville family (a chief indented, azure). If Hervey was closely related to the de Clare family, one would expect that they would have adopted the same coat-of-arms (three red chevrons on a gold background) as this illustrious family of de Clare to gain royal favour, not chosen the coat-of-arms of the lesser middle status de Glanville family.
In my opinion, the theory of descent from the de Clare family is highly improbable, due to lack of any evidence linking the families, nor any suitable de Clare family candidates, and the high status held by the de Clare family (and their marital partners) in comparison to the initial status of middling knights such as the Walters.
For many centuries there was speculation that Theobald Walter may have been related to the Becket family in some way. Gilbert Becket, and his siblings must have been born in the 1090’s, so would have been of a similar age to Hervey.
Legend has it that the family’s promotion in the Court of Henry II was due to Henry’s repentance for the assassination murder of Thomas à Becket on the altar of Canterbury Cathedral by Henry’s knights. However, this relationship is not a proven fact, and is disputed by some researchers.
Theobald Blake Butler points out, that ‘this particular claim rests on entirely different grounds to any of the others in that it is the only descent which a head of the house of Butler has claimed for himself. This ancestry was apparently first put forward by James 4th Earl of Ormond in the year 1444, when he procured an act of parliament establishing his descent from Agnes Becket, sister of the martyred Archbishop Thomas. This earl was a great lover of heraldry and gave land for ever to the College of Heralds. He (sic. –only his wife, and his son Thomas 7th E. of O.) was buried in the hospital of St Thomas of Acre in Cheapside, which was founded by Agnes Becket apparently after the death of her husband, Thomas FitzTheobald de Helles c.1190.
This earl is the first (sic) of the Butlers to be buried there and it is probable that he chose this site for his tomb to strengthen his claim to a descent from the Beckets. The Earls of Ormond continued to maintain their Becket ancestry down to the end of the 17th century and various pedigrees are to be found in Carte’s ‘Life of Ormond’ which were compiled during that period and, though contradictory, all uphold the same ancestry.
The actual descent generally claimed is that one, Thomas de Helles, who undoubtedly married Agnes, sister of Thomas Becket, was the ancestor of the Butlers. Now, it is certain that the Butlers do not descend from the Beckets, either in the male or female line.’
(also see ‘Some account of the Hospital of St. Thomas of Acon in the Cheap, London’, by Sir John Watney, 2nd ed. 1906, pp.8-11, 47-50)
Theobald Blake Butler also wrote an article, ‘The Butler-Becket Tradition’, that was reproduced in the Butler Society Journal (V.2, No.4, p.424), in which he states:
The first occasion that a definite claim was put forward officially was made by James 5th Earl of Ormond in 1454 and is printed in the Parliamentary Rolls V.5 p.257. This descent, namely that the Earls of Ormond ‘were lineally descended of the blood of the glorious martyr St Thomas sometime Archbishop of Canterbury’ does not appear to have been questioned until 1682 when the Rev. John Butler, rector of Lichborough Northants and chaplain to James 1st Duke of Ormond compiled a descent for the family from the de Clares, which was apparently accepted until the 20th century when several different ancestries have been propounded.
The late Walter Rye was convinced that the Beckets were descended from the De Valoines family but was not able to produce sufficient proof to establish these relationships. (viz. that Thomas de Helles was a son of Theobald de Valoines, Lord of Parham)
Since Walter Rye wrote in 1924, the late Dr William Farrer has published ‘The Early Yorkshire Charters’ and in Vol. 5 pp.234-238 he gives considerable detail of the Valoines of Parham family in which he shows that their descent was from Hamo de Valoines an undertenant of Count Alan of Brittany both in Suffolk and in Yorkshire.
Blake Butler then speculates that, 'the pedigree allows for Theobald Walter I marrying the daughter of Thomas fitzTheobald de Helles (de Valoines) and Agnes Becket, (who would be his cousin germain and for which dispensation would be required in those days)'.
Editorial Note (Butler Society)- The late Theobald Blake Butler’s account, largely speculative, is based on W. Rye’s work with amendments of the Valoines pedigree given by W. Farrer in his Early Yorkshire Charters (v). He was not able to consult Davy’s MSS of Suffolk in the British Museum. He sent this copy, as revised in 1960, to Lord Dunboyne who has kindly enabled it to be printed here.
Another early reference to this ancestry seems to have originated from Sir Robert Rothe barrister-at-law and council to Thomas 9th Earl of Ormonde in Queen Elizabeth’s time, who drew up an account of the origin and descent of this family from ‘Walter fitzGilbert’ son of Gilbert Becket. (Carte) There is no record of a Walter fitzGilbert, and if there had been, he would have been contemporary with Hervey Walter, and therefore born far too late to be ancestor of the Walter family.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas à Becket was born 1119-1123 in Cheapside, London, to Gilbert and Matilda Beket (who may have had the pet name of Roheise).
Gilbert Becket took part in the first expedition to the Holy Land in 1099. After having been held prisoner ‘for a year and a half among the Infidels’, he returned to England. Brompton in his Chronicle (1163) says that ‘Gilbert, immediately after his marriage made a second voyage to the Holy Land, leaving his wife with child, Thomas Becket, and staid three years and a half in that country. After his return he had… two daughters’ [Agnes and Mary, Abbess of Barking]- therefore they could not have been born before 1124.
Gilbert’s father was from Thierville in the lordship of Brionne, Normandy and was either a small landowner or a rural knight. Gilbert was perhaps related to Theobald of Bec whose family also was from Thierville and was chosen by King Stephen to be archbishop of Canterbury from 1138 to 1161. Theobald of Bec was the patron of his successor Thomas Becket who was appointed archbishop in 1162, until his infamous murder in 1170.
Thomas’ mother, Matilda, was supposedly also of Norman descent and her family is said to have originated near Caen. However, another legend has it that, ‘Gilbert, whilst in captivity, had been the instrument of converting the daughter of a Sarazen Commander to the Christian faith, who afterwards, making an escape, came to England, found out Gilbert, was baptised and married him’. Which story is true is not known.
Gilbert began his life as a merchant, but by the 1120’s he was living in London and a property owner, living on the rental income from his properties. He also served as the sheriff of the city at one point at the height of his prosperity. But later, he suffered heavy losses when his properties were destroyed by fire. They were buried in Old St Paul’s Cathedral.
Thomas Becket was their only son and heir. They had four daughters including Agnes who became Gilbert’s heir and descent continued through her marriage to Thomas fitzTheobald de Helles/Heilli (of Hills Court, Kent, near Darenth), and Thomas’ ancestry remains a mystery.
The family house in Cheapside which was reckoned to be the site of Thomas’s birth, remained in the hands of his sister Agnes, and gained cult status. In 1227/8 the site of St Thomas’s birth was granted by Thomas de Helles to the master and knightly brothers of the Hospital of St Thomas of Acre for the foundation of a hospital. The community was an order of Hospitallers dedicated to St Thomas which had been established in Acre in 1191/2 with the support of King Richard.
Thomas Carte discusses the de Helles’ potential relationship to this family in the Introduction to his book on the Duke of Ormonde [A History of the Life of James Duke of Ormonde, in 2 volumes, pub 1736, v.1., p.xxxiv+]. According to Carte, Theobald Walter held the lands of Helles/Heilii, ‘proving’ a close relationship, however, this has not been substantiated by other evidence. As suggested by Theobald Blake Butler, maybe Theobald’s first wife was a daughter of Thomas de Helles and Agnes Becket.
Theobald Walter’s only known issue from his unnamed first marriage was a daughter named Beatrix Walter who made several grants to the Abbey of St Thomas in Dublin, of lands, churches and advowsons in the land of Ely “or Helii” which Theobald Walter had given her in marriage to Thomas de Hereford.
In ‘The Letters from Theobald Blake Butler to Lord [Patrick] Dunboyne-Draft’ (released by the Butler Society, and John the Lord Dunboyne), Theobald discusses the various theories, but could not produce any proof (see Letters, pages 97, 99-100).
The main sources for the life of Becket are a number of biographies written by his contemporaries. (ref: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: Becket, Thomas, by Frank Barlow, 2004)
Apart from legend, and the claims of the 4th and/or 5th Earls of Ormond in the 15th century, there is little, if any, unequivocal evidence of an association between the Walter family and the Beckets, and the promotion of the Walter family during the reign of Henry II and his sons, particularly Hubert Walter's promotion as Archbishop of Canterbury which can be attributed to their relationship with the de Glanville family, and King Richard's admiration for Hubert Walter's skills on the Crusade and Richard's subsequent captivity. There is also no evidence that Thomas de Helles was of the Valoines family, as claimed by Walter Rye (antiquarian who wrote 80 books on Norfolk in the late 19th century). And most importantly, the chronology of the two families does not correlate.
3.THE de GLANVILLES
This is the most interesting theory, as there are significant parallels between the two family pedigree lines of ‘Herveys’ living in co. Suffolk at the same time in the 12th century. There were two men named Hervey born in the 1080’s in Suffolk, viz. Hervey (Walter) the elder, and Hervey de Glanville senior, and they both had sons named Hervey viz. Hervey Walter and Hervey de Glanville junior both born c.1110, and the two families were closely associated throughout the 12th century. Some have speculated that Hervey Walter, father of Theobald and Hubert, was also Hervey de Glanville junior, and this theory cannot be dismissed.
But before we look at the de Glanville family in detail, we need to revisit the two prime records we have on the Walter family to see how they could be linked with the de Glanvilles.
Two documents exist revealing that Theobald Walter’s grandfather, the earliest known ancestor of the Irish Butlers, was named Hervey.
The first was an accord between Theobald Walter and William fitzHervey in 1195 over ancestral lands, in which Theobald’s grandfather (Latin ‘Aui’) is named as Hervei Walteri, the same name as Theobald’s father.
Feet of Fines (reign of Henry II and first seven years of reign of Richard I A.D. 1182-1196), 1894, Pipe Roll Society, p.21) (full record copy in blog chapter, Part 1, on Ancestors Origins of Theobald Walter)
The point that stands out in this record is that the justices hearing the case in the King’s Court were led by Theobald’s brother Hubert Walter, Chief Justiciar and Archbishop of Canterbury at that time. As Hubert would oversee the legality of this document, it is unlikely that a mistake would be made by a cleric naming their mutual grandfather, although it should be noted that this copy would have been a later redraft of the earlier original document.
The second record occurs in A.D. 1212 in an’ Inquest of co. Lancaster’ (an inquiry into tenures and alienations), about a century after the birth of Theobald’s father Hervey Walter. This record indicates that it was Theobald’s grandfather named ‘Hervey’ (father of Hervey Walter) who was granted the fee of Weeton and surrounding lands in the Hundred of Amounderness, Lancashire, during the reign of Henry I (ie.1100 to 1135). This reaffirms that Theobald’s grandfather was definitely named Hervey, but the question of whether he was also named Hervey Walter, remains uncertain.
‘Testa de Nevill’, (Liber Feodorum- Book of Fees), Part I, A.D. 1198-1242, (London 1920), fol. 818 p.211
Translation in ‘Lancashire Inquests, Extents, and Feudal Aids, A.D. 1205-A.D. 1307’, edit by William Farrer (Record Society 1903), p.37:
The lands granted to Orm son of Magnus in marriage c.1130’s with Hervey’s daughter Alice, in Rawcliffe, Thistleton and Greenhalgh, were all part of the Amounderness fee in the Honour of Lancaster (Lancashire) held by the Walter family. Orm’s relationship with Warin Bussel Lord of Penwortham who held lands in Lancashire and Cheshire, and Bussel’s relationship with Hervey de Glanville will be explored in detail later.
The question that has frustrated researchers down the centuries -
Why was Hervey of Co. Suffolk, granted the Amounderness fee in Co. Lancashire?
There are no contemporary records that show any particular relationship between Hervey Walter (the elder) and King Henry I or his nephew and heir Stephen Count of Mortain who held the Honour of Lancaster, or that shows he was anyone of note in Norman society and thereby deserving of a grant of land. It would appear, from the lack of records, he was just an undistinguished knight in the county of Suffolk, possibly a younger son. However, a contemporary named Hervey de Glanville, a distinguished knight and baron from Suffolk, was closely associated with the court of Henry I, and in particular with Stephen as Count of Mortain and afterwards when Stephen succeeded to the throne. He was also associated with the Bussels, Lords of Penwortham who originally held Amounderness.
Was this Hervey de Glanville the catalyst for the Walter family’s acquisition of the Amounderness lands, and on what basis?
Was there a long-term close relationship between Hervey de Glanville and Hervey [Walter] the elder, either by blood, or did the relationship date back to their families in Normandy, pre-Conquest?
As suggested in the chapter on the ‘Origin of the Surname Walter’, the Walter (or Walter the crossbowman) who held lands in Bishops Hundred in Suffolk in the Domesday survey of 1086, may have been the Norman ancestor of the Walter family. On his death, did either Hervey de Glanville or his elder brother William de Glanville (as heirs of Robert de Glanville) hold custody of Walter’s underage children, which could explain the close relationship between the Walter family and the extended de Glanville clan? Robert de Glanville held some of the same lands as Walter in Bishops Hundred, from Robert Malet.
The theory that has been suggested by some historians, was that Hervey de Glanville was also Hervey [Walter] the elder.
The de Glanville family link
A ‘Sire de Glanville’ accompanied William the Conqueror in his conquest of England in 1066, and his descendant or relation, probably a son, Robert de Glanville was well rewarded with 18 lands in Suffolk and one in Norfolk, as an undertenant of tenant-in-chief, Robert Malet, as shown in the Domesday Book of 1086.
The Malets and de Glanvilles held ancestral lands in the same area of Normandy, and would have had a long-standing close association.
A later descendant, Rannulf de Glanville, Chief Justiciar of England under Henry II, and son of Hervey de Glanville, held a very close relationship to the Walter family, and researchers attribute the rise of the Walter family to this close relationship.
Rannulf held the most powerful position in England, and was one of Henry’s closest advisors, so much so that he entrusted the education of his son Prince John to Rannulf. Rannulf was also entrusted with the education of his nephews Theobald Walter and, in particular, Hubert Walter. Hubert would work closely with Rannulf learning about the law, and in turn would be appointed Chief Justiciar by Richard I, as well as being elected Archbishop of Canterbury and Papal Legate, making him even more powerful than his uncle had been, as Richard was rarely in the country and the running of the country was left in the hands of Hubert. Theobald developed a close association with Prince John, probably when John was part of the de Glanville household. He and Rannulf accompanied John to Ireland in 1185, being richly rewarded, and Theobald would witness many of John’s charters indicating he was frequently part of his entourage. Charters indicate he was John’s personal butler before he was granted the hereditary title of Butler of Ireland. When John succeeded to the throne, he would appoint Hubert Walter as his Chancellor.
It is well established that Rannulf and Hervey Walter’s wives were sisters, daughters of Theobald de Valoines of Parham in County Suffolk. However, some researchers have questioned the degree of closeness of that relationship, whether just marital or also biological.
We need to explore the available records to see if this theory is plausible, although it must be acknowledged that it is not possible to prove it beyond doubt due to minimal records during this period of time.
Pollock and Maitland in their “History of English Law Before the Time of Edward I”, (v.1, p.162, 1898, 1903), summarized Ranulf de Glanville’s life:
Ranulf de Glanvill came of a family which ever since the Conquest, held lands in Suffolk; it was not among the wealthiest or most powerful of the Norman houses, but was neither poor nor insignificant. Probably for some time before 1163 when he was made sheriff of Yorkshire, he had been in the king’s service. The shrievalty of Yorkshire was an office that Henry would not have bestowed upon an untried man; Glanville held it for seven years. In 1174, being then sheriff of Lancashire and custodian of the honour of Richmond, he did a signal service to the king and the kingdom. At a critical moment he surprised the invading Scots near Alnwick, defeated them and captured their king. From that time forward, he was a prominent man, high in the king’s favour, a man to be employed as general, ambassador, judge and sheriff. In 1180 he became chief justiciar of England, prime minister, we may say, and viceroy. Henry seems to have trusted him thoroughly and to have found in him the ablest and most faithful of servants. Henry’s friends had of necessity been Richard’s enemies, and when Henry died, Richard, it would seem, hardly knew what to do with Glanville; he decided that the old statesman should go with him on the crusade. To Acre, Glanvill went, and there, in the early autumn of 1190, he died of sickness.
Historian, Richard Mortimer, authored an article on “The Family of Rannulf de Glanville” (an ‘academia.edu’ article, Vol. LIV No 129, May 1981), in which he wrote:
‘The family of Rannulf de Glanville are an example of a ‘new’ family advancing in the service of Henry II and his sons…. Various attempts have been made to reconstruct the Glanville family. Rannulf was not a member of the senior branch. As is now known, his father was Hervey de Glanville, one of the heroes of the siege of Lisbon on the Second Crusade and a respected worthy of the county court.
Rannulf, the son of Hervey de Glanville (senior), was married to Bertha de Valoines, sister to Hervey Walter’s wife, Matilda/Maud de Valoines, daughters of Theobald de Valoines Lord of Parham in Suffolk, (variously spelt Valeines, Valoignes- not to be confused with Peter de Valognes sheriff of Essex, a Norman noble who became a great landowner of lands in six counties following the Conquest), making Rannulf de Glanville and Hervey Walter brothers-in-law. Hervey Walter’s son Theobald was obviously named after his maternal grandfather. And Hervey’s fourth son Hamo(n) was probably named after his wife Maud’s grandfather Hamo(n) de Valoines. Theobald de Valoines was the son of Hamo de Valoines who held Parham and several other lands in Suffolk and Norfolk from Count Alan of Brittany, in the Domesday Book. Theobald de Valoines and his brother Robert filius Hamo paid fines for a breach of the peace, listed in the Pipe Roll of Henry I (1130). The extended de Glanville, de Valoines and Walter families held a close familial relationship as evidenced by their appearance as witnesses to each other’s foundation and donation charters to various monastic orders.
As mentioned, Theobald Walter and his brother Hubert Walter, sons of Hervey Walter, were brought up in the de Glanville household where they were given their education. Hubert as dean of York, in his foundation charter to the Abbey of West Dereham in 1188, dedicated it for the salvation of the souls of his family and ‘my lord Ranulf de Glanville and Bertha his wife who nourished us’.
In a second charter, Hubert as Bishop of Salisbury circa late 1189 to early 1190, assigned the revenues from the chapel of St Laurence, Reading, to the hospital there for the support of thirteen poor persons. In this charter he makes a dedication: ‘for the souls of our ancestors and our successors as well, and for the souls of lord Rannulf de Glanville and lady Berthe his wife who educated us’. Witnesses included Theobald Walter and Bartholomew his brother (‘Teodeb[aldo] Gauteri et Bartholomeo fratre eius’). (University of Toronto- Deeds: Documents of Early English data Set, Charter document-0010020- http://deeds.library.utoronto.ca/charters/00100203 -Reading Abbey Cartularies, ed B.R. Kemp Camden Fourth Series, V.31,33, Offices of Royal Historical Society, London 1986-87)
It is possible that the youngest son of Hervey Walter, named Bartholomew, may have been named after the eldest son and heir of William de Glanville (elder brother of Hervey de Glanville). Similarly, third son Roger Walter may have been named after William and Hervey’s younger brother Roger de Glanville.
Unfortunately, Hubert’s dedications do not clarify whether his father Hervey Walter and Rannulf were brothers or just brothers-in-law. But the specific dedications do emphasise the closeness of their family relationship.
Theobald Walter’s Charter to Cockersand Abbey in Lancaster in 1194-99, described Ranulf de Glanville as ‘our dear Ranulf’, which again is ambiguous about their relationship.
Grant in frankalmoign by Theobald Walter for the health of the souls of King Henry II, King Richard, his son John, count of Mortain, our dear Ranulf de Glanville (‘Rannulfi de Glanvilla cari nostri’), Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury our brother, Hervey Walter my father, Maud de ‘Wal’ my mother. (‘The Chartulary of Cockersand Abbey’, vol. II, Transc. & Ed. By William Farrer, 1898, pp.375-376)
Similarly in another of Theobald’s charters, a benefaction to Furness Abbey in Lancashire made in Richard’s time, after acknowledging the health of the souls of Henry King of England, and King Richard his son and John Count of Mortain, he also grants “for the soul of Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury my brother, and for the soul of my dear Rannulf de Glanville, and the soul of Hervey Walter my father, and for the soul of Matildis de Valoines my mother, and for the soul of my wife Matildis and our friends and ancestors and my successors”, etc.
‘..et pro anima domini mei H. regis Anglie, et Ricardi regis filii ejus, et pro salute domini mei Johannis comitis Moreton et domini Hibernie, et pro salute H.fratris mei Cantuar' archiepiscopi, et pro anima cari mei Ranulphi de Glanville, et pro anima Hervei Walter patris mei, et pro anima Matildis de Valoines matris mee, et pro salute anime mee, et pro salute Matildis sponse mee,..' .(Thomas Carte, The Life of James Duke of Ormond, 1851, v.1, p.xlii)
The de Glanville, the de Valoine, and it would appear the Walter families all originated in County Suffolk, and held ancestral lands in that county dating back to the Domesday survey.
In the ‘Chronicle of Jocelyn of Brakelond’ (a monk at the abbey of Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk in the mid to late 1100’s- p.122), Jocelyn recounts a dispute between the abbot of St Edmund’s and Hubert Walter Archbishop of Canterbury in 1198: ‘However, these and other altercations being brought to a close, the legate (Hubert) began to flush in the face, upon the abbot lowering his tone and beseeching him that he would deal more gently with the church of St Edmund, by reason of his native soil, for he was native born of St Edmund, and had been his fosterling. And, indeed, he had reason to blush, because he had so unadvisedly outpoured the venom which he had bred within him’, which appears to indicate that Hubert was born in County Suffolk and that it was his family’s native county. (Hubert was papal legate in England 1195 until 1198)
Theobald Walter held a large estate in Suffolk and Norfolk- in the sheriff’s returns in the Pipe Roll, 1 John (1200) for Norfolk & Suffolk, he is mentioned ‘in capite’ (ie. tenant-in-chief, held directly from the Crown) in the following entry, ‘Theobaldus Walterus reddit compotum de lxxvil. et xiiis. et iiiid.’ (£76.13s.4d.)
As a comparison, Theobald Walter’s grant confirmation of 1194 from Richard I of the whole of Amounderness in Lancashire, was held by the service of three Knight’s fees which were included in the scutage of £73.6s.8d of Knights of the Honour of Lancashire in 1189-1190. (Letters from Theobald Blake Butler to Lord Dunboyne, Butler Society, p.74 - ref. Carte’s Introduction to Life of Ormond, p.xlviii)
The lands held by families are the core of all research on the ancestral origins of these families.
Herveius filius Herveii
Much speculation has resulted from the following entry, ‘Herveius filius Herveii’, and his relationship with Hamon Peche (Hamone peccatum), in the 1130/31 Pipe Roll for King Henry I, in the county of Suffolk:
‘The Great Roll of the Pipe for the 31st Year of the Reign of King Henry I’, New Edition with translation by Judith A. Green, Pipe Roll Society, London 2012, p.77-78:
SUFFOLK- New Pleas and New Agreements:
Translation in the same book by the editor, (p.78):
Suffolk- New Pleas and New Arrangements
Hervey son of Hervey renders account of 10 silver marks for his land of Hamo Peche.
In the treasury 40s. And he owes 7 silver marks.
As there were few named Hervey documented as living in Suffolk in 1130, it has been variously attributed to:
a) 1.Hervey Walter son of Hervey
b) 2.Hervey de Glanville (senior) and his son Hervey de Glanville (junior)
c) 3.An undocumented son of Hervey de Bourges (due to the reference in the suit to Hervey’s grandson Hamon Pecche by Hervey de Bourges’s daughter Isilia, and land held by the Pecche family inherited from Isilia’s father - Hervey de Bourges/Bituricensis held a substantial number of lands in Suffolk in the Domesday survey as tenant-in-chief)
d) 4.A fourth possibility suggested by a couple of researchers: Hervey (Walter) son of Hervey de Glanville (senior)
Thomas Carte, in his Introduction to his ‘The Life of the Duke of Ormond’, (1851, p.xxxix) also stated:
‘In the Pipe Roll commonly called 5 Stephen (1139-40) but certainly some years older, is this entry: ‘Herveus filius Hervei reddit compotum de decem marcis, ut haberet socum et sacum, in terra sua’.
Literal translation: Hervey son of Hervey is liable for ten marks in order to have soke and sake of his own land. (sake and soke- a lord’s jurisdictional right over the district attached to a manor with the right to receive fines and other dues; this included the exclusive right over the district to mill corn the mill being built and held by the lord as a means of extra income.)
Theobald Blake Butler in the ‘Letters from Theobald Blake Butler to Lord [Patrick] Dunboyne (released by the Butler Society and John Lord Dunboyne, p.81), also discusses Carte’s claim on this Pipe Roll entry:
‘In the oldest Pipe Roll, in the Sheriff’s return for Norfolk and Suffolk is the following entry: “Hervey fitzHervey paid £20 fine for erecting his lands into manors” (Carte v.1 Intro xxxiv). Note Mr Hunter* considers the date of this Pipe Roll to be 31st Henry I (1130-31). This entry appears in the same Pipe Roll as that concerning Hervey fitzHervey and Hamon Peche.’
However, on consulting this Pipe Roll of Henry I (1130), old and new editions, there is no evidence of a second entry as described by Carte and Blake Butler.
Joseph Hunter (*referred to above), in 1833, published the Pipe Roll originally attributed to King Stephen (1135-54), which Hunter, in his ‘Introduction’, deduces is actually that of Henry I (1130): ‘Magnum Rotulum Scaccarii, vel Magnum Rotulum Pipe de Anno Tricesimo- Primo Regni Henrici Primi (1130-31) Quem Plurimi Hactenus Laudarunt Pro Rotulo Quinti Anni Stephani Regis’, and again, in that early publication of Hunter’s, only the one reference to ‘Herveus filius Herve’ is found, so it is difficult pinpointing where Carte found this particular reference, although the wording appears to be genuine and similar to other entries in the rolls- in particular, it exactly matches the entry preceding Hervey’s (viz. ‘Avenel renders account of 10 silver marks that he might have soke and sake in his land’- ’Avenellus reddit compotum de x. m. argenti ut haberet Socam et Sacum in terra sua’), so the two entries may have been confused in transcription.
The ‘Pipe Roll for 5 Stephen’ referred to by Carte, was firstly published in the 17th century by Sir Simond’s d’Ewes who favoured a date for the document of the fifth year of Stephen’s reign, but Joseph Hunter made a compelling argument for dating this document to the fiscal year ending Michaelmas 1130, and published the Roll in 1833. The Pipe Roll Society subsequently reprinted Hunter’s Roll in 1929, providing a translation into modern English, republished in 2012. The Introduction (p.ix) explains: ‘The audit took place after Michaelmas, and we can see how the scribe occasionally incorporated information which had come to his attention.’ This probably refers to entries under the heading ‘New Pleas and New Arrangements’, such as ‘Hervey filius Hervey’s’ entry, which could date it to 1131, or later.
One could argue that this Pipe Roll entry of 1130/31 could possibly relate to Hervey de Glanville and his son Hervey, as well as to Hervey Walter and his father Hervey, which needs to be kept in mind as we explore further evidence.
The theory of the de Glanville- Walter family biological link
There have been suggestions in some websites, based on a genealogical reference book written in 1882 on the de Glanville family, ‘Records of the Anglo-Norman House of Glanville’**, by William U.S. Glanville-Richards, that Hervey, father of Hervey Walter, was Hervey de Glanville of County Suffolk, father of Rannulf de Glanville who was such an important influence on the elevation of this family.
(** It should be noted that, although Glanville-Richard’s research of this family has been thorough and detailed, much of the speculative genealogical links, particularly the family trees, and claimed ancestral origins and descents are incorrect, unsubstantiated, or very questionable, but the number of de Glanville family members researched and the referenced records quoted by Glanville-Richards are useful in trying to establish fact from conjecture.)
Glanville Richards refers to an earlier publication, ‘The Norman People: and their Existing Descendants in the British Dominions and the United States of America’ (London 1874) by an anonymous author, which appears to be the first genealogical publication to canvas the idea of a biological link between the Butlers/Walters and the de Glanvilles, but again, much of the information presented and the author’s conclusions are questionable and speculative, with no evidence referenced for the direct biological link with the de Glanvilles.
The anonymous author claimed that “Hervey Walter’s grandfather, Walter (‘de Glanville’) appears 1086 as owner of estates in Leyland, Lancashire (Domesday)”. The actual Domesday entry for Leyland has land held by ‘Gerard, Robert, Ranulph, Roger and Walter’. There is no reference to a ‘de Glanville’ holding this land, and the author’s suggestion is purely conjectural. However, it should also be noted incidentally that those named in Leyland held the same names found in the de Glanville family in the following generations which may have been the basis of his unsubstantiated conclusions.
The author of ‘Norman People’ also makes statements such as: ‘Hervey Walter is a witness as Hervey de Glanville, to Rannulf’s foundation charter to Butley Priory’; and, ‘Hervey Walter or de Glanville had relinquished his barony of Amounderness to his son Theobald before 1165; at which time, as Hervey de Glanville, he held one fee in Suffolk from the See of Ely.’
These claims will be further analyzed in detail later.
The de Glanville family timeline
The following is a timeline and brief summary of the charters and references found on the de Glanville family. Each will then be explored in detail.
De Glanville Family references
Battle of Hastings- Roll of Battle Abbey- ‘John Foxe’s Copy’
Sire de Glanville, one of ‘Commanders of the Archers du Val de Real and Bretheul and other places’
Gallia Christiana, xi, 60
Rainald de Glanville witnessed a charter in favour of Roger de Mowbray, also a commander of the archers
Robert de Glanville held 19 lands from Robert Malet (18 in Suffolk, 1 in Norfolk)
Foundation charter to Eye Priory in Suffolk by Robert Malet
Donation by Randulph de Glanville; charter witnessed by Hervey de Glanville (b.c.1080-82)
Foundation charter to Bromholme Priory on edge of village of Bacton, Norfolk by William de Glanville
William de Glanville born c.1080, elder brother of Hervey de Glanville
Act by King Henry I in favour of William de Glanville
Commanded that William shall have his sake and soke and warren of his manor of Bacton, Norfolk, and forbade that anyone shall cause him injury in this matter upon ‘my forfeit’
Act by Henry I, re mother of William de Glanville
King granted as an inheritance to William de Glanville, ‘his serjeant’, the office and land which belonged to his maternal uncle William de Salt les Dames, to be held with sac and soc, toll and team etc
William de Glanville
Witnessed a deed of Abbot William of St Benet of Hulme, Norfolk. William inherited Robert de Glanville’s land of Honing held from St Benet’s of Hulme
William de Glanville’s charter to Sainte-Trinite of Tiron in Normandy
Charter named his wife, Basilia, and two sons Bartholomew and Anselm
De Contemptu Mundi, written c.1135-38 by Henry archdeacon of Huntingdon
Rollcall of ‘powerful men now dead’- “William de Glanville my kinsman; his son Bartholomew has succeeded to his place”.
Bartholomew de Glanville on Abbey of St Benet Hulme’s list of knights 1134-1149
Roger de Glanville 2nd witness to charter in Eye Priory Cartulary
Eye Cart. No 346- Charter of Fulcher of Playford to monks of Eye
Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I, p.77-78
Herveius filius Hervei renders account for his land of Hamo Peche
Grant by Stephen Count of Mortain to Ernald Russo for land in Stradbroke, Suffolk
Witnessed by Hervey de Glanville
King Stephen confirmation charter to Blythburgh Priory
Witnessed by Hervey de Glanville
King Stephen’s confirmation charter to Eye Priory
Witnessed by Hervey de Glanville
King Stephen’s mandate to Hugh abbot of St Benet of Holme
Stephen ordered Abbot Hugh to allow Bartholomew de Glanville the liberties in his manor of Bacton in Norfolk as granted by King Henry to William his father
Manor of Thorpe Murieux Suffolk granted to Hervey de Glanville by Richard Bussell, Baron of Penwortham (Lancaster) for his homage and service
Hervey de Glanville granted it to daughter Gutha as marriage dower
Writ of Bishop Nigel of Ely
Addressed to ‘H. de Glanville and R. his son’ referring to a fee they hold of him, instructing Hervey and Rannulf to ‘restore to the monks of Ely Cathedral, lands they were possessing at Bawdsey, exempt from ties, and in a peaceful state’
Castle Acre Priory- charter by Hervey de Glanville
Hervey donates rent from a house at Bawdsey to Castle Acre Priory
Witnesses: Mabilia wife of Hervey de Glanville; Gorelmus; Osbert cleric; Osbert the priest
Castle Acre Priory- charter by Roger the Priest of Bawdsey
(Witness Ordingus Gorelmus- ref: ‘First Charter to St Edmund’s Bury, Suffolk’, in The American Historical Review, July 1897, v.2. No. 4, p.688 [JSTOR])
Roger donates rents to Hervey de Glanville snr and his chosen heir, with agreement of Roger’s son Osbert (the cleric)
Witnesses: Roger de Glanville.; Hubert his nephew; Alexander nephew to the same; Osbert the priest of Benhall (de Glanville property); Gorelmus (viz. ‘Ordingus Gorelmus’, 8th Abbott of St Edmunds in 1148-57- tutored King Stephen as a child)
Crusade to liberate Lisbon from the Moors
Contingent from Norfolk and Suffolk led by Hervey de Glanville snr; letter written by priest named ‘R’ (Roger of Bawdsey?) to Osbert of Bawdsey (his son) recounting events
Confirmation charter to Bromholme Priory by Bartholomew de Glanville
(Crawford Coll.; St Benet of Holme Register; Monasticon Ang. v, 63)
Witnesses: Hervey de Glanville and Ranulf his son; Roger de Glanville (and Robert his son?); William de Glanville; Osbert de Glanville, Reginald de Glanville.
(NB. in Monasticon Anglicanum, same witnesses with exclusion of “Robert his son”)
Shire Moot for Suffolk
Hervey de Glanville snr gives speech revealing age of 70+;
witnessed by Hervei filius Hervei and Robert de Glanville
Foundation Charter of Snape Priory by William Martel (steward to K. Stephen) and family
Witnessed by Hervey de Glanville and Rannulf his son
Confirmation charter by William Count of Boulogne and Mortain, son of King Stephen to the monks of Eye Priory (Eye Priory cartulary)
Witnessed by Rannulf de Glanville, indicating his father Hervey de Glanville was now deceased
Castle Acre Priory- charter by Roger de Glanville
Roger donates his Earsham tithes (Norfolk)
Witnesses: “Hervey de Glanville, William son of Flandina, Robert de Glanville my brothers”
Pipe Roll 8 Henry II
Rannulf de Glanville replaced Bertram de Bulmer as sheriff of Yorkshire
Yorkshire charter by Bertram de Bulmer (EYC, I, 252)
Witnesses: Rannulf de Glanville sheriff of Yorkshire; Hervey de Glanville (Jnr)
Pipe Rolls, Henry II
Bartholomew de Glanville and Robert de Valoines overseeing building works of Orford Castle in Suffolk; Custodian until his death in 1179; debts inherited by son Stephen de Glanville, and then by son William de Glanville in 1190 clearing his debts in 1203.
Red Book of the Exchequer- Cartae Baronum (A.D.1166)
Owing knight’s fees:
Hervey de Glanville (Jnr)- 1 knts fee to Bishop of Ely for land in Suffolk
Robert de Glanville 3 ½ fees to Hugh Bigod, Norfolk
Rannulf de Glanville 1 ½ fees to Hugh Bigod;
Roger de Glanville 1 fee to Hugh Bigod & 3 fees in Essex in right of his 1st wife Christine
William de Glanville 9 ½ fees to Honour of Eye
Bartholomew de Glanville 3 parts of a fee for village of Honing in Norfolk
Theobald Walter 1 fee for Amounderness
Pipe Rolls- (first appearance in Rolls)
1162- Rannulf de Glanville
1164- Hervey de Glanville (Jnr)- only appearance
1165- Bartholomew de Glanville
1175- Roger de Glanville
Charter by Roger de Glanville (after the death of Prior Mathew Cheney)
Agreement about the use of a fishery at Roughton (near Bromholme) confirming an existing agreement made with “Roger’s father (?) Robert de Glanville in the time of Prior Matthew”, confirmed by Hervey de Glanville (jnr)”
Marriage of Roger de Glanville
Roger de Glanville married 2ndly Countess Gundred widow of Hugh Bigod Earl of Norfolk/Suffolk (d.1177)
Rannulf de Glanville
Rannulf captures William the Lion, King of the Scots
Probably accompanied by nephew Theobald Walter
Charter to Rievaulx Abbey Yorkshire
Witnessed by Rannulf de Glanville sheriff of Yorkshire and ‘Osbert de Glanville his brother’;
and a second charter witnessed by Rannulf, Osbert and Gerard de Glanville (his brother)
Butley Priory foundation Charter by Rannulf de Glanville
Witnesses: Osbert cleric of Bawdsey, Ranulf of Bawdsey, Osbert de Glanville, Gerard de Glanville, Hervey de Glanville, Robert de Valoines, Radulph de Valoines & Savari de Valoines etc.
Butley Priory- donation charter by Hervey Walter
Witnesses: Stephen de Glanville, William de Glanville, Peter Walter, William de Glanville cleric, Rannulf of Bawdsey, and sons Hubert Walter and Roger and Hamon, William de Valoines, Theobald de Valoines (II), Robert de Valoines etc.
1176 to 1181
Pipe Rolls, Henry II
Roger de Glanville overseeing the building of the keep at Newcastle upon Tyne, Northumberland
Rannulf de Glanville
Appointed King’s Chief Justiciar
1177 and 1180’s
William de Glanville (son of ?)
Acting as one of King Henry II’s justiciars
Osbert de Glanville
Acting as one of the King’s justiciars
Confirmation charter by Rannulf de Glanville, Yorkshire (EYC,1 256)
Witnesses: Osbert de Glanville, William de Auberville (son-in-law), Gerard de Glanville, Hubert Walter, William filius Hervey,
Also, Theobald de Valoines, Stephen de Glanville, John de Glanville
Grant by Henry II to the nuns of St Mary’s, Wikes of lands of Crokesdlande (Nat. Arch. E 40/5268)
Witnessed by Rannulf de Glanville, Hugh de Cressy, Hubert Walter, Bartholomew and Roger de Glanville and Richard de Hastings
Charter of John de Birkine, Joan (Lenveise) his wife, Dionisia (Lenveise) wife of William de Glanville (possible son of Rannulf de Glanville)
John de Birkin b.c.1170 s.&h. of Adam de Birkin, hereditary sheriffs of Sherwood Forest (family tree in EYC, iii, 358)
William de Glanville (born c.1140s-50) and Roger Walter donated their farm to nuns of Watton in Yorkshire; William died before 1190 (possibly in 1185 Ireland), widow Dionisia remarried Hubert de Anstey.
1180-86- grant by Wm Fossard to nuns of Watton of land called Ghille’s land- witnesses: Rannulf de Glanville, Osbert de Glanville, Hubert Walter
John de Birkin possible cousin to Matilda le Vavasour wife of Theobald Walter
Roger de Glanville
Sheriff of Northumberland
Foundation charter to Leiston Abbey by Rannulf de Glanville
Confirmed by Roger de Glanville, Osbert and Gerard de Glanville, Hubert Walter
Witnesses: Roger de Glanville, Osbert de Glanville, Theobald Walter and Roger Walter
Charter to Leiston Abbey- by Roger de Glanville
Donating church of Middleton
For the souls of family including deceased wife, parents and ‘Hervey de Glanville my brother’
Confirmation by Robert de Creke and Agnes his wife of donation of Middleton Church by Roger de Glanville c. 1190-1221.
Death of King Henry II at Chinon
Rannulf de Glanville and Theobald Walter at death bed of King Henry II – witnessed Henry’s charter to Coverham Priory the day before his death at Chinon
3 Sept 1189
Coronation of Richard I
Attended by Rannulf de Glanville, Gerard de Glanville ‘his brother’, and Hubert Walter as Bishop of Salisbury
(Chronicle of Reigns of Henry II and Richard I, by Benedict of Peterborough, ed. Wm Stubbs, v.II, 1867, p.80- list of barons present
Rannulf de Glanville died at Acre on Crusade
Died of sickness
Roger de Glanville on Crusade
Conducted a daring reconnaissance before the gates of Jerusalem, taking some Sarazens prisoner
Roger de Glanville
Died in the Holy Land
Hubert Walter returns from Crusade and visiting King Richard in captivity
King Richard orders that Hubert Walter be elected Archbishop of Canterbury and appointed Chief Justiciar
Feet of Fines Co Norfolk
(Re Roger de Glanville’s land at Roughton Norfolk)
Agnes d/o William de Glanville, and 1st husband Thomas Bigod sue Robert de Glanville over land in Roughton- payment of 5 marks of silver- the defendant, Robert vouches to warranty Agnes, Thomas’ wife, whose inheritance that land is.
‘The Countess Gundred’s Lands’, and Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk
Roger de Glanville’s widow Countess Gundred begins actions for her ‘reasonable dower which falls to her ‘ex dono’ Roger de G., formerly her husband’. Claim against Robert de Creke and Agnes his wife- she claims dower from lands situated in Middleton, Yoxford and Roughton. Agnes is her uncle Roger de Glanville’s heir.
In a separate claim in 1209 re Geoffrey de Lodnes and wife Alice dau. of Hervey de Glanville, defendant asserts that Agnes wife of Robert de Creke was dau. and heir of William de Glanville.
Feet of Fines for Norfolk & Suffolk
(Re Roger de Glanville’s land at Middleton & Yoxford, Suffolk)
Robert de Glanville claims against Robert de Creke and Agnes his wife, tenants of Robert over 1 knts fee in Middleton, and Yoxford in Suffolk under recognition of ‘morte d’ancestor’ with Robert and Agnes paying Robert 20 silver marks to quit claim
Feet of Fines Norfolk & Suffolk
(Re Roger de Glanville’s land at Roughton, Norfolk)
Robert de Glanville claimed under recognition of ‘morte d’antecessors’ to land at Roughton, against William of Edgefield who called Earl Roger Bigod (son of Countess Gundred and Hugh Bigod) to warrant. Robert quit claims to the Earl who pays 40 marks of silver
Priory of St Osithe de Chich in Essex, by Bartholomew son of Robert de Creke and Agnes
Dedicated to the ‘soul of Hervey de Glanville, his mother’s (viz. Agnes’) grandfather’
(viz. Agnes d/o William de Glanville, son of Hervey de Glanville)
Charter to Leiston Abbey by William son of Alan (No.102)
Witnessed by William de Glanville and Walter his son (descendants of Adam de Glanville, desc of William de Glanville the elder)
Early 14th century
Rent Roll of Butley Priory
Rent Roll acknowledges Rannulf de Glanville, his brother Hervey de Glanville, his sister Gutha de Glanville, and two brothers Roger de Glanville and Osbert de Glanville, in 3 charters of Leiston
THE DE GLANVILLE ANCESTRY:
Glanville is in the district of Pont-l'Évêque in the Calvados department of Normandy, between Le Havre and Caen, which would explain the close association between the de Glanvilles and the Malets (of Graville Sainte Honorine in Le Havre) and the de Caens, and Hubert de Montecanisy of Deauville, and William (de Beaufour) Bishop of Thetford, as shown in the Domesday Book.
see towns marked * on the map of Normandy
It would appear the first of the de Glanville family to arrive in England was named Rainald de Glanville.
Mid-11th century records name a Rainald de Glanville, and ‘Le Sire de Glanville, and it is unknown whether they were one and the same. There is also evidence of a William de Glanville, Dean and Archdeacon of Liseaux, Normandy 1077 (Histoire Littéraire de la France).
‘Le Sire de Glanville’ was one of the’ Commanders of the Archers du Val de Real and Bretheul’ at the Battle of Hastings, who was listed in the Roll of Battle Abbey, in John Foxe’s ‘Book of Martyrs’ (also known as ‘The Actes and Monuments’ published in 1563).
The Roll of Battle Abbey; John Foxe’s Copy (‘English Surnames: An Essay on Family Nomenclature, etc’ by Mark Antony Lower, Vol.II, London, 1849: p.185):
Rainald de Glanville, about 1066, witnessed a charter in favour of Roger de Mowbray (Gallia Christiana, xi, 60):
The charter entry translates:
Roger de Molbray gave St Trinitatis land that he had in Grainville, for his daughter, a nun there.
Witnesses Drogo of St Vigore and Rainaldus de Glanville.
As this charter was dated 1066, the year of the Conquest, it is likely that the witness ‘Rainaldus de Glanville’ is the same ‘Sire de Glanville’ at the Conquest (as is ‘Sire de Mombray’ viz. Roger de Molbray/Mowbray, in the same list by Foxe).
De Glanville in the Domesday Book
A Robert de Glanville held eighteen lands in Suffolk and one in Norfolk in the Domesday survey of 1086, as an undertenant of tenant-in-chief Robert Malet.
Map of Robert de Glanville’s lands in Suffolk (marked red dot) (NB. plus one land in Norfolk, named Honing):
Domesday lands held by Robert de Glanville, sub-tenant of Robert Malet, in Suffolk:
Of these lands, several were inherited by William de Glanville father of Bartholomew who confirmed the donation of tithes from Dallinghoo, Hollesley, Honing, Horham, Burgh and Aldeton to Bromholme Priory.
A William de Glanville was listed as donating the church of Bredfield to Butley Priory, in the 14th Century Butley Priory Rent Roll dating back to the original donations in the 12th century.
William de Glanville was obviously the elder heir, and his descendants became the senior line.
Hervey de Glanville, brother of William de Glanville, inherited Bawdsey and Great Glemham, and his son Rannulf de Glanville held Benhall (the tithes of which he granted to Butley Priory), although historian Vivien Browne in her Eye Priory Cartulary, Pt II (p.61), comments that a record of descent of the advowson of Butley priory states that the founder Rannulf de Glanville was given the manor of Benhall by Henry II (or was it just confirmed?), and that it passed on his death to the eldest of his daughters, Maud, who married William d’Auberville, and thence to their son Hugh. Notably, a charter to Castle Acre Priory dated c.1147 of Roger Priest of Bawdsey, of rents of his house given to Hervey de Glanville ‘My lord’, one of the witnesses was Osbert Priest of Benhall, indicating a family link before Rannulf was given the manor by Henry.
It should also be noted that Hervey Walter held the fee of Wingfield (and ‘Sikebro’, possibly Stradbroke/Stetebroc) the tithes of which he granted to Butley Priory.
Robert the crossbowman or ‘Rob arbat’ (Roberto Arbalistarius)
It would also appear that Robert de Glanville may also be listed in Domesday as Robert the Crossbowman, which would make sense given that the Sire de Glanville was a commander of the archers at the Conquest. Robert de Glanville held 18 lands in Suffolk, yet only one in Norfolk, ie. Honing, all held from Robert Malet. Honing was originally held by Eadric of Laxfield who held from the Abbey of St Benet of Hulme, and Robert Malet then held it from the Abbey. Robert de Glanville's heir William de Glanville also held Honing from the Abbey of St Benet of Hulme.
The adjacent land to Honing, ie. Worstead, was held by Robert the Crossbowman from St Benet of Hulme who used it for victualling the monks. The coincidence of these two men named Robert holding adjacent lands in Norfolk from St Benet of Hulme is notable, especially given that Honing was the only manor held by de Glanville in Norfolk.
Map showing close proximity of Honing to Worstead in Norfolk:
On checking his Domesday entries, Robert the crossbowman held ‘Appethorp’ (unidentified) in the Hundred of Forehoe in Norfolk as tenant-in-chief; as well as Worstead (Norfolk) from St Benets; and [Great & Little] Finborough in Hundred of Stowmarket in Suffolk held from Roger d’Auberville:
‘Domesday Book A Complete Translation’ (p.1301):
Encroachments on the King: Hundred of Stow- In [Great & Little] Finborough 1 freeman over whom Roger [d’Auberville]’s predecessor had half the commendation and Eustace the other half of the commendation. Afterwards the Count of Mortain held him but Roger held him when he left the land and Robert the crossbowman under him. Now Roger Bigod holds him in the king’s hand until it be adjudged. He has 15 acres of land. Then half a plough, now none. It is worth 3s.
(p.1271): In [Great & Little] Finborough, Leofsunu, a freeman under the commendation only of Guthmund, Hugh de Montfort’s predecessor, held 2 carucates of land. Now Roger d’Auberveille holds it… Then it was worth £4, afterwards £2, and now 60s. In the same manor 18 free men under commendation only to the same Leofsunu held 1 carucate of land in the soke of the king and the earl… Roger d’Auberville holds all of these freemen through exchange etc.
(also refer to ‘Domesday Book and the Law’, by Robin Fleming, Nos. 3209, 3041)
Finborough/Finburgh was land held by Rannulf de Glanville which he granted to his daughters Amabila and Helewise, along with Bawdsey (held by Robert de Glanville in Domesday). At first glance, it would seem to indicate that Finborough was ancestral land, like Bawdsey, although in this case, inherited from Robert the Crossbowman (held from Roger d’Auberville). However, the Domesday entry for Finsborough indicates that Robert held a freeman with only 15 acres, which would seem to be too unimportant to be inheritable. However, Robert may have acquired, or been granted the adjoining lands of 2 carucates held by Roger d’Auberville who held considerable lands in several counties.
There would also be a long association between the d’Auberville family and the de Glanville family through a marriage of Rannulf’s eldest daughter Maud to William the son and heir of William d’Auberville who also witnessed several charters of Rannulf, but notably, Maud and her husband did not inherit Finburgh from her father, so the land did not come to her from her husband’s Auberville ancestors.
The land of Appethorpe in the Hundred of Forehoe in Norfolk (between Norwich and East Dereham) is not identified, but had a recorded population of 22.8 households in 1086 and is listed under two tenants-in-chief, Count Alan of Brittany (annual value 5s.), and Robert the Crossbowman (annual value 32s.).
The land of Appethorpe held by Robert the Crossbowman as tenant-in-chief:
In “Appethorpe”, Aelfhere, a freeman, held 1 carucate and 30 acres of land TRE for a manor. Then there were 2 villans; now 4. And there are 15 sokemen. There have always been 3 ploughs. There is woodland for 15 pigs. And 4 acres of meadow. Now there are 6 pigs, 20 sheep, 20 goats. Then it was worth 20s; now 32s. And it is 4 furlongs in length and 2 in breadth. And it renders 5d. of the geld.
So, it was a substantial grant.
Alan of Brittany’s entry for lands in this area has:
Costessey held by Gyrth TRE, 4 carucates of land. To this manor is one berewick, Bawburgh of 2 carucates. In Honingham Thorpe there is 1 carucate, a berewick of this manor, etc.
In Marlingford 16 acres of land. In ‘Tokethorp’, Musard holds 30 acres [from Alan] which belong to the same manor etc
MIDFORD HUNDRED (to the west of Forehoe Hundred, between Honingham and East Tuddenham)
‘In [East] Tuddenham there were 10 sokemen of Gyrth’s in Costessey TRE with 42 acres of land and they are in the valuation of Costessey. In “Appetorp” there is 1 sokeman of Gyrth’s with 30 acres of land. This is in the same valuation.’
Presumably, Appethorpe and Appetorp refer to the same vill. (ref: Domesday Book: A Complete Translation, ed. Dr. A Williams, Prof. G.H. Martin, 1992, pp. 1078, 1176)
As to the location, the other lands held by Count Alan of Brittany in this same area of Forehoe indicates that ‘Appetorp’ was located between East Tuddenham and Costessey, most likely near Honingham.
In the same location, Honingham, Honingham Thorpe, Marlingford and ‘Toketorp’/Tochestorp belonging to the same manor as Marlingford, Easton, Taverham, Bawburgh and Barford, were all held by Alan of Brittany. Notably, Robert the bowman’s land of ‘Appethorpe’, which he held as tenant-in-chief, is listed in Forehoe Hundred, not Midford Hundred, so the land of Appethorpe must have straddled the two Hundreds between East Tuddenham and Honingham.
Bowthorpe was held by King William. Colton held by William of Warenne (later held by Peter Walter through his wife’s marriage portion).
Colney partly held by ‘Walter’ from Godric the Steward (19 freemen and 2 small holders with 4 plough teams, valued at £2 p.a.)- also I freeman of ‘Toketorp’, value 5s., also held by ‘Walter’ from Godric.
Notably, there were only nine crossbowmen named in the Domesday Book. All held a considerable number of lands as tenants-in-chief, indicating high rank in the Norman social order. As this Robert only held one land as tenant-in-chief, it lends to the argument that he held more lands as Robert de Glanville. There are several examples of land holders recorded differently by different clerics (eg. Walter de Caen als. Walter fitzAubrey als. Walter).
If Robert de Glanville was also Robert the crossbowman, then that could provide a close link with Walter the crossbowman who held lands near and part of Eye, and was a donor and witness to Robert Malet’s charter to Eye; he was possibly the ‘Walter’ who held the lands of Wingfield, Stradbroke (also held by Robert de Glanville) and Weybread/Instead, later held by Hervey Walter- more detail on these landholders in the blog chapter on the Walters (Part 2).
However, this theory of the identity of Robert the Crossbowman remains speculation.
Robert de Glanville’s heirs
Determining the relationship between Robert de Glanville, and William and Hervey de Glanville, is difficult due to lack of records. Historian Richard Mortimer wrote: “The history of 12th century families is complex and obscure. Partly the problem is one of basic facts, or finding the evidence to establish relationships; the complexity stems from the double link of each generation, with the father’s family and with the mother’s, meaning that the outlines of the group are constantly changing. The difficulty arises in deciding which particular relationships mattered to the individuals concerned. Various attempts have been made to reconstruct the Glanville family. The senior branch, tenants of the honour of Eye, of the abbey of St Benet at Holme and of the Warenne fee in Norfolk and Suffolk, has been known for many years (ie. the descendants of William).” (Richard Mortimer, “The Family of Rannulf de Glanville” article- Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, Vol. LIV, No. 129, May 1981)
We know that Robert de Glanville must have been born pre-1065, probably in the 1040-50’s. His lands were inherited by the following de Glanvilles, but their relationship to Robert is uncertain.
William de Glanville made a charter to Bromholme Priory in Norfolk c.1113, died c.1135, and was the elder brother of Hervey. He also appeared to be favoured by Henry I (1100-1135). Inherited the bulk of Robert de Glanville's lands.
Hervey de Glanville witnessed Robert Malet’s Charter to Eye Priory in Suffolk c.1103-05, and he himself declared in a speech in c.1150-53 that he was at least 70 years of age, therefore born c.1080-1083. Inherited some of Robert's lands.
Roger de Glanville witnessed a document in the 1125-35 period and two documents in the late 1140’s, and appears to have died shortly after. He witnessed the confirmation charter of Fulcher son of Humphrey filius Robert (a favoured sub-tenant of Robert Malet in Domesday) in 1125-35; he witnessed William’s son Bartholomew de Glanville’s confirmation charter to Bromholme Priory circa mid-1140’s to 1150, in which, one copy (The Crawford Collection) named his son as Robert (not named in the Monasticon Anglocanum copy); and he witnessed the charter of Roger the Priest of Bawdsey to Castle Acre Priory c.1147 in which Roger the priest donated his house rents to Hervey de Glanville to give to the Priory. In that witness list, ‘Hubert’ is named as Roger de Glanville’s nephew. Nothing else is known about this Roger, and it is difficult sorting his relationship to the later Roger de Glanville and distinguishing their respective records.
Given the age disparity, it is probable that Robert de Glanville (of Domesday) was either the father, or an uncle, of William, Hervey and Roger.
Hervey de Glanville, in his speech in c.1150-53, also claimed that he ‘was a very old man, having constantly attended the County and Hundred Court for above fifty years with his father, before and after he was knighted’, indicating that his father was alive ‘before and after he was knighted’ which would have occurred c.1100-02, and therefore born c.1080-83.
Several historians claim that William and Hervey had other brothers named Walter and Robert, but there is no clear evidence of their existence.
Robert Malet’s foundation charter to Eye Priory c.1103-05 names Rannulphus de Glanvillis granting his tithe of Yaxley/Jakesleyam hospice in Suffolk (notably Hubert de MonteCanisy also donated his hospice at Yaxley, presumably the same hospice) and the charter was witnessed by Herveus de Glanvill’, which would seem to confirm the close relationship between Rannulph and Hervey and would explain Hervey’s son’s name of Rannulf. However, placing this Rannulphus in the family tree, and his relationship to Robert de Glanville, is difficult.
Rannulphus de Glanville did not hold any lands in Domesday (unless only by the name of ‘Rannulphus’, of which name, 94 lands were held throughout England). Whether this Rannulphus was also a son of Rainald de Glanville, and a brother of Robert de Glanville, is unknown speculation. It is also possible that Rannulphus was the son and heir of Robert de Glanville, and Rannulphus' sons, William and Hervey, inherited in turn.
Notably, Rannulphus did not hold Yaxley in Domesday so he must have acquired a stake in the ‘hospice’, post Domesday. Yaxley was partly held by Hubert de MonteCanisy and Robert Malet’s mother from Robert Malet, and partly by William Beaufour Bishop of Thetford (who died in 1091). The ancestral area of MonteCanisy in Normandy was only about 10 kms north of the de Glanville ancestral lands in Glanville (see map above), and also close to the Beaufour family lands, so there would have been an historical ancestral connection between these families.
The exact translation of the Eye charter donations:
Hubert de MonteCanisy gave to God and St Peter his land at Yaxley, his lodging/hospice (‘hospitium’) since his tenure.
Ranulphus de Glanvillis offered on the altar of St Peter the lodging/hospice (‘hospitium’) which he had at Yaxley.
Notably, Yaxley was located about 2 kms west of Eye.
The mother of William de Glanville and Hervey de Glanville
The following entry in ‘Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum 1066-1154’, (Vol II, eds. Charles Johnson and H.A. Cronne, Oxford, 1956, p.276, no.1835) dated c.1131-33, reveals the ‘surname’ of the mother of William de Glanville (and therefore of Hervey de Glanville):
(Also repeated in ‘An Outline Itinerary of Henry I’, by William Farrer, p.128)
William de Salt les Dames is thought to be the son and heir of Roger de Salt Les Dames or Rogerus Deus Salvæt Dominas- also translated as ‘Roger God-Save-Ladies’, a Norman holding three lands in Essex in 1086 as tenant-in-chief – ie. Felsted (hundred of Hinkford), [Great] Baddow (hundred of Chelmsford) and Rivenhall (hundred of Witham) in Essex. The entry does not reveal how William de Glanville was nephew to William de Salt les Dames, but he was described as ‘avunculi sui’- the Latin word for a maternal uncle is ‘avunculus’, a mother’s brother; as distinguished from ‘patruus’, a father’s brother or paternal uncle. Hence William de Glanville’s mother must have been sister to William de Salt les Dames, and therefore probably the issue of Roger de Salt Les Dames. She is not named in the record.
The interesting reference is the translation of the description of William de Glanville as King Henry’s ‘sergeant’, and the Latin document of the same confirmation (below) states ‘serviento meo’.
A ‘King’s sergeant’ was a Serjeant-at-Law, a legal advisor to the monarch, whereas ‘a ‘serjeanty’, from the Latin ‘serviens’, was, in feudal law, a form of land tenure granted in return for the performance of a specific service to the lord, whether the king or another. Those bringing their holders into immediate contact with the sovereign acquired prestige and became known as grand sergeanties, a tenure so noble that it ranked socially above knight service’. (www. britannica.com/topic/sergeanty)
Another entry in the Calendar of Charter Rolls- Henry III 1226-1257 (PRO, London 1903, Volume 1, p.422)- in the year 1253, the ‘Inspeximus’ (ie. a charter quoting from an earlier charter) written in Latin, confirming a charter made in the reign of King Henry I (witnessed by Henry’s steward, William Martel at Windsor), in which William de Salt Les Dames is named as the maternal uncle (avunculi sui) of William de Glanville:
Translated by J. Horace Round:
Henry King of England, to his justices, barons, sheriffs and all his ministers and faithful people, French and English, in Essex, greeting.
You are to know that I have rendered and granted in hereditary right to my serjeant William de Glanville, the bailiwick and land which pertained to his maternal uncle William de Salt les dames. I therefore wish, and firmly command, that they and their heirs may hold that land well and in peace, and freely and quietly, in woodland and in plains, and meadows and pastures, and waters and ponds, and ways and paths, with soc and sac, and toll and team, and infangethef, and with all liberties, acquittances and things which pertain to that land, with which the aforesaid William ever held them best and most freely. Witnesses: Ingelram de Say, William Martel, Goher de Alnet and Robert Avenell at Windsor.
Dated September in the 29th year of Henry I (1129-1130) in Farrer’s “Outline Itinerary of King Henry the First”.
Dr. Katherine Keats-Rohan included Roger Deus Salvæt Dominas in her ‘Domesday People: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166’ (1999):
The exact relationship between William de Glanville and the Adam de Glanville (son of Nicholas, son of ?) named in the confirmation charter in 1235 is unclear, given the original charter was over 100 years earlier and about 3 generations apart. Whether they descended from William de Glanville’s second son Anselm, of whom nothing is known, or from a fourth unknown son of William’s eldest son Bartholomew de Glanville, is unclear.
An Adam de Glanville, according to Glanville-Richards ('Records of the Anglo-norman House of Glanville', p.63) and Francis Blomefield (Top. Hist of Norfolk, v.8, pp.452-459), in the 30th of King Henry II, 1184, was in company of John Bishop of Norwich, acting in the responsible capacity of King’s justice, on a trial in which a fine was levied between Mathew de Gourney and Rose his wife, and Philip de Burnham of the Manor of Harpley.
No more is known of this Adam.
(Also note that Glanville-Richards erroneously assigns Adam as a son of Hervey not William de Glanville.)
1210-12, in Essex, Nicholas Marscallus held by sergeant, custody of the king’s palfreys (Red Bk of Excheq, ii, 506; marscallus means marshall)
NB. In the index of the Red Book of the Exchequer, only two serjeanties in Essex, solely for custody of the king’s palfreys, one in Felsted and the other in Baddow. Several named ‘Marscallus’ held in Baddow ‘by serjeanty, custody of one palfrey of the king’ in late 12th early to mid-13th century, the earliest named Roger 1086, and Radolphus 1198- unknown if related.
1219, Adam son of Nicholas held 15 acres in Felsted by sergeanty, custody of one palfrey of the king (Testa de Nevill, I, 275)
1235, Adam de Glanville held 60 acres in the hundred of Hinkford (ie. Felsted) by sergeant, custody of one palfrey of the lord king (ibid, ii,1360)
1235, Inspectimus and confirmation on behalf of Adam de Glanville, heir of William de Glanville (Cal. Charter Rolls, 1, 422)
1259, William de Glanville son and heir of Adam de Glanville made homage for all the land which Adam held of the king in Felsted (“Cura Caroli Roberts”, 2, 295)
(ref: ‘The Glanvilles and Roger God-save-The-Ladies’, by F.N. Craig, pp.200-204, The American Genealogist Vol. 71. No 4 Oct 1996)
Adam de Glanville made a donation charter to Leiston Abbey c.1200.
Adam de Glanville held lands in the county of Essex, of the King in capite; the property was called Glanville’s Laver, and situated in Felsted (originally held by Roger de Salt Les Dames in Domesday as tenant-in-chief), Little Leighs and Great and Little Waltham (partly held by a ‘Roger’ from Geoffrey de Mandeville in Domesday, presumably Roger de Salt Les Dames). These lands were held by the serjeanty of keeping a palfrey in the King’s stable, and valued at 100s. yearly. This service was afterwards changed into a payment of 11s.6d. per annum. Adam was succeeded by his son William who held this lordship in 1259. Sir Walter de Glanville succeeded to these lands on the death of his father William, and held in the vill of Felsted, and d.c.1329.
Caution must be taken about accepting any claimed ancestry beyond what can be established by documentation.
THE ELDEST HEIR OF ROBERT DE GLANVILLE- WILLIAM DE GLANVILLE, BARON DE BROMHOLME AND BACTON, CO. NORFOLK
William de Glanville (b.c.1080 d. bef.1138*), heir of Robert de Glanville, founded and endowed Bromholme Priory c.1113, on the edge of the village of Bacton in Norfolk granted to William de Glanville by Henry I.
Upon its completion, it was made subordinate to the Cluniac house of Castle Acre.
*Sharpe and Doherty (below) wrote that, ‘William was clearly dead by 1138, perhaps by 1135. He witnessed a deed of Abbot William of St Benet Home 1127-1134 (J.R. West, Cartulary St Benet of Holme, 74-5, no. 130). His son Bartholomew has taken his place on a list of the abbey’s knights 1134-1149 (Monasticon Anglicanum, iii, 89; Cartl. St Benet of Holme, 34-5, no. 66)
Richard Sharpe (Oxford University) and Hugh Doherty (University of East Anglia) in an article “William de Glanville” in ‘Charters of William II and Henry I Project’ (2014- online):
‘In a passage found only in the earliest version of ‘De Contemptu mundi’ written around 1135-38, William de Glanvill is described by Henry of Huntingdon as his kinsman (consanguineous).’
(Henry, c.1088-1157, was archdeacon of Huntingdon having succeeded his father Nicholas who was canon of Lincoln Diocese for 30 years until his death in 1110; mother unknown but probably English; Henry wrote the ‘History of England’/’Historia Anglorum’ from 43A.D. to the succession of Henry II.)
The passage occurs at the end of a rollcall of ‘powerful men now dead’. The Latin text is transcribed:
I (Henry) pass over that venerable and most devout man of illustrious memory William de Glanvill, my kinsman, who was so enthusiastic in his support of the monastic life that at God’s prompting he gave and granted all the churches of his barony to God and the church of St Andrew the Apostle and to the monks of Cluny who serve them. He also tithed most of his land for the salvation of his soul. Now, however, his son Bartholomew has succeeded to his place, the heir of his character and his honour, from whom by God’s graciousness we hope for good things and to whom also we wish good things.’
An act by King Henry I in favour of William de Glanville, instructing the sheriff and his officials that William shall have his judicial privileges and his warren in the manor of Bacton (Norfolk), is given an imprecise date of c.1106-c.1113 (after Malet’s death, and before Stephen gained the Honour of Eye), translated by Sharpe and Doherty:
‘[Henry king of the English to Ralph de Beaufeu (damaged)], and Ralph Passelew and his officials of Norfolk greeting. I command that William de Glanville shall have his sake and soke and warren in his manor of Bacton as justly and well and fully as Edric of Laxfield well had them. And I forbid that anyone shall cause him injury in this matter upon my forfeit. Witness Geoffrey fitzPain. At ‘Sualisham’ (?Aylsham).’
(Robert Malet succeeded to all of Eadric of Laxfield’s numerous lands held in Norfolk and Suffolk pre-Domesday.)
(Cartulary copies: Cambridge Uni. Lib. MS Mm. ii. 20, Bromholm Cartulary [s. xiv], fol. 1r)
Henry’s successor King Stephen subsequently mandated that Hugh abbot of St Benet of Holme allow Bartholomew de Glanville the liberties in his manor of Bacton as granted by K. Henry to Bartholomew’s father, dated 1146-50 (ie. Hugh’s tenure as abbot), suggesting a dispute:
William de Glanville’s son Bartholomew de Glanville made a confirmation charter to Bromholme Priory in which he confirmed the tithes of several lands granted by ‘patris meis Willm de Glavill’ including several lands held by Robert de Glanville in Domesday, viz, Honing in Norfolk, and Dallinghoo, Burgh, Horham and Alretuna/Aldeton in Suffolk.
In the Crawford Collection of Charters, Bartholomew’s Charter, in Latin, was witnessed by ‘Hervey de Glanville, Rannulf de Glanville his son, Roger de Glanville, Robert his son, William de Glanville, Osbert de Glanville, and Reginald de Glanville’, and Jordan de Sackville (Lord of Bergholt in Essex, son of Robert de Sackville, and Letitia)
Hervey was Bartholomew’s uncle. Roger de Glanville may have been William and Hervey’s brother of that name. As Rannulf was named as ‘Hervey’s son’, it infers that he was of age but quite young. William could have been Hervey’s eldest son (by a first marriage?). Osbert’s identity is questionable, given he was probably too young to be Hervey’s son of that name, and Reginald (als. Reinald) is unknown in any records.
It is notable that none of Bartholomew’s sons (Stephen, William and Geoffrey) were named as witnesses- it would seem that in c. 1140-1150 they were still underage.
(Crawford Collection of Early Charters and Documents, ed. A.S. Napier and W.H. Stevenson, Bodlein Library, Oxford, 1895, p.32; this is repeated in the Register of the abbey of St Benets of Holm, transcribed by J.R. West, i, No. 161).
The estimated date of the charter, c.1150, is possibly calculated on the age of Hervey de Glanville who probably died sometime in the mid to late 1150’s. Richard Mortimer had estimated the same charter in the ‘Register of the abbey of St Benet’s’ to the 1140’s. It should be noted that the dating of all charters and deeds is imprecise.
This charter is repeated in full in Monasticon Anglicanum, (v.5, p.63). The only difference in the list of witnesses, is the omission of “Robert his son” between Roger de Glanville and William de Glanville, which is curious and inexplainable:
According to an online website which does not reference the source, 'Bartoloms de Glavilla' confirmed grants to Bromholme monastery by ‘patris meis Willm de Glavill’, which also names ‘Rogeri avunculi mei’ (ie. maternal uncle, Roger of Bertune- Bertuna in Essex, near Clavering?) …. ‘dna (domina) Basil[ia] matre (mother) dni Bartholom, Matilde uxore (wife) dni, Leticia filia (daughter) ei’.
(NB. Bartholomew’s mother, wife and daughter are not named in the version of the charter in the Monasticon Anglicanum, v.5, Bromholm Priory charters, although his uncle Roger of Bertuna is listed as “avunculi mei Rogeri de Bertuna”; so maybe they are mentioned in the Bromholm Cartulary held by Cambridge Univ. Library, possibly fol.13v and 32v?; or in the Register of St Benet of Holme, I, no.161)
The wife of William de Glanville
In the above unsourced reference to Bartholomew’s grant to Bromholme, his mother is named Basilia.
This same source was probably used by historian Richard Mortimer (’Family of Rannulf de Glanville’) who stated:
“The women, as one would expect, are the least knowable part of the genealogy: wives and daughters one glimpses only very occasionally. We know that the justiciar’s (viz. Rannulf’s) mother was called Mabel (Castle Acre charter), Bartholomew’s mother Basilia (see below) and his wife Matilda, but we know nothing of their families.”
This was confirmed in the following charter. William de Glanville was a donor to the monks of Sainte-Trinité of Tiron, giving six ambres of salt himself and the services of some of his men, also paid in salt (Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, i, 164-5, no.139, ed. Lucien Merlet, Chartres 1883) dated by Merlet c.1130. The deed was witnessed by his sons Bartholomew and Anselm, his wife Basilia (uxoris mee), Richard chaplain to the count of Mortain (Stephen) and Alan chaplain to William himself, and others:
Beatrix de Sackville and Jordan de Sackeville
In contradiction of the charter in the Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, in which William de Glanville names his wife as Basilia, other sources including Arthur Collins (Peerage of England, v.2, 1748, p.261), and Sir Francis Palgrave (The Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth Anglo Saxon Period, Part II, Cambridge 1921, p.6) state that William de Glanville was married to Beatrix daughter of William de Sackville of Essex in the reign of Henry I. Palgrave qualifies the Sackville family tree by stating “the descent whereof has been thus [erroneously?] deduced by Collins, Morant and Edmondson, who follow an ancient pedigree in the College of Arms”. These historians, unfortunately, do not give a reference to the documentary source of this information on Beatrix’s marriage to de Glanville, apart from an ‘ancient pedigree’.
Whether the names ‘Basilia’ and ‘Beatrix’ referred to the same individual is unclear, but seems unlikely.
William and Robert de Sackville were the sons and heirs of Herbrand de Sackville/Sauqeuville of Normandy (NE of Le Havre), steward to Walter Giffard, left to guard Gifford’s lands in Normandy during Gifford’s absence in England during the Conquest. In reward for his good services, Herbrand was granted land at Fawley in Buckinghamshire. (other ? issue: Jordan, Havise, Alice and Herbran)
('Parishes: Fawley', in A History of the County of Buckingham: Volume 3, ed. William Page (London, 1925), pp. 37-42.)
There is much varied speculation over the pedigree of the Sackville family which makes for difficulties in trying to sort out the exact familial links between these two families, and will remain unresolved.
Eldest son William de Sackville had four children, Beatrix, Agnes, Hodierna and William (d.s.p).
Second son Robert de Sackville’s son and heir was named Jordan de Sackville (named as first witness in Bartholomew de Glanville’s charter to Bromholme Priory), who inherited the family lands after the death of William’s only son William without legitimate issue. It should be noted that, it is Jordan who seems to hold a close relationship with the de Glanvilles, and that Beatrix was only a cousin of Jordan, not his sister.
There was an infamous, complicated, and well recorded court case involving the hereditary estate of the deceased William de Sackville (the younger- son and heir of William de Sackville the elder) and his nephew Richard Anstey (son of Hubert Anstey and Agnes de Sackville, William’s sister) in 1162, in which Rannulf de Glanville was engaged as solicitor/advisor by Anstey. In the 1130’s, the marriage of Adelicia (de Vere, daughter of Amfrid the sheriff) and William de Sackville, who had a daughter, Mabel, was declared invalid on the grounds of William’s prior betrothal to Albreda de Tregoz. Albreda, who was probably underage at the time of the betrothal, had not consented when her father and William broke the betrothal. She initiated action to uphold it and subsequently married William who was forced to abandon Adelicia and his daughter Mabel. William and Albreda subsequently had no issue.
In the 1160’s, the decades long court battle between William’s nephew Richard Anstey, and William and Adelicia’s daughter Mabel, over William’s lands, culminated in a ruling in favour of Anstey.
(read the fascinating details of the court case: https://www.supremecourt.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/Publications/Speeches/Pre-2015%20Speeches/Bryson_20100827.pdf)
Richard Anstey’s father Hubert Anstey came into prominence as chamberlain to Matilda, wife of King Stephen and it is estimated he married Agnes de Sackville c.1125.
Some websites estimate that Beatrix, Agnes, Hodierna and William were born in Essex between circa 1090 and 1100, while others estimate their births in the early reign of Henry I, post 1100 (which would make Beatrix too young to have born Bartholomew de Glanville who was born c.1113-15).
Notably, Robert de Sackville’s son Jordan de Sackville was the first lay witness to Bartholomew’s charter to Bromholme Priory (see above), even taking precedence over all the Glanville family members who are witnesses, indicating a close familial relationship with the Sackvilles.
J. Horace Round, in his ‘The Essex Sackvilles’ (Archaeological Journal Vol.64, No.1) notes that the name of Bartholomew’s daughter, as of Jordan’s mother, was Letitia, and suggests that Jordan’s mother, Letitia, was possibly a member of the Glanville family. However, Arthur Collins (Peerage of England, v.2, p261) states that Letitia was daughter of Sir Henry Woodvil Knt, without giving a reference (probably the ‘ancient pedigree’ referred to).
Notably Bartholomew named a daughter Leticia (in the grant to Bromholme- see above)
Jordan de Sackville (a baron in the reigns of Henry I and Stephen- d.1175) confirmed a grant of the manor of Wickham made to the priory of St John in Colchester, by his father Robert and added other lands of his own free gift, and was joined in this grant by his mother Letitia and Bartholomew de Glanville- ‘Illiam elemonsinam Jordanus cum matre sua Letitia et Bartholomeo de Glanvilla super altare sancti Joliannis obtulit’- which appears to link Letitia with Bartholomew. (Colchester Cartulary/Cartularium Monasterii sancti Johanni Baptiste de Colecestria, v.1, ed. Stuart Moore, London 1897, p.132).
Jordan’s son Geoffrey de Sackville added to the endowment of St John’s, Colchester, and to his two grants (1189-1193) the first three witnesses are ‘Hubert Walter bishop of Salisbury, Bartholomew his brother (viz. Hubert’s brother), and William de Glanville’ (probably the son of Bartholomew de Glanville), also pointing to a familial connection (Colchester Cartulary, 1, 133,134).
However, this information on the de Sackville/de Glanville marriage by Collins and Pargrave, still clashes with the known charter of William de Glanville declaring that William’s wife was named Basilia.
There appears to have been a close family tie between the de Glanvilles and the Pecche family. William Pecche, who accompanied the Conqueror in 1066, held lands in the Domesday Book in Suffolk, Norfolk and Essex, as undertenant of Richard fitzGilbert (de Clare), Aubrey de Vere and Roger Bigod. He married secondly, Isilia, daughter and heir of Hervey de Bourges, and had issue Hamon Pecche and Basilia.
Hervey de Bourges held a substantial number of lands in Suffolk in Domesday- 31 as tenant-in-chief, including a part of Fressingfield, and a further 29 as an undertenant, several held from Robert Malet or Malet’s mother.
As previously mentioned, the 1130-31 Pipe Roll of Henry I (p.77-78) lists:
Suffolk- New Pleas and New Arrangements
Hervey son of Hervey (viz. Herveius filius Herveii) renders account of 10 silver marks for his land of Hamo Peche (Hamone peccatum).
In the treasury 40s. And he owes 7 silver marks.
A record of a suit in 1250 as to the advowson of Grundisburgh showed that Isilia de ‘Bergwes’ was reputed to have been joint founder with Bartholomew de Glanville of the church of Grundisburgh (Curia Regis rolls 33-34 Henry III, 139, m.21 d [No. 2338]; 143, m7d; 146, m36d- see G.E. Cokayne, Complete Peerage- v.10-Pecche p.332).
How Isilia and Bartholomew de Glanville are connected, close enough to co-found a church, is not explained.
One could speculate that William Pecche and Isilia’s daughter Basilia was the mother of Bartholomew named Basilia (wife of William de Glanville), presuming that Hamon and Basilia were born before 1100. In which case, Bartholomew and his grandmother Isilia co-founded the church at Grundisburgh.
However, historian Dr Katherine Keats-Rohan in her ‘Domesday People: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166: Domesday Book’, (1999, p.253-54 ‘Herveus Bitureicensis’ without giving a reference), claims that William Pecche’s first wife was still alive in 1107, and if correct, then his daughter Basilia by his second wife Isilia, would have been born too late to be the mother of Bartholomew who was an adult in 1135. William and Isilia’s son, Hamon Pecche, was an adult in the 1130 Pipe Roll and married 1130-1134, and was considered a favourite of Henry I, however, this does not reveal his birth year.
In the Red Book of the Exchequer (p.366), for Cambridgeshire, in A.D. 1166, in a list of knight’s fees owed to their lord Hamon Pecche for lands held in Suffolk, Hamon described Basilia as ‘my sister’ holding Martley from him for one fee: ‘Martley, quam Basilia soror mea tenet, 1 militem’. (Martley, SW of Parham, was originally held by Hervey de Bourges in Domesday.)
In Domesday, Grundisburgh was partly held by Hervey de Bourges as tenant-in-chief, and in neighbouring Burgh, two parts were held by Robert de Glanville from Robert Malet and William Warenne
A charter in the Chronicle of Ramsey Abbey (Chronicon Abbatiae Rameseinsis etc., ed. W. Dunn Macray, London 1886, pp.228, 233) dated 1088, has, Herbert, the Abbot of Ramsey granting to William Pecche the land of Ofra for 1 m. of gold at entry and 6 lbs of pence yearly and 100s. for his soul to the church of Ramsey, where he shall have burial. Alfwen his wife shall conditionally hold the land for her life after his death. A second charter by King Henry I, which appears to be in the period 1112-1114, confirms the terms of the original charter owed by the heirs of William Pecche and his wife Alfwen. Neither of these charters indicate that Alfwen was alive in 1107.
However, as previously referred to, Bartholomew de Glanville’s confirmation charter to Bromholm Priory names his maternal (?) uncle (‘Rogeri avunculi mei’) as Roger of ‘Bertuna’ (Essex), viz. his mother Basilia’s brother. There were no sons of William Pecche named Roger, nor of William de Sackville either, which appears to negate this theory, making the family connection very confusing. Historian Richard Mortimer suggests that it referred to his paternal uncle named Roger de Glanville, however that contravenes the grammatical rules of Latin in which the Latin word for a maternal uncle is ‘avunculus’, a mother’s brother, as distinguished from ‘patruus’, a father’s brother or paternal uncle. Although, it should be taken into account that these documents are extremely old, when literacy in Latin was limited, and linguistic conventions and constructions were yet to be firmly established.
Therefore, due to the contradictory information on this family, the ancestral origin of William de Glanville’s wife named as Basilia in his charter, remains unresolved.
Another conjecture suggested by Professor Katherine Keats-Rohan is that Hervey de Bourges’s wife Jeuita, (about whom she states: onomastic evidence show this form to be a corruption of Judith, comparable with the hypocoristic form Jueta), and mother of Isilia/Esilia de Bourges, was possibly the sister of Robert Malet, based on the fact that Robert Malet’s mother was also named Isilia/Esilia.
A charter of Hamo ‘Peccatum’ (Pecche) confirmed to the abbey of St Edmund the gift made thereto by his grandmother and his mother:
De honore Sancti Edmundi terram tenentibus Haimund Peccatum in Christo salute. Sciatis me concessisse terram et redditum quem Jeuita aua mea et mater mea Esylya dederunt et concesserunt domino meo Sancto Edmundi et conuentui scilicet xxv solidos quos Radulfus de Selfangre et heredes sui reddent unoquoque anno Sancto Edmundi…
(Feudal Documents of Bury St Edmunds, ed. D.C. Douglas, London 1932, p.179)
Sons: Bartholomew de Glanville, and Anselm
Anselm de Glanville- nothing is known of this son. Richard Mortimer in his ‘Family of Rannulf de Glanville’ (p.3) has two sons assigned to Anselm, named William and Richard. However, Mortimer does not give any references for this claim, nor any further information. It is possible that the son named William may be the ancestor of Adam de Glanville who inherited Felsted in Essex (which William the elder inherited from his maternal uncle, as described above).
Bartholomew de Glanville inherited from his father c.1134-38, and died before Michaelmas 1180.
Bartholomew’s wife was named Matilda, and they had a daughter named Leticia and three sons.
Bartoloms de Glavilla confirmed grants to Bromholme monastery by ‘patris meis Willm de Glavill’, which names ‘Rogeri avunculi mei’ (ie. maternal(?) uncle, Roger of Bertune- ‘Bertuna’ in Essex, near Clavering?) …. ‘dna (domina) Basil matre dni Bartholom, Matilde uxore dni, Leticia filia ei’.
ie. Basilia mother of Bartholomew, Matilda his wife, Letitia his daughter
(NB. no source given but maybe in the Bromholm Cartulary held by Cambridge Univ. Library, possibly fol.13v and 32v?; or the Register of St Benet’s of Holme)
Bartholomew’s sons were:
1.Stephen d.s.p.1190; married the dau. of Warin de Munchensy (son of Hubert de MonteCanisy);
2.William who inherited his brother and father’s debts in 1190, and cleared those debts by 1203. Died without issue. Probably William de Glanville the cleric/clerk who witnessed Hervey Walter’s charter to Butley Priory, and who worked with Hubert Walter as clerics in the exchequer.
3.Geoffrey, who inherited from his brother William; married Margaret da. of Sir Geoff de-la-Haye- issue: one male heir Geoffrey s.p, and six daughters (not in order): (1) Emma = Sir John de Grey [their dau. married William de Huntingfield/de Caen]; (2) Julian = Simon Pecche; (3) Alianore = Lord Almuric Pecche; (4) Basilia = Sir Wm Boville; (5) Agnes = Baldwin (a Norman); and, (6) Margaret = Edmund Earl of Cornwall.
(NB. Almuric and Simon Pecche, sons of Sir Gilbert Pecche II, s/o Hamon Pecche II, s/o Gilbert Pecche I, s/o Hamon Pecche I and Isilia de Bourges)
Mortimer wrote (p.2): Bartholomew made a local career in the royal service, overseeing the works at Orford Castle from 1166, and from 1169 to 1174 was joint sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk (with Vinar Capellanus and William Bardull). He accumulated a quantity of debts at the exchequer, which were taken over by his son Stephen in 1180, from which one assumes that Bartholomew was dead by Michaelmas of that year. This Stephen is described in a papal bull as ‘founder (?) and patron’ of Bromholm priory.
The Pipe Roll of Henry II, 1165-66 (p.35) shows Bartholomew de Glanville and Robert de Valoines overseeing the building works of Orford castle in Suffolk- this continued through 1168-69:
This entry in the Pipe Roll, Henry II, 1178-79, p.6, is the last entry for Bartholomew de Glanville (indicating his death the following year):
He had accumulated a quantity of debts at the exchequer.
The following year, Stephen de Glanville has two entries in the Pipe Roll, 26 Henry II, 1179-80 pp.15, 19, assuming the debts of ‘patre suo’ (his father) and of Oreford. (This is repeated in the 1180-81 Pipe Roll, pp.81,84)
This confirms Mortimer’s claim that Stephen was the eldest son of Bartholomew.
Another Pipe Roll entry, “Guillemus de Glanville pro Stephano fratre suo (his brother) 39 lib de veteri firma comitatis (Pipe Roll, 1, John, f.33b, Norfolk/Suffolk), confirms that Stephen’s brother William took over his father’s debts at the exchequer as well as the land in 1190 (indicating the death of Stephen), finally clearing his father’s debts in 1203 (W. Farrer, Honors and Knights Fees, iii, 104; Pipe Rolls 1 Ric I, p.42; 2 Ric I, p.93). William was found holding the Honing fee of his father’s, around 1210, and died without issue, succeeded by his brother Geoffrey de Glanville whose lands were inherited by his daughters following the death of his only son and heir named Geoffrey.
Notably, Stephen was one of the key witnesses to the Charter of Hervey Walter to Butley Priory, along with a William de Glanville (possibly Rannulf’s son), and William de Glanville cleric (probably Bartholomew’s son, mentioned in C.R. Cheney’s book on ‘Hubert Walter’ (1967):
“The first witnesses to the archbishops acts were a distinguished half dozen archdeacons, followed immediately by Osbert de Camera, Hubert Walter and William Glanville, clerks. The trio significantly took precedence over a large number of other men of note, clerical and lay. William Glanville must be a relative and is elsewhere recorded as in the company of Rannulf and Hubert. He was a judge in Richard’s reign”. Glanville-Richards claims William the cleric died 1228 and buried at Butley; a justiciary 1196 and a benefactor to the Abbey of Leiston.)
William Glanville-Richards wrote that, “in the time of Henry I, Hervey de Glanville distinguished himself in many of the affairs of State, of things connected with his own counties of Suffolk and Norfolk, and with those relative to the realm at large (quoting “Inquodam Libro Actorum Abbatie de Burg, fol. 142”[?]; and “Dodsworth MS, iv, fol. 36 b”).
On the accession of Stephen to the throne, Sir Hervey de Glanville no doubt took part in many of the disturbances which happened during his reign.”
(Notably, in clarification, Glanville-Richards also quoted Courthope in his ‘The Historic Peerage of England’ (1857, p.213), who erroneously stated that Hervey was Chamberlain to King Stephen on his succession- Aubrey de Vere, one of several of King Henry I’s chamberlains was appointed Master Chamberlain in 1133, died 1141, and was succeeded by his son Aubrey de Vere 1st Earl of Oxford as Master Chamberlain from 1141-1194, although there were periods when he was caught up in the succession conflict between King Stephen and Empress Matilda in the early 1140’s and placed under arrest. There are no known records of Hervey de Glanville holding the position of chamberlain, and Courthope did not reference any record.)
Hervey de Glanville’s age can be calculated from a speech he made c.1150-53, in which he told the assembly that he was ‘a very old man’, recounted in ‘The Anglo-Norman House of Glanville’ (p.26); and the full account in ‘An Essay Towards a Topographical History of the County of Norfolk: Volume 3, The City of Norwich, Chapter 8: of the city in the time of King Stephen’, pub. by W. Miller, London, 1806, pp.24-29; and ‘An East Anglian shire-moot of Stephen’s reign 1148-53’ by Helen M. Cam (English Historical Review xxxix  pp.568-71 [ref: Cambridge University Library MS, Ff.2.29 fo.60]- JSTOR).
This fragment of a Bury St Edmund’s chronicle is in the volume of Registrum Rubrum, one of a series of Bury registers, now held by the Cambridge University Library:
“Hervey de Glanville met with an assembly of lords of Norfolk and Suffolk about the year 1150 when they had met to consider the liberties that belonged to the Abbot of Bury (St Edmund). At the assembly, Sir Hervey de Glanville rose and made a speech in the assembly, telling them that he was a very old man, having constantly attended the County and Hundred Court for above fifty years with his father, before and after he was knighted, as they all knew; and he assured them, that in the time of Henry I, when justice and equity, peace and fidelity, flourished in England, though now alas! war silenced justice and law, he remembered a question of the like nature concerning the liberties of St Edmund, etc…..
Upon which the bishops and barons present, with the consent of Roger Gulafre, William de Frehnie, sheriffs, and also of Herveus filius Hervei, Robert de Glamvill and others, of the honours of Warren, of Earl Hugh Bygod, and of the Honour of Eye, presented the liberties to be good, and delivered their testimonies of it to William Martel sewer to King Stephen, sent as the King’s Deputy and Judge, who notified it to the King, who confirmed it.”
“Quod ut comperit Herveus de Glamvuyle protinus exiliens et stans in medio ait: ……
Verumtamen pro certo dico, testificor, et astruo quod transacti sunt quinquaginta anni quod primitus cepi frequentare centuriatus et comitatus cum patre meo, antequam casatus essem, et postea usque modo. …..
Hiis itaque auditis, episcopi prefati et barones prenominati assenserunt, et cum illis Rogerius Gulafre et Willelmus Frehnei qui tunc temporis errant vicecomites, et Herveus filius Hervei, et Robertus de Glamville et multi alii de honore de Warenne et de honore Comitis Hugonis et de honore de Eye hoc idem attestati sunt.Barones igitur presentauerunt Willwlmo Martel Justicie regis testimonium quod prehibitum erat de jure et libertate ecclesie sancti Edmundi. Willelmus autem, sumptis quibusdam de Baronibus, notificauit regi per ordinem totum testimonium baronum et comitatuum.”
The report begins: “When the bishops were assembled at sunrise William Martel the king’s Dapifer, sat in the seat of the prefectory with dignity to examine the state of affairs of the state.”
Josiah Cox Russell wrote an article on Ranulf de Glanville in which he makes the suggestion that Rannulf de Glanville may have been the author of the East Anglian Shire-Moot account, given Rannulf’s subsequent treatise ‘De Legibus Anglie’, the first great treatise on English law: ‘The treatise is described as bearing the imprint of the author’s personality and style: the imprint of a strong, original mind. He defines his purpose and proceeds in a well-organised exposition of the subject, and he cherishes the opinions of his own family. These characteristics occur in this other writing, and seems to indicate that Ranulf was also the author. Professor Helen Cam wrote, “It is of considerable interest- for the light which it throws on central and local administration and justice in the reign of Stephen”. In the presence of King Stephen, Abbot Ording of Bury St Edmunds (abbot 1146-56) presented his claim to retain certain legal jurisdiction in the abbey’s court. In place of documents, the author reports remarks by abbot and king and a long speech by Hervey de Glanville bringing knowledge from his fifty years of experience in the local courts. “The abbot and Hervey are the heroes and the Glanville family is present, not merely in the elderly Hervey, but in a Robert de Glanville and probably in a Hervey fitzHervey. The concluding sentence is both a statement of purpose of writing and a tribute to excellence.”
"These things, indeed, are written lest it escape people later how vigorously both prelates and wise men who were in the Church [ie. Bury St Edmunds] laboured to maintain and preserve the same liberty”.
The final step came “after a few days when the king came to St Edmunds where the abbot- with advice of the barons of the Church and with the aid of the barons of the king” brought the case to an end.
Since position on the abbot’s council normally went to local men of wealth and influence, probably Ranulf or other members of his family were members of the council at the time of the shire-moot.’
(Ranulf de Glanville, by Josiah Cox Russell, Speculum, Jan 1970, V.45, No.1 pp69-79, Uni of Chicago Press -JSTOR)
The above statement by Hervey de Glanville at the assembly revealed that Hervey was at least 70 years of age and was thereby, born in the period c.1080-1083.
The list of witnesses specifically included Robert de Glanville, and ‘Herveus filius Hervei’- it is uncertain to whom that refers. As Robert de Glanville is considered to be one of the sons of Hervey de Glanville, then it is likely that Hervei filius Hervei also refers to one of his sons, as they were both selected to be prominently noted in the statement. It also probably refers to the same individual named in the 1130 Pipe Roll, ‘Hervei filius Hervei’. It specifies ‘others of the honours of Warenne (William de Warenne 3rd Earl of Surrey), of Earl Bigod (Hugh Bigod, Earl of Norfolk), and of Eye (Suffolk)’. Hervey Walter’s Suffolk lands were situated in the Honour of Eye. Several of the de Glanville family held lands of Hugh Bigod.
Others mentioned in the statement were, Walter filius Robert Lord of Little Dunmow (de Clare) who is also described as the King’s dapifer ‘Regis Dapifer’, Robert de Vere the king’s constable, Reginald de Warenne son of William de Warenne, William de Chesney filio Robert filius Walter (de Caen), Fulk de Oilly, and Henry de Rye (d.1161).
The author of the article, Helen Cam wrote: As to the date, Ording became abbot of Bury St Edmunds in 1148 (?1146) and Daniel, abbot of St Benet of Holme died in 1153, both named in the document, so that a date soon after 1148 may be safely accepted for the joint shire-moot.
ie. “Willelmus Norwycensis Episcopus et venerabilis Abbas ecclesie sancti Edmundi Ordingus et Daniel Abbas Holmensis”.
The first two witnesses to the charter named were ‘Roger Gulafre and William de ‘Frehnie’ sheriffs’ (viz. William de Fresney/de Fraxneto), and this also helps date the document more precisely.
An article in the Anglo-Norman Studies XIV-Proceedings of Battle Conference, 1991, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, ‘Financing Stephen’s War’ by Green, p.99:
“In the early 1150’s Roger Gulafre and William de Fresney were sheriffs of Norfolk and Suffolk. The two may have been joint-sheriffs. Roger came from a family established in the honour of Eye in 1086 and attests a charter of William Martel at a time when the latter may have been in charge of the honour of Eye, whilst William de Fresney, about whom less is known, held some land of Hugh Bigod (including Earsham in Norfolk which he donated to Castle Acre Priory). It is particularly unfortunate that the precise dates and counties of these men cannot be identified, because they bear on the question of earl Hugh’s authority in Norfolk. (refs: Pipe Roll 2/3/4 Henry II, 1155-56, p.8- Wills de Fraxineto, sheriff of Suffolk; Red Book of the Exchequer, I, 395- Willelmi de Fraxneto, owed knight’s fees to Hugh Bigod, Norfolk, 1166.)
Other sources reveal that William de Fresney/Fraxineto was sheriff of Suffolk from Michaelmas 1155 to Michaelmas 1156.
In the 1130 Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I (p.77), for Suffolk: Roger Gulafre rendered account of 15 silver marks for breach of the peace. In pardon by the king’s writ to the same Roger 15 marks for love of the count of Mortain (Stephen). And he is quit.
Roger gave 8 acres of land of his demesne of Okenhill (in Badingham) to the monks of Eye, said to have been given by Roger when he became a monk at Eye, in or about 1155. (Eye Cart.,II, p.58-9; I, Nos.40, 283). Roger Gulafree was the son of Domesday holder William Gulafre, a subtenant of Robert Malet, holding 30 acres at the villages of Oakley and Brome, and 16 acres at Thrandeston. Okenhill Hall Manor, or Saxhams, also formed part of the Malet holding, and he held several other vills. His estates in England passed to his son Roger, when ‘Guillaume Goulafriere’ left Normandy in 1096 to join the Conqueror’s eldest son Robert to fight in the First Crusade.
The author, Cam, notes that Roger Gulafre and William de Fresney held the shrievalty in the early 1150’s. The assembly delivered their testimonies to William Martel, steward of King Stephen who then reported back to the King (Stephen). King Stephen died in late October 1154, so this assembly must have taken place before that date, and, significantly, as Helen Cam pointed out, ‘Daniel, abbot of St Benet of Holme died in 1153’. Given the dates Gulafre and de Fresney briefly held the shrievalty, and the dates that Ording was abbot of St Edmunds and the death of Daniel Abbot of St Benet of Holme in 1153, it would appear that the speech given by Sir Hervey de Glanville, most likely occurred c.1150-1152.
The self-proclaimed information that Hervey de Glanville had attended these shire meetings for ‘50 years or more’, before and after he was knighted, indicates a birth around 1080.
Hervey de Glanville was a signatory to Robert Malet’s Charter to Eye Priory in c.1103-05, confirming his birth no later than 1080-1083.
In Malet’s ‘Charter to Eye Priory’, the list of donors included Rannulphus de Glanville of ’his hospice at Yaxley’:
“Ranulphus de Glanvillis optulit super altare Sancti Petri hospitium quod habuit apud Jakesleyam.”
Rannulf de Glanville offered on the altar of St Peter the hospital that he had at Yaxley.
Notably, Hubert de MonteCanisy also donated ‘his hospice at Yaxley’, and was the first named witness.
Presumably this referred to Hervey’s forebear, Rannulphus de Glanville, and as Hervey, not Rannulph, was the witness to the charter, maybe Hervey donated his part of Yaxley hospital on behalf of Rannulphus who was either deceased or had returned to his lands in Glanville in Normandy.
Hervey de Glanville was also a witness to King Stephen’s Charter of confirmation to the monks of Eye Priory of all their possessions as they held in the time of Robert Malet and of Stephen before he became king, dated Dec 1137-March 1138 (Eye Cart. I, p25, No.15). He was the only witness who had also witnessed Malet’s Foundation Charter of c.1103.
Other witnesses to Stephen’s charter included William Martel (steward of Henry I and Stephen) nephew of Walter fitzGrip who held Snape, and lands in Bishops Hundred, Suffolk, in Domesday), Hubert de MonteCanisy/Munchenesi (the son), John fitz Robert (fitzWalter de Caen), and William son of Roger (de Huntingfield, fitzWalter de Caen), Ada(m) Beln(aco).
Hervey de Glanville of Bawdsey, and other lands held in Co.Suffolk Suffolk
Hervey was generally known as Hervey de Glanville of Bawdsey, Suffolk. Bawdsey, near the coast, was land held by Robert de Glanville as an undertenant of Robert Malet in Domesday- parts of Bawdsey were also held by Robert Malet’s mother from her son; two parts held by the Abbey of Ely, and one part by Ralph de Beaufour. It would appear that Hervey de Glanville had added to his lands in Bawdsey (inherited from Robert de Glanville) by annexing those held by the Abbot of Ely, which is the source of this following dispute.
A writ of Bishop Nigel of Ely (dated c.1144-54) addressed to ‘Hervey de Glanville and Ranulf his son’, refers to a fee ‘they’ hold of him. Nigel bishop of Ely instructed Hervey and Rannulf to restore to the monks of Ely Cathedral the lands they were possessing at Bawdsey and promising to do them justice if they claimed anything in the land.
Liber Eliensis (a History of the Isle of Ely from 7th century to the 12th, compiled by a monk of Ely in the 12th century, translated from the Latin by Janet Fairweather, 2005, v.iii, p.471 no.133):
The footnote 582: Date: episcopate of Nigel 1135x1169. Blake argues that this charter dates to King Stephen’s time (c.1144-1154).
Hervey de Glanville (junior?) of Suffolk is found in possession of an Ely fee in 1166- Red Book of the Exchequer-Cartae Baronum:
A.D. 1166- Hervei de Glanville owed one knight’s fee for his fee in Suffolk (Suthfolcia), to Nigel Bishop of Ely, Cambridgeshire (Cantebriggescira) p.365.
Whether this fee related to Bawdsey or another land held in Suffolk by the de Glanvilles, is not determined. Notably, the daughters of Rannulf de Glanville inherited the Bawdsey property, so it is unlikely that Hervey jnr. held the fee of Bawdsey.
Similarly, Wingfield (Hervey Walter’s fee) was held in parts by Robert Malet, William (Beaufour) Bishop of Thetford, and the Abbey of Ely. Malet’s undertenants were Walter, Robert de Glanville, Loernic and Walter fitzGrip. Roger Bigod was subtenant of the Abbey of Ely in Wingfield.
In fact, several of Robert de Glanville’s lands held of Robert Malet were also partly held by the Abbey of Ely- Bredfield, Burgh, Benhall and Dallinghoo.
Hervey’s son Ranulf de Glanville held Benhall, another of Robert de Glanville’s lands in Domesday. John Beames in his introduction to his translation of Glanville’s treatise, ‘Treatise on the Laws and Customs of the Kingdom of England’, quoted Lord Edward Coke (late 16th century, Attorney General, Chief Justice and Speaker of the House of Commons) who revealed Rannulf’s birthplace as Stratford (Stratford St Andrews-3kms SW of Benhall) in Suffolk; his demesne manor of Benhall, ‘with total ownership, the gift of King Henry’; his wife Bertha daughter of Theobald de Valeines of Parham (4kms west of Stratford), and the names of his three daughters (pp.viii,ix):
“I will for the honor of him (viz. Ranulf de Glanville), impart and publish, both to all future and succeeding Ages, what I found of great antiquity and of undoubted verity, the original whereof remaineth with me at this day, and followeth in these words:
Ranulphus de Glanvilla, justiciarius anglie, fundator fuit domus de Buttely, in Comitatu Suffolcie, que fundata erat anno Regis Henrici, filii Imperatricis, decimo septimo, et anno Domini 1171. quo anno Thomas Becket, Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus, erat occisus. Et dictus Ranulphus nascebatur in Villa de Stratford, in comitatu Suffolcie, et habuit Manerium de Benhall, cum toto dominio, e dono dicti Regis Henrici. Et duxit in uxorem quondam Bertram, filiam Domini Theobald de Valeymz, Senioris domini de Parham: qui Theobaldus per Chartam suam dedit dicto Ranulpho et Berte Uxori sue totam team de Brochous, cum pertinentiis, in qua domus de Butteley sita est, cum aliis terries et tenementis, in libero maritagio. Predictus vero Ranulphus procreavit tres filias de dicta Berta (viz.) Matildam, Amabiliam, et Helewisam, quibus dedit terram suam ante progressum suum versus Terram Sanctam.”
The Castle Acre Priory Cartulary, a 13th century document, also contains fragments of charters dating from the 12th century dating back as far as the reign of Henry I. It contains charters of Hervey de Glanville of Bawdsey, Roger, priest of Bawdsey, and another charter of Roger de Glanville, son of Hervey, as discussed in detail elsewhere. (B.L. Harley Ms 2110, fol.67)
Notably, the manor of Bawdsey was the demesne fief of Hervey de Glanville Senior, having inherited it from Robert de Glanville who held it in Domesday.
NB. both charters succeed each other indicating they were closely linked and written at the same time.
Charter of Hervey de Glanville of Bawdsey
Concerning rent of 2 shillings
in Bawdsey from the land and
lordship of Aluric Estolt
Hervey de Glanville sends greeting to all his men and friends, French and English, both future and present.
Let it be known to all that I have given and granted, to the church of Saint Mary of Acre, [the house of] Aluric Estolt in Bawdsey, and the land and whatever pertains to the house, yielding two shillings per annum.
And to hold this as freely and as if it were part of Acre.
These being witnesses, Roger de Talaville, Hubert de Baduend’, Gorelmus, Hugh of Little Cross, Osbert the priest, William Gudlac, Humphrey the clerk, Lady Mabel the wife of Hervey, Osbert the clerk.
Moreover, I give [this] in alms, for the soul of my father and my mother, my wife, and my sons and daughters, or [the souls] of those joined to me by kinship, as equally as I may deserve to come to eternal life, Amen.
The charters are undated. However, looking at the witnesses, apart from Osbert the priest and Osbert the cleric, both of whom were attached to Bawdsey as seen in other family charters, another witness has been found in the records, that of Gorelmus who witnessed both Bawdsey charters. The only record found of a ‘Gorelmus’ is in an early charter for St Edmunds, Bury, by Abbot Anslem who held that position between 1121 and 1148. The list of witnesses include an ‘Ordingus Gorelmus’, with the footnote noting that he succeeded Abbot Anselm as abbot in 1148, named Abbot Ording. (‘The First Charter to St Edmund’s Bury, Suffolk’, in The American Historical Review, July 1897, V.2, No.4, pp.688-690, Oxford Uni. Press [JSTOR])
When he became abbot in 1148, all succeeding records only name him as Abbot Ording (all abbots were known by their first names, such as Abbot Hugh etc), so this is the only reference to his second name of Gorelmus. Therefore, as this record was dated sometime before 1148, the charters of Hervey and Roger the priest must date pre-1148. The timing of the donation may relate to Hervey leaving to join the Second Crusade in 1147, and the second charter of his priest Roger will become significant.
Hervey’s charter reveals that his wife was Domina/Lady Mabilia.
The important revelation in this charter is the naming of a witness as Domina Mabil uxore Hervey- which has been translated as ‘Lady Mabilia the wife of Hervey’.
Translation: Dame/Lady Mabilia wife of Hervei
However, Theobald Walter’s original charter to Cockersand Abbey (1190’s) names ‘Hervey Walter my father and Matilda de Wal my mother’ (as translated by the editor and historian William Farrer),
which confuses the issue as it looks remarkably similar, but a Latin expert explained that the ‘a’ has a long extender which looks like a ‘d’, followed by a small ‘t’ and the last letter ‘l’ crossed to indicated a contraction.
Susan M. Johns authored a book “Noblewomen, aristocracy and power in the twelfth century Anglo-Norman Realm” (Manchester Uni Press, 2003), and in a chapter (5), on ‘Witnessing’ p.81+, she discusses the reasons for family, particularly wives, witnessing charters in the 12th century.
'It is generally assumed that the process of attesting and witnessing documents was a method of ensuring the security of a transaction, because attestors and witnesses could be called upon to verify the transaction recorded in the charter in the event of a legal dispute at a future date. As the twelfth century progressed there was a marked growth in female attestations: whilst at the start of the period, high-status women witnessed documents, by the end of the century, groups of women of freeholder status witnessed charters. There is sparse evidence of non-royal noblewomen witnessing prior to 1100. There are limited examples from 1100 until the 1130’s. Thereafter the incidence of noblewomen witnessing documents increased in the 1130’s. The period 1140-60 is also notable as a period when female witnessing increased. After 1160, there are examples of groups of women and also lower-status women witnessing documents. The most common context for female participation as a witness is that of a wife either with or for her husband.
p.171- In charters, noblewomen were often called ‘domine’ in address clauses, consent and closing protocols as well as witness lists.'
Hervey's wife may have witnessed this charter in case her husband did not survive his upcoming voyage to the Crusades, thereby ensuring the security of the transaction.
Hervey then ends his charter with: Moreover, I give [this] in alms, for the soul of my father and my mother, my wife, and my sons and daughters, or [the souls] of those joined to me by kinship.
Notably, he mentions ‘his sons and daughters’, revealing that he has more than one of each gender.
The following charter which adjoins that of Hervey in the Cartulary, is of Roger the priest of Bawdsey, so probably Hervey’s personal priest, and it is highly likely that Roger the Priest of Bawdsey joined Hervey de Glanville on crusade which may account for his donation.
Charter of Roger the priest of Bawdsey:
And concerning 5 shillings in Bawdsey
Let it be known to all, present and future, that I, Roger the priest of Bawdsey, give and grant the tithe of my house, under a price of five shillings, every single year, to my Lord Hervey, he granting it to whichever heir succeeds, forever.
And my son Osbert in the chapter [or chapter house] of Saint Mary of Acre consenting, and offering [making an oblation of] the abovesaid tithe upon the altar of the same church of Saint Mary.
These being witnesses, Roger de Glanville, Hubert his nephew, Alexander, nephew to the same, Roger de Hou, William Gudlac, Humphrey the clerk, Osbert the priest of Benhall, Gorelmus.
The fact that Roger was the priest at Bawdsey would indicate he was probably the personal priest of Hervey at Bawdsey. The fact that he names his son as ‘Osbert in the chapter of St Mary of Acre’, indicates that Roger became a priest later in life. This Osbert could be Osbert the cleric, or Osbert the priest, both of whom are named as witnesses to Hervey’s charter. Osbert cleric of Bawdsey would feature in several of the family’s later charters.
His witness, Roger de Glanville, is more difficult to place. It could have been Hervey’s son who would have been in his late 20’s to early 30’s, or he was more likely to have been the younger brother of Hervey Senior.
The wording of the witnesses named after Roger de Glanville, Hubert his nephew, Alexander, nephew to the same, is also difficult to understand. Were they nephews to Roger de Glanville, or to Roger the priest?
Notably William Gudlac and Gorelmus witnessed both charters, indicating they were dated in a similar timeframe, pre-1148.
The witness Osbert was ‘priest of Benhall’, a Domesday held property of Robert de Glanville, later the demesne manor of Rannulf de Glanville- this may have been ‘my son Osbert’ referred to by Roger the priest in his charter.
Roger the priest also made an interesting statement, granting the tithe of his house at Bawdsey “to my Lord Hervey, he granting it to whichever heir succeeds, forever.” The manor of Bawdsey was inherited by one of Hervey’s younger sons, Rannulf de Glanville who in turn gave it in inheritance to his daughters Amabila and Helewise. This reference to ‘Lord Hervey’, as a baron, also explains the reference to his wife as Domina/Lady Mabilia.
The Second Crusade (1147-1149) was organized by the Pope and European nobles to recapture the city of Edessa, on the edge of the desert of Syria in Upper Mesopotamia, an important commercial and cultural centre held by Christian since the First Crusade in 1095-1102, which had fallen in 1144 to the Muslims. It also included significant campaigns in the Iberian Peninsula and the Baltic against the Muslim Moors and pagan Europeans, both largely successful, unlike the failed objective to free Edessa from Muslim occupation.
In mid-1147, Hervey de Glanville was part of a large contingent sent in a fleet of 164 vessels to Lisbon to drive out the Moors from that city, which they accomplished later in the year, after a long siege and battle. About 6000 English, 5000 German and 2000 Flemish forces took part. As part of the contingent, Hervey de Glanville commanded the men of Norfolk and Suffolk. They disembarked at the end of June. The Moorish King sent ambassadors to treat with the crusaders who held a council before sitting down to their meal. The majority of the crusaders opposed the proposals made by the Moorish ambassadors. Sir Hervey stood up and made an impassioned speech, extolling the military virtues of the Normans, and the need to honour their Norman ancestors. After further speeches including the Bishop of Oporto who challenged the Moors to fight, Sir Hervey and other commanders attacked the Moors, which continued for several months until the Moors capitulated on 22 October and departed Lisbon a week later. (full speech recounted in Latin in Glanville Richards p.23-24- see below, with translation)
A remarkable historical memoir contains most that is known concerning this enterprise, entitled “Expugnatione Lyxbonensi ”, and the beginning of the letter is addressed with the words “Osb. De Baldr. R. Salutem” which has caused much conjecture on the identities of both the letter recipient ‘Osb. De Baldr.’, and the author of the letter only written as ‘R’.
Two articles were written, one by C.W. David “The Authorship of de Expugnatione Lyxbonensi” (Speculum, Jan 1932, V.7, No.1 pp.50-57, Uni. Of Chicago Press- JSTOR), and by C. R. Cheney in the subsequent journal (“The Authorship of the De Expungnatione Lyxbonensi” by C.R. Cheney, Speculum July 1932, v.7 No. 3, pp.395-397, Uni. Of Chicago Press- JSTOR- N.B. Cheney was also author of ‘Hubert Walter’), the outcome of which is the conclusion that the recipient of the letter was Osbert de Bawdsey/Baldresseie, a cleric, or priest to the de Glanville family, and most probably a relative (Hervey de Glanville was enfeoffed in the Suffolk vill of Bawdsey, where the Domesday Robert de Glanville also held).
Dr. Josiah C. Russell wrote to Professor David stating that he believed Osbert to have been a person of considerable importance since his name stands well toward the first of the list of witnesses in Ranulf de Glanville’s charter of 1171 to Butley Priory.
The author of the letter, simply named as ‘R’ has led to several suggestions. Harold Livermore, in his article ‘The ‘Conquest of Lisbon’ and its Author’ (Portuguese Studies, Vol.6, 1990, pp.1-6), reasons that the author was an Anglo-Norman priest named Raol, and the general consensus appears to be that he was the priest Raol who founded a hermitage or chapel and donated the Anglo-Norman cemetery to the Augustinian priory of Santa Cruz at Coimbra.
Raol, in his charter, states “I, Raol, priest, coming with my companions among the Franks to the siege of Lisbon…., being the foremost of the seafarers to land (‘R’ said in his account that he and 39 others were the only ones to spend the first night ashore,) after due prayer set up the sign of the Holy Cross in a certain solitary place, far from the city and from all its inhabitants, both within and without, having expelled the infidels with my own bow. And there on the second day of our arrival I erected an alter for the service of Our Lord Jesus. In which place I dwelt thenceforth, not omitting to go daily to the siege with my companions, and in praise of Our Lord Jesus Christ I built with my own money, toil and sweat, and not without the greatest devotion, an hermitage and tabernacle to the Blessed Virgin Mary. In the cemetery of which the English who died, killed by the arrows of the Saracens, lie buried. I bequeath the said place… to you the canons of Santa Cruz.” (‘R’ says that two churches were built, one to the east for the Flemings and Germans, one to the west for the Anglo-Normans, with whom he was clearly associated.)
I would suggest that another possible, and more likely candidate for the author ‘R’ is Roger priest of Baldressie/Bawdsey who made the charter to Castle Acre Priory soon after that of Hervey de Glanville pre-1148, in which Roger grants the tithe of his house in Bawdsey to “my lord Hervey, he granting it to whichever heir succeeds, forever”, and then mentions “my son Osbert in the chapter house of St Mary of Acre”, witnessed by Osbert the priest of Benhall, another de Glanville property. Both Osbert the priest and Osbert the cleric witnessed Hervey de Glanville’s charter of the same time. The charters date pre-1148, and Roger, as Hervey’s personal priest at his demesne vill of Bawdsey, is highly likely to have accompanied him to the Crusades to relieve the Christians from Muslim occupation. As Hervey was one of the 40 to spend the first night ashore, Roger would have accompanied his lord Hervey as his spiritual protector. It would certainly explain the emphasis given by the letter author to the actions and motivational speech of his lord Hervey, indicating a close personal relationship, and the reason why the letter was sent to Osbert of Bawdsey in particular.
Prof. David wrote: “the author’s interest in religious or ecclesiastical events, in churches, relics miracles and sermons all reveal unmistakably the attitude of a priest. As to his fighting qualities, from the animation of his narrative and the abundance of details which he records, it is difficult to escape the conviction that he took part personally in the unpremeditated attack of the rank and file of the Anglo-Normans which resulted in the capture of the western suburb of Lisbon and in the heroic struggle by which the Anglo-Norman siege-tower was successfully defended while it was moved up against the wall of the city during the final attack. His interest in the brave deeds of the men of Suffolk is revealed in his account.”
Again, Roger the priest referred to ‘his son Osbert’ indicating a life, possibly military, prior to becoming a priest, as Prof. David suggests. And Prof. David notes the author’s particular interest in the ‘brave deeds of the men of Suffolk’.
As to which Hervey de Glanville was the leader of the crusade, Prof. David makes the following point:
It would seem natural to conclude that the father of Rannulf de Glanville, named Hervey de Glanville, was identical with the leader of the Lisbon crusade of 1147, were it not for the complicating evidence of a fragmentary narrative in the 15th century register of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds, of an account of a meeting of the county court of Norfolk and Suffolk, held in Norwich at which the abbot of St Edmund’s successfully asserted his privileged jurisdiction as against King Stephen in the case of two knights accused of plotting against the king’s life. The decision of the court in favour of the abbot’s privileges is said to have been determined mainly by the testimony of one Hervey de Glanvill who declared that he was man of advanced years, whose memory ran back to the days of King Henry and even earlier, and that 50 years had passed since he first began to attend the courts of shire and hundred with his father, and when the decision of the court was finally agreed upon, it is said to have been made with the assent among others, of Hervey fitzHervey and Robert de Glanvill. It is clear therefore that there were two Herveys de Glanvill, father and son. Either of them may have been the leader of the Lisbon crusade. In view of the advanced years of the father at the time of the Norwich meeting of the county court, it seems more likely, though by no means certain, that the son was the crusader of 1147.
At the time of the crusade in 1147, Hervey de Glanville senior would have been at least 65 years of age, whereas his son Hervey fitzHervey would have been in his mid to late 30’s.
However, Harold Livermore concluded: “Hervey was Constable of the men of Suffolk and Norfolk, and appears in the narrative as a mature man of counsel rather than an active young warrior: his personal influence over the Anglo-Norman contingent was crucial.” He reasoned that, “if Ranulf went on the Third Crusade at the age of sixty or even seventy, then it is not impossible that his father, Hervey, should have gone to the Second Crusade also in his seventh decade.”
Professor David continued to explain the letter author’s particular interest in Hervey de Glanville:
The author’s interest in Hervey de Glanvill and his close association with him receives repeated illustration. In the catalogue of the forces with which he begins his narrative names him first, as commander of the ships of Norfolk and Suffolk, among the four constables who were the recognized leaders of the Anglo-Norman forces.
On a later occasion his language leaves no doubt that after the first brush with the enemy upon the arrival of the fleet in the Tagus before Lisbon (June 28) he was one of the little band of thirty nine who, with Hervey de Glanville and Saher of Archelle, slept out with their arms upon them in a peculiarly dangerous and exposed position when there had not yet been time to establish a defensible camp. Again, next day, at a critical moment during the negotiations of the crusaders with King Affonso Henriques of Portugal, when a powerful minority of ‘about eight shiploads of Normans and men from Southampton and Bristol’ under the leadership of one William Calf, declared their opposition to stopping at Lisbon and their determination to push forward and practice piracy upon ‘the merchant vessels of Africa and Spain’, their defection was prevented, according to our only author, by an impassioned address of Hervey de Glanville- a speech which he reproduces in full with evident pride and admiration, being careful to record in a marginal note that he has not given the exact words but the sense of it. Even more instructive is the situation revealed when the Moors in Lisbon had been brought to the point of surrendering the city and a brief truce had been arranged. Five hostages were received from the Moors by Hervey de Glanville on behalf of King Affonso, and by them they were in due course handed over to the king. This action caused grave dissatisfaction to spread among the Anglo-Normans, where the king was distrusted and where it was felt that the hostages ought not to have been delivered into his hands; and at the instigation of a renegade priest of Bristol, a mutiny was started among the lower ranks, which was directed against Hervey de Glanvill. Our author defends him with eloquence and animation; and from his language it transpires that he himself was present with Glanvill in the king’s camp when emissaries were dispatched to calm the mutineers.
On the question raised by Prof. David as to whether the leader of the Crusade to Lisbon was Hervey de Glanville Senior or his son Hervey de Glanville Junior, I would agree with Harold Livermore’s view that this Hervey ‘appears in the narrative as a mature man of counsel rather than an active young warrior’. He would continue to give wise council as seen in his speech given at the Shire-Moot in c.1150, which demonstrated the respect in which he was held.
There were three motivational speeches made, by the Bishop of Porto, an anonymous ‘certain priest’ (either Raol or Roger priest of Bawdsey), and Hervey de Glanville.
Bishop Pedro called the crusaders “God’s people” who were on “a blessed pilgrimage” and told them that “the praiseworthy thing is not to have been to Jerusalem but to have lived a good life on the way.” He urged them to “act like good soldiers” and affirmed that “sin is not in waging war but in waging war for the sake of plunder” and “when a war had been entered upon by God’s will it is not permitted to doubt that it has been rightly undertaken”.
The “certain priest”, held up a relic of the True Cross and assured them that “in this sign, if you do not hesitate, you will conquer… for if it should happen that anyone signed with this cross should die, we do not believe that life has been taken from him, for we have no doubt that he is changed into something better. Here, therefore, to live is glory, and to die is gain”.
Hervey's speech appeals to family pride of his Norman ancestors, the desire for glory to honour his Norman roots, "the counsels of honour" and the unity to which the crusaders had sworn, at the onset of the expedition.
SPEECH OF HERVEY DE GLANVILLE
In a memory of pious recollection, I recall how, on the day before I came to Portugal, I saw people of so many nations, and men of pious erudition marked with the Lord’s cross, and [thought] it would greatly relieve my (albeit most melancholy) mind if I knew how I could bind this universe of people with a chain of sincere unity.
To that end in fact, and with our great power such as it was fitting to bring to bear, now that such a diversity of men is drawn together with us under the law of a united alliance, (and in connection with that, we may carefully judge that there is nothing in it which can with merit be complained of or denigrated), let not the stain of infamy adhere to us, fellows of the same blood, for ever ,by our avoidance; on the contrary, mindful of our ancient virtues, we are to accumulate the renown and glory of our forebears, rather than wrap up the disgrace of misbehaviour in rags. Certainly, the distinctions of ancestors, and the rewards of love and honour, are brought back into memory by descendants. If you are good imitators of the ancients, honour and glory will follow you; if bad, the disgrace of improper conduct.
The race of the Normans, who, by use of unbroken virtue, know no-one to refuse work, that is to say, [the race] of whom, always hardened in the great hardship of military service, is neither quickly overcome by adversity, nor exercised by as many difficulties in prosperity; nor is it subject to indolent laziness, seeing that the vice of idleness always knew how to disrupt work.
But now I know not to what perverse purpose envy, as though with a passion for honour and glory, creeps slavishly upon us, and when it is unable to poison men of a race foreign to us, it diverts the greatest part of its venom to us ourselves.
Pay attention, brothers, and revisit your habits, correcting them. Take an example, in your confusion, from your neighbour. Colognians do not disagree with others from Cologne. Flanders men are not prejudiced against Flanders men. Who, indeed, would deny that the Scots are barbarians? And yet they never overstepped the law of due friendship between us.
And another thing can be seen in you, all but unnatural when we are all sons of one mother; that the tongue denies the office of mutual assistance to the palate, the back to the stomach, the foot to its equal, the hand to the hand, and you wish to go away from here. And we elect that it may be well.
As for us, indeed, as it is now settled by all those in the commune (you few alone excepted, I am compelled to say, not without sadness); here we shall remain. You do no injury to God thereby, but to yourselves. For if you remain here, the power of God is not increased by you; if you go away, it is not diminished. If this city is taken from us, what will you say to that?
And concerning atonement for fellowship violated, I shall say nothing; you will come to infamy and ignominy everywhere in the world. For fear of a glorious death, you will have taken your forces away from your fellows. You have not yet compared booty forsaken with a single desire for eternal opprobrium.
Your innocent progeny will be held liable for this your crime, and surely be ashamed that the Norman mother of our race will undeservedly suffer perpetual disgrace for your action from the men of so many nations who are present here.
Now for the future. For what reason do you send yourself and your descendants to ruin? Your travel abroad is certainly not seen as founded on charity, because there is no love in you. For if it were given of true love in you, assuredly you would have greater faith in us.
I have not acquired learning, nor have I learned how to make a speech to the populace. I did however learn, and I know, that it behoves him who wishes his sins to be absolved to absolve the sins of others. Here, in fact, he [ie. Hervey, speaking of himself, and distancing himself from the King?] fills the office of a diligent person, who was not acquainted with those by whom he was sought. The reason I assert this is on account of absolving sins and tolerating wrongs, because you have pointed out above, to excuse yourselves from this duty, certain questionable things concerning the King.
Besides, concerning the advantage arising to those sailing - who knew whether we might squander something foreign to us by thus striving? In rushing the passage? Who knew whether that hope of profit might be speedy or delayed? To some extent, indeed, I prefer to be well used here to consume my time, than to be wandering and wavering, or to exchange a certainty for uncertainties, and to commit me and mine to bad outcomes through accidental circumstances.
Concerning the King, although in your minds he might have been blameworthy, as you have pointed out above, for God it might have been tolerable that to some degree he took great advantage of you. He, however, as we are told, claims himself to be innocent of all improper action towards you, and should be cleared by your judgment. Therefore, he should feel the compassion of your fellows. Be sparing with that kind of infamy. Listen to the counsel of your honour.
Indeed I, in the first place, if it may please you, with all my might, on bended knee, hands clasped, surrendering all I have into your hands, will most willingly take the lordship of you upon myself, if you will only remain with us. And if you do not wish [this as] fellows, at least show yourselves to us [as] lords.
Prof. C.W. David, writing about Osbert clerk of Bawdsey (recipient of the Memoir, who also witnessed Ranulf’s charter to Butley), revealed that ‘an Osbert was party to a final concord concerning property in Stradbroke in 3 Henry III, and that a daughter of an Osbert of Bawdsey was party to a final concord concerning property in Fressingfield in 15 Edward III’
[Walter Rye, A Calendar of the Feet of Fines for Suffolk, Ipswich, 1900 pp.20,90]:
p.20: 3 Henry III-(1219), No.72: Geoffrey Bustard v. Osbert de Baudreseya in Stradebroc
p.90- 15 Edward I-(1287) No.59: Robert de Ufford and Johanna his wife and Thomas their son v. Margaret daughter of Osbert de Baudresya in Fresingefeud.
(Sir Robert de Ufford, Justiciary of Ireland in 1276-81, a descendant of Reginald de Peyton; son Robert married Cecily de Valoines a descendant of Theobald de Valoines of Parham)
Notably the Osbert of Bawdsey named in these two final concords was of a different generation to the Osbert of Bawdsey who received the letter in 1147, but one would assume they were related. The interesting link is with the lands in Stradbroke and Fressingfield, both lands linked with the Walter family in the 12th century.
Hervey de Glanville witnessed a confirmation charter by Stephen Count of Mortain (pre-1135) of the grant to Ernald Ruffus, son of Roger, of the manor of Stradbroke (to hold as his grandfather, Ernald, held it) and of the soke and advowson of the churches of Stradbroke and Wingfield in the Honour of Eye. And King John confirmed this said grant to Ernald Ruffus on May 17 in his first year.
This Le Rus or Ruffus family was enfeoffed of this property soon after the reign of the Conqueror, as held from Roger de Poitou who held part of Stradbroke in Domesday, (and Robert Malet held another part of Stradbroke sub-tenanted by Walter, Walter fitzGrip, Robert de Glanville and Leornic).
Roger son of Ernald also held Hasketon from Roger in Domesday.
Other witness of the charter included Robert fitzWalter (de Caen) sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, and Stephen’s nephew Henry (ie. his heir Henry II):
King Stephen confirmed properties of Blythburgh priory by undated charter (1136-47), witnessed/testibus by "Adam de Belnaco et Herveo de Glanvilla apud Framlyngham". (Blythburgh Priory Cartulary Part I, e. Christopher Harper-Bill, Suffolk, 1980, No. 44, p.47) Adam de Belnaco was a regular witness to Stephen’s charters, as was Hervey de Glanville.
Framlingham was originally granted to Roger Bigod Sheriff of Suffolk and a ringwork or motte and bailey castle was first built in either the 11th or early 12th century. It was later held by his son Hugh Bigod who built a larger castle.
Hervey de Glanville and son Rannulf (and Roger Gulafre) witnessed the foundation charter of Snape priory by William Martel.
The introduction in Monasticon Anglicanum (iv, p.558):
William Martel, Albreda his wife and Geoffrey their son, having given the manor of Snape, with other possessions (inherited from Walter fitzGrip), to the abbot and convent of St John at Colchester, a prior and some Benedictine monks from that house were settled here in the year 1155. The settlement having been ordered in William Martel’s charter.
William Martel was appointed steward under Henry I and Stephen, but his service was not continued under Henry II, with his last entry as sheriff of Surrey in 1154-55.
So presumably, this charter is dated prior to 1155, which is confirmed by various cartulary researchers, including Vivien Brown in the Eye Priory Cartulary (Part II, p.26-27), who also stated that Roger Gulafre became a monk at Eye in or about 1155 (ibid, p.59; Cart. Pt I, p.211, No.283).
This is likely the last appearance of Hervey de Glanville as a witness before his death.
And, as previously mentioned (under William de Glanville), Hervey de Glanville witnessed his nephew Bartholomew de Glanville’s Confirmation Charter to Bromholm Priory, as shown in the Monasticon Anglicanum (v, p.63), and in the Crawford Collection of Charters and Documents (ed. A.S. Napier and W.H. Stevenson, Bodlein Library, Oxford, 1895, p.32)- the document was witnessed by ‘Hervey de Glanville, Rannulf his son, Roger de Glanville, Robert his son, William de Glanville, Osbert de Glanville, and Reginald de Glanville’. Dated c.1147-50.
While Hervey de Glanville witnessed King Stephen’s Charter of Confirmation to the monks of Eye Priory in 1137-38, Rannulf de Glanville replaced his father as witness to another confirmation charter to Eye Priory by William son of King Stephen, count of Boulogne, earl Warenne and count of Mortain, in 1156-58, along with William Martel, William Gulafre (son of Roger), etc. This implies that Rannulf’s father, Hervey, was now deceased. (Eye Priory Cartulary and Charters, i, 32, No.23)
While difficult to establish beyond doubt, it would appear that Sir Hervey de Glanville had the following issue, by at least two wives, Flandina and Mabil (both named in the Castle Acre Priory Cartulary).
The Castle Acre Priory Charters (Brit. Lib., Harley MS 2110, folio 67) dated circa 1147, contains a charter by Hervey de Glanville in which a witness is named as ‘Domina/Lady Mabil wife of Hervey’. Notably Rannulf named his second daughter Amabil/Mabil (see discussion below), probably after his mother, and his third daughter Helewise after his wife Berthe de Valoines’ mother, (his eldest daughter named Matilda/Maud, possibly named in honour of King Henry II’s mother). And one of Rannulf’s nieces was named Mabilia.
1.William de Glanville –‘son of Flandina’; wife unknown (Glanville-Richards suggested William married Gundreda, a daughter of William de Warren 2nd Earl of Surrey- however, she married 1. Roger Earl of Warwick 1130, and 2. William de Lancaster of Kendal c.1154, so highly unlikely she married William de Glanville); only known issue a dau. Agnes who was sole heir to William and to his brother Roger de Glanville- Agnes married Robert de Creke and was the daughter of William de Glanville (Curia Regis Roll, v.1, 10 John (1209) No.101, p.155- ‘Robertus de Crec qui habet filiam Willelmi de Glanvill’); Bartholomew de Creke, the son of Agnes de Creke made a charter to the Priory of St Osithe de Chich in Essex, which he dedicated to ‘the soul of Hervey de Glanville, his mother’s grandfather’. (Monasticon Anglic.vi. pt1, p.309). See full account of Roger’s wife Countess Gundred’s (possibly the source of the confusion re the name Gundred) claim against Agnes de Creke, ‘The Countess Gundred’s Lands’, by S.J. Bailey, The Cambridge Law Journal, 1948, Vol.10 No.1 (1948) pp. 84-103, which confirms that Agnes was heir to Gundred’s husband Roger de Glanville; William’s brother Roger de Glanville’s charter to Castle Acre was witnessed by ‘Hervey de Glanville, William son of Flandine, and Robert de Glanville, his brothers’, implying that William’s mother differed to the other brothers.(refer charter below)
Probably the William de Glanville who held 9 ½ fees of the Honour of Eye, Suffolk in 1166 (Red Book of the Exchequer, p.411)
2.Robert de Glanville - attended the meeting of barons where Hervey de Glanville made his speech c.1150 at the Suffolk Shire Moot when William Martel accused Ralf de Alstead and Roger his brother of treason; named as a brother by Roger de Glanville in charter to Castle Acre Priory, dated c.1160, witnessed by ‘Hervey de Glanville, William son of Flandine, and Robert de Glanville, his brothers’; 1166 Cartae Baronum- held 3 knights fees in Norfolk from Earl Hugh Bigod and half a fee of the bishop of Norwich (Red Book of the Exchequer, I, 392 and 395). May have died sometime after 1166, as he does not appear in family charters. Could also be the son of Roger de Glanville, Hervey’s brother, as named in the Crawford Collection of Charters and Documents (ed. A.S. Napier and W.H. Stevenson, Bodlein Library, Oxford, 1895, p.32)- the document was witnessed by ‘Hervey de Glanville, Rannulf his son, Roger de Glanville, Robert his son, William de Glanville, etc’. Dated c.1147-50.
3.Hervey de Glanville (jnr) -named as a (deceased) brother by Roger de Glanville in a charter dated c.1186; witness to Rannulf’s charter to Butley Priory c.1171; witnessed brother Roger’s charter to Castle Acre Priory c.1160; listed with Rannulf as witnesses in Yorkshire Charter in 1163; held land in Suffolk from the Abbot of Ely in 1166. Probably the ‘Hervey filius Hervey’ named in the 1130 Pipe Roll, and as a witness, ‘Hervey filius Hervey’, to Hervey Senior’s Shire Moot speech in c.1150. Issue: Alice who married Geoffrey de Lodnes; possibly father of John de Glanville (below); possibly father of William filius Hervey/William Hervey involved in a suit over Theobald Walter’s inherited lands, being granted Boxted in Suffolk, and Belaugh and Hulmestead in Norfolk.
4.Rannulf de Glanville -married Berthe de Valoines dau. of Theobald de Valoines Lord of Parham; Chief Justiciar of England 1180-1190; died at Acre in 1190, when participating in the Crusades. Designated author of ‘Tractabus de legibus et conseuetudinibus regni Angliae, often called Glanvill Treatise (The Treatise on the Laws and Customs of the Kingdom of England), dated 1187-89, the earliest treatise on the laws of England (also thought to have been written by his protégé Hubert Walter). An entry in the annals of Loch Cé, recording the killing in 1185 by Domnall Ó Briain, king of Thomond, of a foster brother of Prince John, suggests that a son of Ranulf de Glanville was included among John's entourage in Ireland. (M.T. Flanagan, Butler [Walter], Theobald, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography 2004; and CELT below). This may have been a son named William de Glanville, possibly married to Dionysia Lenveise. This William died without issue in the 1180’s and his widow remarried Hubert de Anesty whose son Nicholas de Anesty inherited on the death of his father in 1210, implying he was of age.
Rannulf’s heirs were three daughters, Matilda (m. William d’Auberville), Amabila (m. Ralph d’Arden), Helewise (m. Robert fitzRalph Lord of Middleham). Rannulf appears to be the designated heir of Hervey de Glanville, inheriting Hervey’s estate of Bawdsey, as well as Benhall. First appears witnessing charter of William son of King Stephen c.1156-58 (Eye Cartulary, i, p.32 No. 23), and in the Pipe Rolls, 8 Henry II (1162), and as sheriff of Yorkshire in 1163/64.
5. Roger de Glanville- of Middleton, Suffolk; on Crusade, with Rannulf, at Acre in 1190 (‘Benedict of Peterborough’, v.II, p.144); baron of the Exchequer 1174; witnessed Rannulf de Glanville’s endowment charter to Leiston Abbey in c.1186-9 along with other brothers Osbert and Gerard de Glanville; married 1. Christiana, and m.2. Countess Gundreda widow of Hugh Bigod Earl of Norfolk; his heir named as Agnes dau. of his brother William who inherited Middleton, Yoxford in Suffolk, and Roughton in Norfolk, however, a Robert de Glanville claimed these lands in recognition of ‘morte d’ancestor’, whether as a legitimate heir is unknown (Roger also supposedly had an illegitimate son Richard de Glanville of Bedfordshire); Roger also named his brother Hervey in his own charter to Leiston Abbey; Roger made a charter granting tithes in Earsham Norfolk to Castle Acre Priory, c.1160, witnessed by “Hervey, Robert and William ‘son of Flandina’, his brothers” (Brit. Lib, Harley MS, 2110 fol.67). A full account of Roger’s wife Gundred’s land claim against William’s daughter Agnes, see ‘The Countess Gundred’s Lands’, by S.J. Bailey, The Cambridge Law Journal, 1948, Vol.10 No.1 (1948) pp. 84-103), and Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk claims against Agnes and husband Robert de Creke.
A curious charter to Coxford Priory c.1171 in which an agreement between the Prior and Convent of the canons of Rudham and Roger de Glanville concerning the mill and pond of Thorp in which the canons ‘will render annually to the aforenamed Roger and his heirs 7s. “just as his father Robert de Glanville was accustomed to have in the time of Prior Mathew”’, is difficult to fathom, unless this was a clerical error- Matthew was the first prior at Rudham Priory founded in c.1140. To confuse matters further, a confirmation of the agreement was given by Hervey de Glanville in which he says that he and equally his heirs have complied with the agreement made between the aforesaid canons and Roger de Glanville and then confirmed the gift with his deed. Whether this refers to a Roger son of Robert son of Roger de Glanville (brother of Hervey de Glanville senior), is difficult to establish.
6.Gerard de Glanville - list of Barons present at coronation of King Richard included Rannulf and ‘Gerald his brother’- Ranulfus de Glanvil justituarius Anglie, Gerardus de Glanvilla frater ipsius (‘Benedict of Peterborough’, v.II, p.80); witnessed Rannulf de Glanville’s endowment charter to Butley Priory c.1171, and his charter to Leiston Abbey c.1186-89, and two charters in the Cartulary Abbey de Rievalle (in Nth Yorkshire- pp.40 and 119). Married 1. Emma, dau. of Thomas de Cuckney of Nottinghamshire- issue Henry de Glanville of Wooton-Glanville in Dorset, and Bertha who married Lord William de Stuteville of Knaresborough and Aldeborough (c.1140-1202) as arranged by her uncle Rannulf- William de Stuteville joined with Rannulf to capture King William of Scotland in 1174; married 2. Maud dau. of Adam fitzSwein fitzAilric de Bretton (of Yorkshire) and widow of Adam de Montbegon who died 1181.
The Chronicle of the Reigns of Henry II and Richard I, under the name of Benedict of Peterborough, ed. by Wm Stubbs, 1867, v.II, p.80- list of Barons present at the coronation of Richard, including Ranulf de Glanville and his brother Gerard de Glanville:
7.Osbert de Glanville- Richard Mortimer states that evidence indicates Osbert de Glanville was a brother of Rannulf as he witnessed several family charters including the Cartulary Abbey de Rievalle (below) which is witnessed by ‘Rannulfo de Glanvilla, Vicecomite, et Osberto fratre ejus’; appointed a justice during period Rannulf was chief justiciary; witnessed Hubert Walter’s foundation charter to West Dereham Abbey 1188, and, the charter (no. 147) of Gilbert de Hawkedon to Butley Priory granting rent in Instead at the request of his lord Theobald Walter (also witnessed by Peter Walter).
(NB. Some claim he was the son of Rannulf, but he was not Rannulf’s heir)
8. Guthe de Glanville- thought to have married 1. Ada(m) de Biannery- issue a son Adam; m.2. de Murious- issue Roger, Geoffrey and Alexander. (Placitorum Abbreviatio, Temporibus Regum Ric I, Johann, Henry III etc., pub.1811, Suffolk, Easter Term, 11 John, 1210- Record Commission. p.67; 14th Century Rent Roll of Priory of Butley- The East Anglian, or Notes and Queries… New Series… vol.xi, 1906, p.59; Testa de Nevill, p.210)
Others speculated upon, but unlikely:
John de Glanville?- rarely mentioned – (a) National Archives UK Ancient Deed E326/3932 (Series B)- Alice de Dunville widow late the wife of William Dacus, grants land in Gretingham/Cretingham to the nuns of Redelingfeld, witnessed by ‘John son of Hervey de Glanville, parson of Combes’ in undated charter (also Mortimer p.6)- possibly the son of Hervey de Glanville Junior. Combes is near Finborough in Suffolk (held by Rannulf).
(b) Early Yorkshire Charters, Vol. I., p.256, No. 337, dated 1179-1185- Confirmation by Rannulf de Glanville, for the health of the soul of Berta his wife and for the health of William de Fiskergate of the gift made by William of the house late of Walter son of Daniel in York. Witnesses: Osbert de Glanvill, William de Auberville, Gerard de Glanville, Hubert Walter, William filio Hervey, Theobald de Valoines, Stephen de Glanvill, Johanne/John Glanvill, etc.
(c)Also named in a 1211 fine between Herbert prior of Cokesford, and Robert de Creke and Agnes his wife (daughter of William de Glanville and heir of Roger de Glanville), ‘represented by John de Glanville, dispute over the ‘fish, pool and vineyard of the said Prior of Torp. Interests which the Canons had of Roger de Glanville mentioned. Consideration: 7 s yearly and water rights’. Due to the year of the fine, this may indicate he was son of Hervey de Glanville Junior. (Pedes Finium Norfolk, p.136, No. 492)
Gilbert de Glanville? -clerk of Archbishop Baldwin of Canterbury; elected Bishop of Rochester 1185, ordained a priest 21 Sept 1185; d.1214; on the deathbed of Hubert Walter, he was sent for when the Archbishop caused his will to be written (Glanville Richards p.62); appointed a justice 1187-88 during period Rannulf was chief justiciary; attended coronation of Richard I and frequently in attendance on the king in England and France, and acted as a justice 1194-97; involved in election of Archbishop Hubert Walter in 1193.A local chronicle, Anglia Sacra, (by H. Wharton, i, 346) says he was a native of Northumbria. No document directly links him with Sir Hervey or to Rannulf, but most likely a close kinsman, rather than a brother.
Rannulf had a recorded niece, father unknown, also named after her grandmother:
Mabel who is the niece of Rannulf de Glanville, and is in his custody, was wife of Albrici Picot, and their land in Bukeswurthe, etc (Cambridgeshire)…. And she is 60 years old and more (‘Et ipsa est lx annorum et amplius’), and has 2 sons and 3 daughters, and the eldest is a soldier.’ (Rotuli de dominus et pueriset et puellis, 31 Henry II (1185) p.44)
Mabel’s eldest son was named Robert which could be a clue to her father’s name, as Robert was not her husband’s father’s name (ie. Henry), although it was the name of Albrici’s grandfather.
Walter de Glanville, unknown parentage, was dead by 1199, when the custody of his daughters was given to William Briwere (Honours and Knights Fees, Wm Farrer, v.III, p.238)
Reynald de Glanville, unknown parentage- listed in Bartholomew de Glanville’s charter to Bromholme Priory c.1147-50 as a witness.
There are several charters in the Early Yorkshire Charters, volumes I and II, ed. by William Farrer (1914,1915), involving the de Glanville family.
Vol. I, p. 252, No. 333, dated c.1163- Charter of Bertram de Bulmer, witnessed by Rannulf as sheriff, and Hervey de Glanville.
Vol. I, p.254, No. 335, dated 1179- Grant by Henry II to Rannulf de Glanville of land with houses in York, which Walter son of Daniel held of the grantor for 6s yearly and which the said Walter forfeited for the murder of his wife, whereof he was attainted n the king’s court at York by duel; pardon also to the said Ranulf of those 6s yearly.
Vol. I, p.255, No. 336, dated 1179-1185- Grant by Rannulf de Glanvill to William de Fiskergate of the land with houses in York which Walter son of Daniel held of the king… to hold for 13d. yearly. Witnesses: Prince John, Gerard de Glanvill, Alan de Valoines, etc.
Vol. I., p.256, No. 337, dated 1179-1185- Confirmation by Rannulf de Glanville, for the health of the soul of Bertha his wife and for the health of William de Fiskergate of the gift made by William of the house late of Walter son of Daniel in York. Witnesses: Osbert de Glanvill, William de Auberville, Gerard de Glanville, Hubert Walter, William filio Hervey, Theobald de Valoines, Stephen de Glanvill, Johanne/John Glanvill, Nicholas Pincerna, Rannulf and William chaplains.
Vol. I, p.257, No. 339, dated 1186-87- Confirmation of No 366 by King Henry II. Witnesses: Rannulf de Glanville and Hubert (Walter) dean of York and William Vavasour.
Vol II, p.379, No. 1096, dated 1180-1186: Grant by William Fossard II to the nuns of Watton of land in York called Ghille’s land. Witnesses: Rannulf de Glanville, Osbert de Glanville, Hubert Walter, etc
Vol II, p.119, No 780, dated c.1164-70- Charter to monks of Rievaulx- witnessed by Rannulf vicecomite (de Glanville), Bertha vicecomitissa, Matilda filia ejus.
Osbert de Glanville was one of the signatories to Bartholomew de Glanville’s charter to Bromholm c.1150 (Crawford Collection Charters), his earliest appearance.
Osbert de Glanville was also one of the signatories to Hubert Walter’s foundation charter to West Dereham Abbey in 1188.
Mortimer states that ‘Osbert is proved to have been Rannulf’s brother by a charter to Rievaulx. (Cartularium abbathiae de Rievalle [North Yorkshire], ed. JC Atkinson, p.132. no.182.), undated:
NB. Osbert also witnesses another charter to Rievaulx (p.119) with Rannulf and Gerard de Glanville and William de Auberville (Rannulf’s son-in-law).
Osbert, Roger and Gerard de Glanville were all present and witnessed Rannulf de Glanville’s foundation charter to Leiston Abbey in c.1186-89.
(Mortimer cont.) Osbert de Glanville witnessed a number of Suffolk Charters of Sibton Abbey. He had a son, once called William and twice Rannulf who appears a number of times in records after 1198. The last certain reference to Osbert is in 1194.
S.J. Bailey, in his article, ‘Ranulf de Glanvill and His Children’, The Cambridge Law Journal (Nov.1957, Vol.15 No. 2 pp.163-182), p.178:
Osbert seems to die in the year 1195. The rolls of the King’s Court at the close of the preceding year show him as defendant in an action brought by a widow claiming her dower. She is suing him for dower in the county of Northhampton and he twice essoins himself (ie. non-appearance), first ‘de malo veniendi’ and then ‘de malo lecti’ at “Tateston” (with Suffolk as its marginal venue). Evidently, he died of this illness, leaving as his heir a son name Ranulf; for when this action reappears, early in the year 1196, there is a compromise between the widow’s warrantor and “Ranulf fitzOsbert de Glanville”. In the year 1199, this Ranulf is again concerned in litigation, but this warranty is nullified at once, by special writ of the king, on the ground that Ranulf is underage. It is clear therefore that in July 1199, Osbert, though dead, is represented by a living infant heir; and this heir, be it noted, tends to be recorded at this time simply as Ranulf de Glanville. Moreover, the king’s writ states that the infant Ranulf is in the custody of Hubert Walter, and it was Hubert Walter who likewise held in custody at this time the infant heirs of Glanvill’s daughters. It seems probable, therefore, that Osbert and Glanvill’s daughters were of the same generation.
As yet I have failed to find for Osbert de Glanvill and Ranulf his son, any decisive evidence of a relationship with Glanvill (Rannulf senior), or indeed with any of the collateral Glanvill families.
The question then arises whether Osbert was a son, possibly illegitimate, of Rannulf de Glanville as his three daughters were named as his heirs by the exchequer in 1199.
One would assume there must have been two named Osbert de Glanville, one of whom was Rannulf’s brother. The second one may have been an illegitimate son of Rannulf as suggested, or maybe he was a son of Osbert the elder.
Osbert de Glanvill, is listed among the justices, before whom two fines were levied in the years 1182 and 1189 respectively (Feet of Fines, Henry II, Nos 2,4), but does not appear in any fines of later date. He witnessed Rannulf de Glanville’s endowment charter to Leiston Abbey c.1186-89 and his endowment charter to Butley Priory c.1171. He was, along with Rannulf, witness to Bartholomew de Glanville’s confirmation charter to Bromholm Priory c.1150’s. Osbert also witnessed a charter of Gilbert de Hawkedon who granted rent in Instead (to Butley) that he held of Theobald Walter (Butley Cartulary No. 147) c.1190’s.
Osbert fitzHervey, on the other hand, was one of the circuit judges frequently named in the ‘Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk’, from 1199 to about 1206.
Chronicler, Jocelyn of Brakelond referred to Osbert fitzHervey as a ‘sub vicecomes/under-sheriff, active in the early 1180’s in Suffolk (p.51 Chronicle).
In the Rotuli Curæ Regis in counties Suffolk, Norfolk and Kent, there are eight entries dating from 1194 to 1199, for Osbert filius Hervey - it is difficult to determine which Osbert this refers to, but presumably not Osbert de Glanville. Osbert de Glanville and Osbert fitzHervey both witnessed Hubert Walter’s Charter to West Dereham Abbey in 1188.
The most comprehensive study of the de Glanville family was published in a book by William Urmston S. Glanville-Richards, ‘Records of the Anglo-Norman House of Glanville’, London 1882. It should be noted that, although Glanville-Richard’s research of this family has been thorough and detailed with references to numerous records, much of the speculative genealogical links, particularly the family trees, and claimed ancestral origins and descents are incorrect, unsubstantiated, or very questionable. Given that, Glanville-Richards concluded that Hervey Walter was also known as Hervey de Glanville, brother to Rannulf de Glanville, on what basis he does not reveal, nor did he produce evidence for his conclusion. However, we do need to explore all available evidence of this Hervey de Glanville to see whether there is any substance to this claim he was Hervey Walter.
It is generally accepted by historians who have studied and published articles on Rannulf de Glanville, that Rannulf had a brother named Hervey de Glanville.
Richard Mortimer in his article “The Family of Rannulf de Glanville” (p.6), stated:
‘It was believed in the 14th century at Butley priory (ie. the 14th C Priory rent Rolls) that Rannulf, their founder, had a brother Hervey, and this certainly fits in with other information. He would be the Hervey de Glanville active with Rannulf in Yorkshire in the late 1160’s (NB. does not reveal the source of this information, but probably ‘Early Yorkshire Charters’), and also a witness of the foundation charter of Butley Priory dating from the early 1170’s. He does not occur after the 1170’s, and nothing else is known about him.’
Mortimer referred to “An Unpublished 14th century note from a Butley Priory Rent Roll document which tells of Rannulf’s brother Hervey de Glanville, his sister Gutha de Glanville, and of two brothers named Roger de G. and Osbert de G. although the note implies a degree of vagueness (‘per estimacionem duos fratres quibus nomina’= it is estimated two brothers were named”).
This translation is a bonus given the abbreviated Latin in the original document below.
The source for this text is: H.G. Evelyn White, ‘An unpublished 14th century rent roll of the priory of Butley, Suffolk’ in ‘The East Anglian, or Notes and Queries…’, New Series…vol.xi (1906), p.59:
Mortimer also referred to the list of witnesses to Rannulf de Glanville’s foundation charter to Butley Priory c.1171. (Leiston Abbey Cartulary and Butley Priory Charters, ed. Richard Mortimer, 1979, p.131 No.120):
Historians have noted that it is odd that Hervey Walter was not included in the list of witnesses to Rannulf’s charter to Butley Priory, yet in just a couple of years, Hervey Walter would make his own charter donating tithes from his fee to Rannulf’s priory. And the closeness of the Walter family with Rannulf’s family has been demonstrated in their acknowledgement of Rannulf and his wife in their own charters. This has been one of the arguments equating Hervey Walter with Hervey de Glanville who did witness Rannulf’s charter.
Also, the fact that Hervey de Glanville disappears from the records in 1171, and Hervey Walter first appears in the records with his own charter in c.1171-77.
Further records of Hervey de Glanville
There is also an entry in the ‘Early Yorkshire Charters’ (v.1, pp.252-253, no.333), dated 1163-66, in which Hervey de Glanville and his brother Rannulf as sheriff of York (vicecomite Eboraci), witness a charter by Bertram de Bulmer (previous sheriff).
Mortimer also wrote that ‘Hervey de Glanville (Jnr) was holding a fee of Ely in 1166’, which is confirmed in the Red Book of the Exchequer (Liber Rubeus de Scaccario), ed. Hubert Hall, 1896 London, (p.364-365):
Cartae Baronum (Red Book of the Exchequer)
A.D. 1166- Hervei de Glanville owed one knight’s fee for his fee in Suffolk (Suthfolcia), to Nigel Bishop of Ely, Cambridgeshire (Cantebriggescira):
‘Knight’s fee’ or tenure by knight-service refers to a fief or holding of land held by a knight from an overlord or baron/tenant-in-chief, or the head of a religious house, who in turn held from the Crown, with a feudal obligation to provide the service of one knight properly equipped for 40 days in a year. The overlord could then provide the knights required by the king when at war. One manor might owe several knight’s fees; a holding which owed one fee was probably too small to be a manor.
It should be noted that Hervey Walter’s son Theobald Walter is listed in Cartae Baronum, in the Red Book of the Exchequer (vol.1, p.445), for the Amounderness fee in Lancaster in 1166 A.D., for the payment of one knight’s fee (confirming he was of age). The Honour of Lancaster, at the time, was held by the Crown. He had taken over responsibility for the family’s Amounderness fee in Lancaster while his father was still alive, so presumably Hervey Walter was living in Suffolk/Norfolk although he is not listed in the Cartae Baronum as owing knight’s fees (maybe indicating he was living on his own inherited lands, as a ‘fee simple’- a tenure with no service obligations attached which could be a free-holding ie. hereditable).
In the same volume (Red Book of the Exchequer), the following Glanvilles also owed knight’s fees in 1166:
Robert de Glanville owed half a knight’s fee to William Bishop of Norwich, and 3 fees to Hugo Bigod in Norfolk (pp.392, 395)
Rannulf de Glanville owed 1 fee to the Honor of St Edmunds, and ½ fee to Hugh Bigod in Norfolk (pp. 393, 396), and Rannulf held the wardship of Everard de Ros who held the castle of Helmsley in York for 1 knights fee (p.432).
Bartholomew de Glanville ‘holds 3 parts of a fee in the village de Hamingges/Hanigges’ (Honing, Norfolk) owed to William Abbot of Holme, Norfolk (p.394)
Roger de Glanville 1 fee to Hugh Bigod, Norfolk (p.397- possibly Earsham, or Roughton), and 4 fees in Essex in right of his wife (Christiane), owed to William de Montfichet (p.349)
William de Glanville 9 ½ fees to Honour of Eye, Suffolk (p.411).
Hervey de Glanville (Hueū de Glan.) is also listed in the Pipe Roll, vol.8, 11 Henry II, 1164-65, Honor of Eye, Suffolk (p.6), his only entry in the Pipe Rolls:
Rannulf de Glanville makes his first appearance in the Pipe Rolls, in 8 Henry II,1162 for Norfolk/Suffolk (p.65) owing 21d., and again in 1163/64 as sheriff for Yorkshire (Everwicscr) in Pipe Roll 10 Henry II the year he replaced Bertram de Bulmer as sheriff of Yorkshire (p.11):
Bartholomew de Glanville first appears in the Pipe Rolls for Suffolk in 1165-66 (12 Henry II). Rannulf and Bartholomew appear in successive Pipe Rolls (until Bartholomew’s death in 1179).
Roger de Glanville, brother of Rannulf, makes his first appearance in Pipe Roll 22 Henry II, 1175-76 in Northumberland.
Roger de Glanville appears to have held a close relationship with Hervey de Glanville, as revealed in several records.
There were at least two by the name of Roger de Glanville, and the records make it difficult to work out which one is which. The key appears to be the lands of Middleton, Roughton and Yoxford held by Roger de Glanville.
Roger de Glanville of Middleton, Suffolk (north of Benhall, and near Leiston), a witness along with brothers Osbert de Glanville and Gerard de Glanville and three of Hervey Walter’s sons (Hubert, Theobald and Roger Walter) to Rannulf de Glanville’s endowment charter to Leiston Abbey c.1186-89. Roger takes precedence in the list and therefore must have been the elder brother.
List of witnesses:
Roger made his own charter granting Middleton church to Leiston Abbey c.1186-90 (Leiston Cartulary…, p.83, no.39) shortly after Rannulf’s charter, in which he offered ‘prayers for the souls of me and Countess Gundred my wife, and my father and my mother and my wife Christiane’ (all deceased), ‘et pro salute anime Hervei fratris mei (and for the soul of Hervey my brother)’, implying that his brother Hervey may have died.
Roger had earlier made a charter granting tithes in Earsham, Norfolk, to Castle Acre Priory, witnessed by “Hervey de Glanville, William son of Flandina, Robert de Glanville, my brothers”.
The Cartulary of Castle Acre Priory, is dated mid-13th century, but preserves a large number of charters from the time of Henry I onwards. The Cartulary is a later copy of the original charters and the charters have been grouped together according to the names of ‘de Glanville’. (Brit. Lib., Harley Ms 2110, fol.67)
There are four charters on the page of the Cartulary of Castle Acre Priory, two for Hercham/Earsham and two concerning Baldressei/Bawdsey- they are listed in the heading for the page: ‘hercham. Baldressie’.
The first two charters are placed successively, as though closely linked. The first by William de Flaxineto of Earsham, (sheriff of Suffolk 1152-58) of his tithes from Earsham to Castle Acre priory which he held from Hugh Bigod Earl of Norfolk, followed by the charter of Roger de Glanville who succeeded to Earsham after William’s death, confirming the donation of William de Flaxineto.
Then there is a long space before two other charters, also placed together as though closely linked, the first by Hervey de Glanville of Baldressie/Bawdsey and the second by Roger priest of Bawdsey. These were explored in detail in the section on Hervey de Glanville Senior above.
The initial thought is that the second pair of charters succeeded the first two charters, but a closer inspection of the people named in these two charters would seem to indicate they were of a much earlier date than the first two charters which date c.1150s- 60’s. The second two charters appear to date c.1147, as discussed earlier.
William de Fraxineto and Roger de Glanville’s Charters in the Castle Acre Cartulary were followed on the same page, albeit with a large space, by a charter of Hervei de Glanville of Bawdsey, and a charter by Roger priest of Bawdsey. However, these two charters related to a previous generation, viz. Hervey de Glanville Senior and his priest Roger of Bawdsey.
We will now look at the first two charters on the page.
Charter 1, of William de Fraxineto:
Concerning the tithes of Earsham
May all men, present and future, know that I, William de Franxineto, have given and granted, and by this my charter confirmed, to God and Saint Mary, and the monks of Acre, in free, quiet and perpetual alms, all my tithes from my lordship of Earsham, for the health of my soul, and those of all my forebears, living and dead,
For which reason I will and firmly order that the aforesaid monks may hold, and forever possess by right, the aforenamed tithes.
These being witnesses, Rodbert de Franxineto my son, Ralph de Franxineto, Ralph de Beling’, Roger de Earsham, Rodbert Contenance [Coutances?], Christian [or Christine] my wife (Xp[ist]iana uxore mea), Nicholas the clerk of Werinset’.
When William de Flaxineto died (1158/59), Hugh Bigod granted Earsham to Roger de Glanville, who confirmed the original donation to Castle Acre:
Charter 2, of Roger de Glanville
Concerning the same
May all men, present and future, know that I, Roger de Glanville, have granted, and by this my charter confirmed, to God and Saint Mary, and the monks of Acre, in free, quiet and perpetual alms, all my tithes from my lordship of Earsham, for the health of my soul, and those of all my forebears, living and dead,
For which reason I will and firmly order that the aforesaid monks may hold, and for ever possess by right, the aforenamed tithes, just as William de Fraxineto gave them to them, and by his charter confirmed them to them.
These being witnesses, Adam the deacon, Hervey de Glanville, William the son of Flandina, [and] Robert de Glanville, my brothers, Stephen de Ludham, Roger de Colville, Gerard de Hemingstone.
The list of witnesses in Roger’s charter reveals some interesting information about the sons of Hervey de Glanville Senior:
'Herveio de glanvill. Will ‘fil’ flandine. Rob de Glanville, ‘fratres’ mei'
= Hervey de Glanvill. William ‘son of Flandina’. Robert de Glanville, my brothers
This is the only charter that describes William as ‘son of Flandina’. He was always named as William de Glanville. It would seem that Roger was distinguishing William as a half-brother (from a different mother), for some obscure reason. William was thought to be the eldest of the brothers, and held 9 ½ knights fees in the 1166 Cartae Baronum (Red Book of the Exchequer). Yet Roger listed his brother Hervey firstly in the list of witnesses.
However, it should be noted that Roger de Glanville’s heir appears to have been William’s daughter Agnes, not Hervey’s issue. Agnes, wife of Robert de Creke was named in a suit by Countess Gundred, widow of Roger de Glanville who was claiming lands held by Roger in Middleton in Suffolk, and Roughton in Norfolk, inherited by Agnes daughter of William as outlined in “The Countess Gundred’s Lands” by S.J. Bailey who states that this ‘clearly implies that William was Roger’s eldest brother’. However, a Robert de Glanville made a claim for the land of Roughton (Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk, No. 173) against William de Egefield in 1209; and against Robert de Creke and Agnes his wife in 1203 for the lands of Middleton and Yoxford under recognition of ‘morte d’ancestor’ (ie. inheritance from an ancestor), (ibid, no. 422), after an earlier claim by Agnes (de Glanville and her first husband Thomas Bigod who sued Robert de Glanville in 1195 over a carucate of land in Roughton. All three lands of Roughton, Middleton and Yoxford were held by Roger de Glanville. (Notably all held in Domesday by Roger Bigod.) It is not known on what basis Robert de Glanville was claiming inheritance rights. Was he a base son of Roger de Glanville, or of William de Glanville, or was he claiming for a generation further back?
Notably, Roger confirmed for ‘the health of my soul, and those of all my forebears, living and dead’. This cryptic clue implies that one of his forebears was still alive, probably his mother (Mabil).
Dating the charters
No date is given for Roger’s endowment of the priory- the estimated date is under dispute and makes a difference to the identification of Roger and his brother Hervey and to which generation they belonged to. Richard Mortimer, in his ‘Family of Rannulf de Glanville’ estimated the date as the 1140’s and attributed the charter to a Roger de Glanville whom he claimed was brother to Hervey de Glanville Senior. However, Hervey de Glanville Senior’s elder brother William died before 1138, well before Mortimer’s claim of the 1140’s, and therefore could not be the brother William (son of Flandina) named by Roger.
However, other information provided in the charters, related to the man who initially held and donated the manor of Earsham, William de Fraxneto, appears to prove a later date for Roger’s charter, probably the 1160’s, and that places Hervey de Glanville Junior as brother to Roger de Glanville in these charters.
Further indication of a later date can be found in one of Roger’s charter witnesses, Roger de Coleville, who was named in the Pipe Roll 4 Henry II (1158) p.129-130 (notably in the same section for Suffolk and Norfolk, in the pleas of Wandelbury, as Hubert Walter the elder):
And on a preceding page, in Suffolk (p.126), William de Fraxineto/de Fraisnei as sheriff.
William de Warenne, 2nd Earl of Surrey originally granted the monks a new site in 1089 when they began building the existing buildings of Castle Acre Priory. However, building progressed slowly and the church was not consecrated until 1146-48 and its west end was completed in the 1160’s. The priory continued to attract benefactors, including the second earl’s descendants who made their last endowment in 1315. Much of the monks’ expenditure went on building, particularly in the 12th century.
Francis Blomefield wrote: In the Lordship of Earsham, Norfolk, there was a manor which formerly belonged to William de Freney/Fraxineto who gave the tithes of the demesne of it to the monks of Castle Acre, it afterwards came to Roger de Glanville, who confirmed that donation. (An Essay Towards a Topographical History of the County of Norfolk, v.5, pp.313-318, by Francis Blomefield, London, 1806)
William de Fraxineto’s undated charter is directly above Roger’s charter in fol. 67. Trying to pinpoint when William de Fraxneto received this land of Earsham from the Bigods, and when he made this charter, is difficult, but it would appear to have been in the 1150’s.
William de Frehnie/Fresney/Fraisni/Fraxineto (various spellings) held land of Hugh Bigod.
Hugh Bigod earl of Norfolk was steward of Henry I, Stephen and Henry II. Earsham manor, part of the Hundred of Earsham ws confirmed to Hugh Bigod by Henry II when he made him Earl of Norfolk in 1154. It was held by the Bigod family from an earlier period.
At the beginning of the reign of Henry II, William de Fraxneto/Fraisni appears in the (first) Pipe Roll 2/3/4 Henry II (1156,57,58) as sheriff of Suffolk
Pipe Roll 2 Henry II (1156)
Pipe Roll 3 Henry II (1157) (p.75): Hugh Bigod sheriff of Norfolk ('Comes Hugo') and William de Fraisni sheriff of Suffolk, as a vassal of Hugh Bigod.
Pipe Roll 4 Henry (1158), p.126:
However, in the Pipe Rolls for Henry II, for the years 1159 to 1164, William is no longer listed.
In the 1158/59 Pipe Roll (p.11), his son Roger de Fraisni is listed in his place in Suffolk, his only appearance in a Pipe Roll.
Pipe Roll 5 Henry (Michaelmas 1158- Michaelmas 1159)
William de Fresnay and his wife Christiana, with their sons William and Roger, were benefactors of Thetford Priory (undated), to which they gave land at Little Bealings (BL. Lansdowne 229, fol.147v; Monasticon Anglicanum, 5, p.142, Thetford Priory). To estimate a date of the Thetford donation, we can look at another benefactor listed with de Fresnay, Robert de Vere and his wife Alice (de Montfort), her second husband whom she married c.1129; Alice held the Honour of Haughley after the banishment of her brother Robert de Montfort (son of Hugh de Montfort II) in c.1107, dying c.1111 (Keats Rohan p.597) and her husband Robert held the honour until his death c.1151.
Therefore, William must have donated to Thetford after 1129 and before 1151, indicating that William and Christiana were married early in the century- he was not listed in the 1130 Pipe Roll of Henry I (p.72), although a Robert de Fraxineto/Fresney was fined for a breach of the peace and for forfeitures of the Exchequer, presumably either William’s father or brother.
In the early 1150’s, William de Fresney/Fraxneto and Roger Gulafre were ‘at that time sheriffs’ of Suffolk and Norfolk (‘Rogerius Gulafre et Willelmus Frehnei qui tunc temporis errant vicecomites’), as vassals of Hugh Bigod when they attended the assembly of the lords of Norfolk and Suffolk c.1150-1153 held by King Stephen, in which Hervey de Glanville Senior gave a speech. Roger Gulafre was a sheriff of Suffolk/Norfolk in the 1130’s and 1140’s during King Stephen’s reign, and became a monk at Eye, in or about 1155.
The relevant information is that the Pipe Roll entries indicate that William de Fraxineto was active in the 1150’s and died in c.1158-59.
In the Cartae Baronum in A.D.1166 (Red Book of Exchequer, i, 395) the entry for those who owed knight’s fees to Hugh Bigod, is curiously written: ‘Filius Willelmi de Fraxneto, I militem et iiii partem/quartam’, which appears to translate as ‘the son of William de Fraxineto, I knight’s fee and a quarter’, which would appear to confirm that William was deceased and his son had inherited.
The death of William de Fresney could explain how and when the tithes of Earsham ended up with Roger de Glanville, as granted lands often reverted to the lord who held it, or the Crown, on the death of the grantee, and then regranted, and in this case, it reverted back to Hugh Bigod who gifted it to Roger de Glanville shortly after the death of William dee Fresney, which gives us an approximate date for his Charter to Castle Acre in the early 1160’s.
In 1166, Roger de Glanville owed 1 knight’s fee to Hugh Bigod in Norfolk, which was possibly for the manor of Earsham, or possibly Roughton (also held by the Bigods- see below), and Roger would end up marrying Hugh Bigod’s widow (Hugh died 1177), so Roger is a likely recipient of Bigod’s generosity.
Roger de Glanville came to an agreement, probably in 1171 with the canons of Rudham Priory over a mill-pond at Roughton (vicinity of Bromholm). The charter made a curious statment confirmed an existing agreement made in the time of the previous prior with “Roger’s father Robert”, confirmed by Hervey de Glanville (jnr).
Coxford Priory, or Broomsthorpe Priory was a monastic house in Norfolk, founded c.1140 at the church of St Mary East Rudham by William de Cheney, son of Robert fitzWalter (de Caen), transferred to a new site of Coxford c.1216.
The first prior was Mathew Cheney, a relative of the founder.
(Norfolk and Norwich Record Office, Cartulary of Coxford Priory, fol.15 and 15v- see Mortimer p.3)
Agreement of Roger de Glanvilla
It is witnessed.
This is the agreement between the Prior and Convent of the canons of Rudham and Roger de Glanvilla concerning the mill and pond of Thorp,
That is to say, that the aforesaid canons will render annually to the aforenamed Roger and his heirs seven shillings, just as his father Robert de Glanvilla was accustomed to have in the time of Prior M. (ie. Matthew Cheney)
And if Roger de Glanvilla shall be in Ructon (Roughton), or his wife, he may fish in the fishery, without waste, with the canons’ boat.
And if the fresh water of the canons’ mill should overflow the dam, their miller shall have permission to divert the water to run along the river bed of Roger de Glanvilla’s mill.
Agreement of Hervey de Glanvule
Confirmation of the agreement between the canons of Rudham and Roger de Glanvilla
That is to say, that I, Hervey de Glanvilla, and equally my heirs, have, for the love of God, complied with the agreement which was made between the aforesaid canons and Roger de Glanvilla, calced1 friar [ie a member of the Carmelite Order] of the mill of Thorp, just as their chirographs, from either party, witness.
In order, therefore, that the agreement which was made between them might continue settled, firm and undisturbed for ever, I confirm the gift with my deed, and corroborate it by the application of my seal.
(1.A friar allowed to wear shoes, as opposed to a barefoot friar, indicating a Carmelite friar.)
Confusion is caused by the reference to ‘Roger’s father Robert’ in Roger’s charter to Coxford.
The anomaly is difficult to explain, but the reference to ‘his father Robert de Glanvilla’ may have been a clerical mistake. However, the following records appear to prove that Roger who held Roughton and Middleton was son of Hervey de Glanville Senior, and brother of William de Glanville and of Hervey de Glanville Jnr, and of Rannulf de Glanville.
In 1213, a further confirmation by Robert de Creke and his wife Agnes de Glanville (heir of her father William de Glanville and of Roger de Glanville). This record was on the same page in the Coxford Priory charters as the two charters above. Agnes’s first husband was Thomas le Bigod.
This is the final concord, made in the court of our Lord the King at Wilton in the three weeks after Easter in the 13th year of the reign of King John,
Before the same Lord the King, Simon de Pateshull, James de Poterna, Henry de Ponte Aldemere and Roger Huscarl, Justiciars, and other faithful subjects of our Lord the King then and there present,
Between Herbert, Prior of Cokesford, complainant, through Robert Joie, put in his place to win or lose,
And Robert de Crec and Agnes his wife, defendants, through John de Glanvilla, put in the place of the same to win or lose,
Concerning the pond and fishery of the same Prior of Thorp,
In respect whereof there was a plea between them in the same court.
Roger de Glanville held the lands of Roughton in Norfolk and Middleton and Yoxford in Suffolk.
In 1196 (7 Richard I), Thomas le Bigod and Agnes his wife (de Glanville), per Roger de Reppes, sued a Robert de Glanville over a carucate of land in Roughton, with the fine, a payment of 5 marks of silver by Robert to quit claim.
According to Bailey (‘Countess Gundred’s Lands’) ‘The defendant, Robert, ‘vouches to warranty Agnes, Thomas’ wife, whose inheritance that land is’. (Pedes Finium-Fines Relating to the County of Norfolk ed. Walter Rye, 1881, p.10 No.23; Feet of Fines of Reign of Henry II, and of Richard I from 1182 to 1196 [pub.1894] pp.139-140, No.155)
In 1203, Robert de Glanville made a claim against Robert de Creke and Agnes his wife, tenants of Robert over one knight’s fee and the pertinences in Middleton and Yoxford in Suffolk, under recognition of ‘morte d’ancestor’. With Robert and Agnes paying Robert de Glanville 20 silver marks to quit claim. (Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk, p.201, No.422)
In 1209 Robert de Glanville laid claim, under recognition of ‘morte d’antecessors’ to a carucate in Roughton, against William of Edgefield who called Earl Roger Bigod to warrant. Robert quit claims to the Earl, who pays 40 marks of silver and the land is to remain to the tenant and his heirs who are to hold of the Earl at the service of a knight’s fee. (Pedes Finium, Norfolk, p.130, No.460; Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk, pp.83/84 No. 173)
From the above land claims, it would appear that Robert was claiming the lands of Roger de Glanville at Middleton, Yoxford and Roughton, under recognition of ‘morte ancestor’, indicating that he was the rightful heir. Whether he was a legitimate heir is unknown, but there were no known issue of Roger by either of his wives.
Francis Blomefield, on Roughton (Top. Hist. of Co Norfolk , viii, 155):
Roger Bigod held a lordship in this town, held by 2 freemen (Domesday)- as did Edric, who also had a freeman, but these men Robert Malet laid claim to. Roger de Glanville, who married Gundreda ‘de Warren’ (? inconclusive), relict of Hugh Bigod, had an interest in this lordship in the reign of Henry II, when he and his lady, Gundreda, on their founding the nunnery of Bungey in Suffolk, gave the patronage of this rectory to them, which was also appropriated to them; and in the first of King John, Gundreda, widow of Roger, demanded her dower herein of Robert Creke, and he called to warrant Agnes his wife, whose inheritance it was, she being the daughter (niece) and heiress of Glanville; and in the 9th of that King, an assise was brought to find if Roger, brother (father?) of Robert de Glanville was seized of a carucate of land here, which William de Eggefeld held*, who called to warrant the Earl Roger Bigod, the capital lord.
The church of Roughton was a rectory, which being granted to the nunnery of Bungey by Roger de Glanville and the Lady Gundreda his wife, it was appropriated to that convent.
*Pedes Finium- Fines relating to the County of Norfolk, ed Walter Rye, 1881, p.130- 10 John, No.460: “Robert de Glanville v. William de Egefeld- A carucate in Ructon. Wm calls earl Roger Bigot to warrant. Robert quit claims to the Earl who pays 40 marks of silver, and the land is to remain to the tenant and his heirs, who are to hold of the Earl at the service of a knight’s fee.”
Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk for the Reign of King John 1201-1215, ed. Barbara Dodwell 1958, p.83-84, No. 173:
Robert de Glanville claimed “unde recognito de morte antecessoris”, but no mention of Roger de Glanville by name.
‘The Countess Gundred’s Lands’, by S.J. Bailey, The Cambridge Law Journal, 1948, (Vol.10 No.1 (1948) pp. 84-103), pp.96-98
Roger de Glanville’s widow Gundred, begins actions for her ‘reasonable dower which falls to her ‘ex dono’ Roger de Glanville, formerly her husband’. She brings a claim against Robert de Creke and Agnes his wife. She claims dower from lands situated in the same three vils, Middleton and Yoxford in Suffolk and Ruhton/Roughton in Norfolk. This Agnes, it thus appears, is Roger de Glanville’s heir.
Then in a quite different action, tried in the year 1209 (against Geoffrey de Lodnes and wife Alice de Glanville), we find a defendant asserting that Agnes, the wife of Robert de Creke is the daughter and heir of William de Glanville, Roger’s brother. It thus transpires that this Agnes, the niece and heir of Roger de Glanville, was twice married: first to Thomas Bigod and then to Robert de Creke. The writ of right was against Geoffrey de Lodnes for land in Rattlesden (Suffolk). His defence is that he got it with his wife Alice, daughter of Hervey de Glanville, in ‘maritagium’, and that consequently, Robert de Creke, who has the daughter of William de Glanville, ought to be their warrantor. This clearly implies (1) that William was Roger’s eldest brother (or at least was the eldest of those brothers who, or whose issue, were still surviving), (2) that Agnes is this William’s sole heir.
The son of Agnes and Robert de Creke, Bartholomew de Creke, made a charter to the Priory of St. Osithe de Chich in Essex, dedicating it to the ‘soul of Hervey de Glanville, his mother’s grandfather’ (viz. Agnes de Glanville’s grandfather, “Hervei de Glainvill, avi matris mea”), thereby confirming that Agnes’ father William was the son of Hervey de Glanville Senior. (Monasticon Anglicanum, vi, Pt 1, p.309)
It therefore also confirms that Roger de Glanville, William de Glanville, Hervey de Glanville (jnr) were all sons of Hervey de Glanville Senior.
Bailey referred to the suit against Geoffrey de Lodnes (of Loddon/Lodnes, Norfolk) and his wife Alice de Glanville.
Geoffrey de Lodnes was son of Ralph de Lodnes, son of Jordan de Lodnes Lord of Loddon, son of Jeffrey de Lodnes Lord of Loddon temp Henry I, son of Goceline de Lodnes Lord of Loddon who held 5 fees there in 1110.
Agnes was the sole beneficiary of her father William and of her uncle Roger de Glanville:
In the 10th of King John (1209), Hubert de Randeston sued Jeffrey de Lodnes, for a carucate of land in Ratelesden (Rattlesden, Suffolk), of his inheritance, which William his brother held in the reign of Henry II. Jeffrey pleaded that he had the land by the marriage of Alice the daughter of Hervey de Glanville; so that Robert de Creke, who married the daughter (Agnes) of William de Glanville, ought to warrant it.
(refs. ‘Feet of Fines for Norfolk and Suffolk in reign of King John’, Nos. 309, 422, 449; An essay towards a topographical history of the county of Norfolk, by Frances Blomefield and Charles Parkin pp.152-154; ‘Chronica Jocelini de Brakelond’, London, 1847, Notes- p.146-47)
The Curia Regis Roll entry confirms that Geoffrey de Lodnes’ wife Alice was the daughter of Hervey de Glanville, and that Robert de Creke’s wife (Agnes) was the daughter of William de Glanville:
Curia Regis Rolls of the reigns of Richard I and John (London 1922), p.155
There is some dispute as to which Hervey de Glanville (senior or junior) was the father of Alice, however, as the dispute involving her husband Geoffrey de Lodnes took place in 1209, one would assume that she was the daughter of Hervey de Glanville junior, as Alice would have been born after the death of Hervey de Glanville senior.
It is also noteworthy that Hervey Walter’s sister Alice (married to Orm), coincidently held the same name as Hervey de Glanville Junior’s daughter Alice (married to Geoffrey de Lodnes), possibly indicating a family name.
John Pym Yeatman, Esq. Barrister-at-Law wrote a later introduction to Glanville Richard’s book in which he discusses the Lodnes case and makes the unsubstantiated claim that although “the suit found that Robert de Creke ought to warrant the land, but of this land (Rattlesden) Theobald Walter was the heir and would have had to warrant it.” The only conclusion for this statement is his belief that Alice was the sister of Theobald Walter. (Records of the Anglo Norman House of Glanville, op.cit, Intro p.xvii, and p.56). However, when the case was heard, in 1209, Theobald and Hubert were both dead, and Theobald’s heir was a minor and in wardship, which could explain why Alice’s cousin’s husband had to warrant it. However, this is unsubstantiated speculation by Pym and Glanville-Richards.
An article by J.R. Olorenshaw about the Manor of Rattlesden, Suffolk dated 1277:
Hervey de Glanville Senior’s wife has been established as ‘Mabel’, so the reference to ‘Hervey son of Mabel’ is an interesting coincidence, or connection. (The East Anglian, or Notes and Queries…’, New Series…vol.xi (1906), p24- referring to a Nicholas de Wodeward.)
In Domesday, the land of Rattlesden (ESE of Bury St Edmunds, near Haughley) was partly held by the Abbey of Bury St Edmunds, and their undertenant was Peter [the steward] who is understood to be Peter Bituricensis brother of Hervey Bituricensis/de Bourges- another interesting connection, as several lands held by Peter (from the Abbey of St Edmunds who held soke and sake, however, the holder could give and sell their land) were inherited by Hervey de Bourges’s daughter Isilia married to William Peche.
Other holders of Rattlesden in Domesday were: Count Robert of Mortain, Count Eustace of Boulogne, the Abbey of Ely, Richard fitzGilbert (de Clare) and William de Warenne.
Although Roger de Glanville was a prime witness to Rannulf de Glanville’s foundation charter to Leiston Abbey c.1186 placed ahead of brothers Osbert and Gerard de Glanville, he did not witness Rannulf’s charter to Butley Priory in 1171, nor Hervey Walter’s subsequent charter to Butley, however, it is likely that he accompanied Rannulf and Theobald Walter to fight the Scottish king in the north, as he was overseeing the building of the keep in Northumberland from 1176.
Roger de Glanville, a baron of the Exchequer in 1174, custodian of Newcastle upon Tyne (County of Northumberland) from 1176 to 1181 (Pipe Rolls) overseeing the building of the keep there, and sheriff of Northumberland 1185-89, accompanied Rannulf and King Richard I on the Crusade in 1190 distinguishing himself at the siege of Acre and going on in April 1192 to mount a daring reconnaissance before the gates of Jerusalem, taking some Saracens prisoner. Since he does not reappear, he probably died in the Holy Land. His second wife Countess Gundreda (b.c.1135, dau. of Roger de Beaumont, 2nd earl of Warwick), was the widow (2nd wife) of Hugh Bigod, earl of Norfolk (1095- 1177). She was associated with her husband Roger in the foundation of a nunnery at Bungay in Suffolk (near Earsham), and was still alive in 1199.
The Roger who was active in the Crusade must have been considerably younger than Rannulf and Hervey.
All of the above evidence seems to indicate a close relationship between Roger de Glanville and his brother Hervey, and with their brother William.
Robert de Glanville and William de Glanville seem to disappear from the records after this last charter of Roger de Glanville to Castle Acre Priory, circa 1160’s. Hervey de Glanville jnr last appears as a witness in Rannulf’s foundation charter to Butley Priory c.1171.
This is the point where Glanville-Richard’s theory begins- that Hervey de Glanville started to use the name of Hervey Walter, about the time that his sons Theobald and Hubert started using the surname Walter, maybe to distinguish from the numerous de Glanville lines. The first record we have of Hervey Walter was his donation charter to Butley Priory c.1171-1177.
However, significantly, this theory does not explain the choice of the surname ‘Walter’.
A link with the family of Hervey Walter
We already discussed Rannulf’s entry with his three brothers, Hervey, Roger and Osbert de Glanville and sister Gutha de Glanville named in the 14th Century Rent Roll of the Priory of Butley: (H.G. Evelyn White, ‘An unpublished 14th century rent roll of the priory of Butley, Suffolk’ in ‘The East Anglian, or Notes and Queries…’, New Series…vol.xi (1906), p.59):
On page 46 of the 14th Century Rent Roll of the Priory of Butley, a list of donations to Butley include the church of Belagh, Norfolk, by ‘Hervey ‘fil’ Walter, and Peter Walter and Robert fitzWilliam’ (a witness to Rannulf’s Charter to Butley).
And secondly, a donation of the church of Weybread by Guthe de Glanville ‘soror’/sister of Ranulf de Glanville, and Alan de Withersdale:
The fact that Guthe de Glanville held land in Weybread and donated the church of Weybread to Butley Priory is of interest given that the Walter family held land in Instead which is also part of Weybread, the tithes of which Hervey Walter had donated to Butley Priory. Peter Walter also donated rent from his mill at Instead to West Dereham Abbey as part of Hubert Walter’s foundation Charter. In a fine in 1209, Peter filius Hubert (Peter Walter) challenged the Abbot of Dereham under the recognition of ‘mort d’ancestor’, over 20 acres and appurtenances in Instead and 3s. worth of rent in Weybread held by the Abbot. A charter in the late 1190’s-early 1200’s to Butley Priory revealed that a Gilbert de Hawkedon donated rent in Instead which he held from his lord, Theobald Walter, witnessed by Peter Walter.
Withersdale is part of the parish of Fressingfield as is Weybread- as a minor, Alan of Withersdale, son of William of Withersdale, was in the custody of Peter Walter of Fressingfield, and came of age 1201-09 (Butley Priory Charter No.140, and Eye Priory Cartulary No.391). In early 1200’s Alan exchanged with Butley Priory 1& 1/13th acres in Weybread. Peter Walter’s demesne manor of Snapeshall was in Fressingfield, very close proximity to Withersdale and Weybread, and Wingfield.
These records show the close ties between the families holding lands and living in this area in the parish of Fressingfield in Bishops Hundred. The revelation that Hervey Walter held part of Weybread, and Peter Walter held land in Weybread as claimed under the inheritance law of ‘mort d’ancestor’, and Guthe de Glanville also held land in Weybread, is a significant link between these families.
A further link with the de Glanvilles is revealed in ‘The Anglo Norman House of de Glanville’ (p.54):
Rannulf de Glanville’s eldest daughter Maud married Sir William de Auberville (witness to Charters to Butley and Leiston- d.c.1196). Maud married secondly Roger de Tudenham (d.1210) and had a son named John de Tudenham.
‘The Manor of Newton, in Suffolk, was settled on Gundreda, wife of Edmund Todenham (or Tudenham), on her marriage, as Maud de Glanville, mother of John de Todenham, father of Edmund, held it.’
Theobald Walter held Newton in Suffolk as part of the Amounderness fee:
Lancaster Pipe Rolls: pp.144-145:
Feodary of the Honor of Lancaster, from the returns of 1st and 2nd scutages of King John’s reign 1200- 1201, by the Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk-
Theobald Walter, Newton, co Suff…. ½ fee
The link between the Walter and de Glanville families with Newton would also appear to indicate a close genealogical link rather than just a marital link.
Hubert Walter held the wardship of Maud de Glanville’s son and heir Hugh de Auberville.
Theobald Walter’s wife Maud le Vavasour remarried to Fulk fitzWarin. When she died c.1226 (being the date of Maud’s son Theobald Walter II seeking his rights against Maud’s fitzWarin children through suits of ‘mort d’ancestor’, viz. his half-sister Hawise and her first husband William Pantulf, to recover Narborough co. Leic. [failed], and against his half-brother Fulk fitzWarin to recover the manor of Edlington co. York), Fulk remarried to Clarice de Auberville, daughter of Robert son of William d’Auberville and Maud de Glanville.
All of these records demonstrate the incredibly close relationship between the extended de Glanville and the Walter families, and appears to indicate a closer blood bond than that just held by the marriage with the two Valoine sisters.
The Valoines link- Avicia wife of Theobald II de Valoines
Theobald Blake Butler wrote an article “The Butler- Becket Tradition” in the Butler Society Journal, v.2, No.4, pp.424-25:
The late Walter Rye was convinced that the Beckets were descended from the de Valoines family and also that they had a relationship with the Hautein family of Hellesdon, Norfolk, but he was not able to produce sufficient proof to establish these relationships. Since Walter Rye wrote in 1924, the late Dr William Farrer has published “The Early Yorkshire Charters”, and in Vol. 5 pp.234-238 he gives considerable detail of the Parham family in which he shows their descent from Hamo de Valoines in Suffolk. If the data collected by Rye is matched and corrected by that of the Early Yorkshire Charters it is possible to construct a pedigree:
Hamo de Valoines tenant of Parham Suffolk etc and of the honour of Richmond Yorkshire of Count Alan of Domesday. He had with other issue:
Theobald I of Parham- issue Matilda and Bertha
Robert of Parham ob.1178 who had issue:
A)Theobald II of Parham who founded the Priory of Hickling in 1185. He married Avicia daughter of Hervey de Glanville, brother of Rannulf ‘The Justiciar’, and had issue Thomas, ancestor of the Valoines of Hickling.
Unfortunately, Theobald Blake Butler does not give a source for his statement that Avicia, wife of Theobald Valoines II of Parham, was the daughter of Hervey de Glanville Jnr. The Charter to Hickling Priory by Theobald de Valoines and his wife Avicia (Mon. Ang. v.6, 476) does not reveal her family; nor does the ‘Early Yorkshire Charters (EYC)’ v.5, pp234-238 on the Valoines family.
The EYC, does contain a confirmation charter of Theobald Hautein to Jervaulx Abbey of the land and pasture of Rookwith which Hamo de Valoines, his uncle and vassal, had given…(c.1170-1181). One of the witnesses was Rogero Waltero (brother of Theobald Walter, and cousin of Hamo de Valoines).
Hervey Walter’s son Roger Walter was named in an undated charter of a William de Glanville and his brother-in-law John de Birking, indicating some sort of co-ownership of a farm by Roger and William, which was granted to the Canons and nuns of ‘Wattun’:
‘Jones de Birkine, et Johanna vxor eius, et Dionisia vxor Willmi de Glanvilla, salute
= John de Birking, and Johanna his wife, and Dionisia wife of William de Glanville
“Noverit universitas vestra, quod Canonici et moniales de Wattun terram nostram de Serzeuans, quam ad firmam de Wittmo de Glanuilla et Rogero Walteri ad firmam receperunt, et de nobis postmodum tenuerunt cum instauramentis, et implemementis, et cum firma integre,…. etc”
May your whole community know that the canons and nuns of Watton received to farm* our land of ‘Serzeuans’ (unidentified), which [was] at the farm of William de Glanville and Roger Walter, and afterwards they held it of us, with the stock and the implements, and at that time they wholly and fully yielded the farm-rent, and satisfied us concerning all the agreements made about the aforementioned farm.
Thus it is that we have quitclaimed the aforenamed canons and nuns concerning the same farm, and all the agreements, and the exactions pertaining to the same farm.
And because we do not have to hand the chirographs made concerning the same farm, we have firmly and faithfully promised, and we have given security to them with the interposition of our faith, that if the aforenamed chirographs be found, we will restore them to the aforenamed canons and nuns; if, however, by chance, they be not found again, we wish them to be void and useless in the future, and to have no force.
(* ie they took the land to farm; they agreed to pay a fixed sum to William and Roger in return for keeping the profits of the land
Glanville-Richards assigned this charter to William de Glanville second son of Bartholomew de Glanville, on what basis he did not disclose. However, William de Glanville son of Bartholomew was still alive in the 1200’s, which therefore discounts him as husband of Dionysia who remarried c.1189.
He is a William de Glanville of unknown parentage- some have suggested he was a son of Rannulf de Glanville and died before his father, thereby Rannulf’s three daughters inherited, but that is speculation.
Dionysia and Joan/Johanna were sisters, daughters of Jordan Lenveise. Dionysia secondly married c.1189, Hubert de Anstey, son of Richard Anstey of the well documented Anstey (Hereditary) Case of 1162 claiming inheritance of the estate of his uncle William de Sackville by making the accusation that William’s marriage was illegal and his issue illegitimate (as recounted previously). Hubert and Dionysia’s son Nicholas inherited in 1210 and was therefore probably of age. (EYC, x, pp.169-71, No 113).
As William de Glanville appears to have been born c.1150’s-60’s he is probably a son of one of Hervey de Glanville senior’s sons, and, as Roger Walter and William de Glanville held a farm together, therefore the theory that he was a son of Rannulf is conceivable.
One of the witnesses to the charter was Herebt. de Glanvill (Hubert or Herbert?).
(There are references to a Hubert de Glanville as a juror in Suffolk in 1201 in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, p433, Roll 21. m. 14d. Easter 2 John  Suffolk; and in the Curia Regis Rolls, i, 188, as a juror in Norfolk in 1200- whether this is relevant is unknown.)
‘Wattun’ refers to Watton Priory, the Gilbertine double monastery at Watton in Yorkshire founded c.1150, a house of nuns and 13 Canons, the only such house in the diocese of York, begun by Gilbert a parish priest in Sempringham, Lincolnshire in the mid-12th century.
See Wikipedia for the fascinating story of the ‘Nun of Watton’, b.1140’s, the protagonist of an infamous sexual drama at Watton Priory.
Roger Walter (‘Rogero Waltero’) had another association with Yorkshire- he was signatory to a confirmation charter of Theobald Hautien to Jervaulx Abbey of the land of Rookwith which Hamo de Valoines his uncle (Roger’s cousin) had given; dated c.1170-1181 (Early Yorkshire Charters, v, pt II, p.237)
Although the close relationship between the two families of Hervey Walter and Rannulf de Glanville can be explained due to the wives being sisters, there are several further coincidences between the lives of Hervey and Hervey de Glanville that suggest they could be one and the same, which would make Hervey Walter the brother of Rannulf de Glanville, as well as brother-in-law. These will now be explored.
The Walter family also held a close relationship with the senior line of the de Glanville family, descendants of Hervey de Glanville’s elder brother William de Glanville and his son and heir Bartholomew, as evidenced by the prime witnesses to Hervey Walter’s charter to Butley Priory, Bartholomew’s sons Stephen de Glanville and William de Glanville, which suggests a closer biological relationship than just through Hervey and Rannulf’s wives being sisters. It would appear that Hervey Walter’s youngest son Bartholomew was named after Bartholomew de Glanville, and third son Roger after Roger de Glanville, brother of Hervey and William de Glanville.
We can speculate that William de Glanville (the elder) may have held custody of the underage Hervey [Walter] on the death of his father named Walter.
Nothing is known about the wife of Hervey [Walter] the elder. We could also speculate that she may have been of the de Glanville family.
However, it should also be remembered that in the medieval period, close family alliances were important in maintaining and advancing their status, as seen between the close alliances between the various families living in the Suffolk area during the 12th century. Marriages created powerful networking bonds that ensured a family’s success in maintaining and acquiring land and wealth. Many of these same families in Suffolk were linked geographically back in Normandy, in the Calvados Department, and in particular with the Malet family, so their connections were longstanding. An analysis of the 1130 Pipe Roll of Henry I, revealed Henry’s approval of 32 marriages in the year covered by the Roll. ‘The cost of a wife ranged from a minimum of 16s. to the enormous sum of over 1000 silver marks. The average price of £110 suggests the costly nature of gaining property and local standing through marriage, but the willingness to pay indicates it was a superb investment.’
(‘Patronage in the Pipe Roll of 1130’, by Stephanie L. Mooers, Speculum Journal, Vol. 59, No.2 April 1984, Uni of Chicago Press, p.304)
The author of the ‘Introduction’ to the book by Glanville-Richards, John Pym Yeatman, Esq. Barrister-at-Law, in a later republication of Glanville Richard’s book wrote:
The origin of the noble House of Ormonde is of great interest, and research has not enabled genealogists to prove who was the grandfather of ‘Herveus fil. Hervei’. Although many more able genealogists than the Author have attempted to produce a longer descent than can be accurately traced, and to hang the House of Ormonde onto any celebrated Norman House that seems fit to receive it, yet, of all the many suggestions on the subject, and considering it is such an obscure and doubtful one, the Author thinks the external evidence allying them by birth (it is well known they were by marriage) to the House of Glanville, brought forward in this Work (by Glanville Richards), may be tolerated. One thing certainly clear is, that they owed their rise to the celebrated Lord Chief Justice (Rannulf) Glanville, and that they to this day bear the Glanville arms (viz. chief indented, azure).
The chronological coincidences do give credence to the suggested theory of a blood relationship between the de Glanvilles and the Walters:
Hervey [Walter]’s estimated birth was c.1080’s, as his grandson Theobald was born before 1145 and possibly as early as the mid 1130’s; as second grandson Hubert resigned in 1198 citing ‘ill health due to his advanced age’ indicating he was over 60 years of age, therefore born mid-to-late 1130’s; and his son-in-law Orm was born in the early 1100’s. He was deceased before Theobald took over the Amounderness fee pre-1166. Wife unknown; at least 3 issue: Hervey, Hubert and Alice
Hervey de Glanville’s self-proclaimed birth was c.1080-1082; died circa late1150’s (son Rannulf replaced his father as a signatory to Eye Priory charters c.1156-58); wife named Mabilia; issue- William, Robert, Hervey, Rannulf, Roger, Osbert, Gerard and Gutha (unknown order).
Hervey Walter’s estimated birth c.1108-1115, and died sometime after his charter to Butley Priory dated circa 1171-1176 (his last documentary evidence), but before son Hubert’s Charter to W. Dereham Abbey in 1188; married to Matilda/Maud de Valoines daughter of Theobald de Valoines, son and heir of Hamon de Valoines who held lands in the Domesday Book 1086; Maud died at West Dereham c.1195; issue- Theobald, Hubert, Roger, Hamon, Bartholomew, unknown daughters
Hervey de Glanville Junior’s estimated birth similar to younger brother Rannulf, c.1110-1115, and death before 1186-89, viz. after witnessing Rannulf’s Butley Priory charter in 1171-Jan 1174 (last documentary evidence) and before brother Roger de Glanville’s charter to Leiston Abbey dated c.1186-1189 in which Roger indicated his brother Hervey was deceased. Wife unknown; daughter named Alice.
The age of Rannulf de Glanville can possibly be established as occurring much earlier than the birth range of 1120-30 suggested by most authors on his life.
The following is from a record of abstracts of inquisitions taken in 1185 for the purpose of ascertaining the wardships, reliefs and other profits due to the king from widows and orphans of his tenants in capite, in which Rannulf holds custody of his niece who is ‘60 years of age and more’ (‘Et ipsa est lx annorum et amplius’) – therefore this document suggests that his niece was born in or before 1125, unless there was a clerical mistake:
= ‘Mabel who is the niece of Rannulf de Glanville, and is in his custody, was wife of Albrici Picot, and their land in Bukeswurthe, etc…. And she is 60 years old and more (‘Et ipsa est lx annorum et amplius’), and has 2 sons and 3 daughters, and the eldest is a soldier.’
Albricus Picot held one knight’s fee in Cambridgeshire in 1166, stating that Henry I King of England had granted it to ‘Henricus pater meus’/Henry my father. (Red Book of the Exchequer, p.370)
Given there could have been a clerical error in estimating her age, even a ten year error would place her birth between 1125 and 1135. Even if Rannulf was one of the younger sons of Hervey de Glanville Senior, and his niece the daughter of an elder brother or sister born before 1110, this record of a daughter of an elder sibling still places Rannulf’s birth closer to 1110 than 1130, making him in his seventies when he died on crusade in 1190.
Notably his niece was named Mabilia, the name of Rannulf’s mother. (Rannulf also named a daughter Amabilia.)
Contemporary chronicler and monk, Benedict of Peterborough in his ‘Chronicles of the reigns of Henry II and Richard I AD 1169-1192’, (ed. William Stubbs, Vol.II, p.87) wrote about the replacement of Rannulf as chief justiciar by King Richard and gives a reason, relating to Rannulf’s ‘great age’:
-‘quia Ranulfus de Glanvil jam senior et labore confectus’, meaning that Ranulf was replaced as justiciar in 1189, ‘because Ranulf de Glanville was now old and labour worn’, or, ‘worn out by old age and toil’, which implies he was at least in his 70’s, just as his father before him lived to a great age.
Similarly, William Parvus of Newburgh (Priory), a 12th century chronicler and Yorkshire canon (Historia Rerum Anglicarum, or, History of English Affairs [translation], v.II, Chap. IV, p.9) wrote about Rannulf’s retirement as justiciar:
‘Rannulf de Glanville, a man of the greatest prudence, was still justiciar of the realm, as he had been in the time of the previous king, though the king considered that he had become old (“Qui cum esset grandævus” = ‘for though he was of great age’) and acted with much less wisdom and forethought than he had shown when new in office. The justiciar, too, wished to be released from the burden of his office, that he might with greater convenience prepare himself for his departure for Jerusalem, since he had assumed the sign of the Lord under king Henry. He therefore solemnly renounced his office.’
Data from his social class in the 13th century show that a tenth of the men at 30 years of age lived on past 70 years. (J. Cox Russell, British Medieval Population, 1948, pp.180-181). Russell wrote, ‘The frequency with which men served vigorously in their sixties in that period of time, marks it as less than a great age’, thereby confirming that Rannulf was most likely in his seventies, born before 1120.
Hervey Walter was born c.1110 as his sons were born in the mid-to-late 1130’s- he could therefore be the ‘Hervei filius Hervei’ named in the 1130-31 Pipe Roll of Henry I, and it could also refer to Hervey de Glanville Junior. The same ‘Hervei filius Hervei’ was named as a witness to Hervey de Glanville Senior’s speech at the Suffolk shire meeting in c.1150, and again, could be either man named Hervey.
Hervey Walter’s donation Charter to Butley Priory (Suffolk) dated c.1171 to 1176, while dedicating his grant to the souls of his family and ancestors, and of Rannulf’s family, does not conclusively indicate that Rannulf was his brother or that they shared ancestors, however, nor does the wording exclude the possibility either.
The part translation of the Latin document reads:
“for the salvation of the souls of me and Maud, my wife, and our children, and for the salvation of the souls of Ranulf de Glanvill, and Bertha his wife and their children, and all of our ancestors and parents,”
This charter was witnessed by Rannulf’s son-in-law William de Auberville, Stephen de Glanville, William de Glanville, William de Glanville cleric, and Peter Walter, and Hervey Walter’s sons ‘Huberto Walter et Rogero et Hamone’, as well as several members of Maud’s de Valoines family including Maud’s brother Robert de Valoines who died 1177, dating the charter before 1177.
Stephen de Glanville was the eldest son of Bartholomew de Glanville, a cousin of Rannulf and Hervey de Glanville junior. William de Glanville could be the son of Rannulf, while ‘William de Glanville cleric’ is another son of Bartholomew de Glanville.
Peter Walter, son of Hubert Walter the elder, is almost certainly cousin to Theobald and his brothers.
Other witnesses, Ranulf de Bawdsey and Robert fitzRocelin were close connections to the de Glanville family, and Robert de Blanchville was connected to the Blund and Valoines families. Geoffrey de Ykeling/Hickling was a close connection of the de Glanville and Valoines families- Theobald II Valoines (son of Robert) founded the priory of Hickling in 1185.
The most important reference in our quest to finding the ancestors of the Walters, is the name of the three townlands granted by Hervey Walter to Butley Priory, viz. WINGFIELD, ‘SIKEBRO’ (unidentified, but possibly Stradbroke/Stetebroc, as suggested by Blake Butler and others) and INSTEAD (in WEYBREAD); and FRESSINGFIELD held by Peter Walter, inherited from his father Hubert (the elder); all located in the Hundred of Bishops in Suffolk (held in Domesday by Robert Malet as tenant-in-chief); and the charter is endorsed by Hervey Walter ‘of his fee in Wingfield’. Notably, land in Wingfield and Stradbroke were partly held by Robert de Glanville from Robert Malet in Domesday (and notably, partly by a ‘Walter’ who also held part of Weybread, and part of Fressingfield).
The Cartulary of Leiston Abbey and Butley Priory Charters’, ed. R.H. Mortimer, 1979, (p.151):
NB. witness Robert de Valoines died in 1177, so the charter must date between 1171 and 1176.
Hervey Walter in the presence of all his friends, and to all French and English people present, future Health. Know ye that I have given and granted, and by this my present charter have confirmed to God and the church of the Holy Mary of Bute (Butley) 'and the canons there serving the Lord, for the salvation of my soul and Maud, my wife, and of our children, and for the salvation of the souls of Rannulf de Glanvill, and Bertha, his wife and of their children, and all of our ancestors and our parents, and of our friends, and the whole of the fee shall be in pure and perpetual alms, the whole fee shall be in Wingefeld (Wingfield, Suffolk) in the homage and rents of all, and in all other things, and the whole fee in the Sikebro (unidentified), as Oudin held of me, and the whole fee for Isted (Instead, Suffolk) that Godfrey held of me.
It is notable that neither Rannulf nor Hervey’s son Theobald witnessed Hervey’s charter. In this same period, in 1173-74, Rannulf, as sheriff of Yorkshire, was appointed High Sheriff of Lancashire, Westmoreland and Northumberland due to the outbreak of a major war with William the Lion, King of Scots. The successful campaign led to the capture of King William at Alnick in July 1174, accredited to Rannulf, leading to Rannulf’s promotion in Henry’s court. No doubt Theobald, a knight in Lancashire owing military service, had accompanied Rannulf in this campaign in the north, which could explain their absence from Hervey Walter’s charter witness list.
Prior to Hervey’s donation charter to Butley Priory, Rannulf had made a foundation charter to establish Butley Priory.
It has also been noted by researchers that, ‘Hervey Walter’ did not witness Rannulf de Glanville’s foundation Charter to Butley Priory in c.1171-1174 (below), despite their wives being sisters and their close family relationship as indicated by Hervey’s dedication in his own charter to Butley, although ‘Herveo de Glanville’, Rannulf’s brother, was listed as a witness. This may be significant, given that Hervey Walter soon followed Rannulf’s charter with his own donation charter.
Rannulf’s Foundation Charter to Butley Priory
Cartulary of Leiston Abbey and Butler Priory Charters (ed. R.H. Mortimer, 1979, p.131)- Charter No. 120, dated 1171 to January 1174
Rannulf de Glanville endowered Butley Priory, a Priory of Augustinian canons upon the lands called ‘Brockhouse’ which he held by his wife Bertha. The founder gave to the priory, as of fee, the advowsons of Farnham, Butley, Bawdsey, Wantisden, Capel (St Andrew) and Benhall.
King Henry II gave, at the request of Rannulf, the Rectory of Burston in Norfolk, confirmed by John of Oxford Bishop of Norwich, and the Archbishop of Canterbury:
Witnesses and attesters included …Roberto de Valeines, Radulpho de Valeines, Osberti de Glanvil, Gerardo de Glanvill,… Herveo de Glanvill, Savari de Valeines, Galfrido de Muriols (son of sister Gutha), etc.
The donated benefits of Bawdsey and Benhall were lands held by Robert de Glanville from Robert Malet in the 1086 Domesday survey, Farnham was held by Hamo de Valeines (father of Theobald de Valeines- land situated between Stratford St Andrew the birthplace of Rannulf, and Benhall held by Rannulf), and Butley and Capel St Andrew were partly held by Walter de Caen from Robert Malet, while Wantisden was also partly held by Robert Malet.
It should be noted that Hervey de Glanville’s name is placed well down in the witness list, which is curious, but is probably related to his standing in the social order. Dr Josiah Cox Russell, in his paper “The Significance of Charter Witness Lists in Thirteenth Century England” (New Mexico Normal University Bulletin, No. 99, 1930 supplement, p.56, note 2), derives an important indication of rank from the relative positions of names in lists of witnesses in medieval charters.
In Ranulf’s charter, after several clergy names including Osbert cleric of Bawdsey, the witnesses to the charter, lists two of his wife’s close Valeine relatives, and his brothers Osbert and Gerard de Glanville, followed by twelve local worthies including his sister Gutha’s son (Geoffrey de Muriols), Reiner of Waxham his steward, and Ranulf of Bawdsey, and finally his brother Hervey de Glanville and another member of the Valeine family. It is difficult to assess the reason for Hervey’s placement well down from Rannulf’s other brothers in the list.
Ranulf of Bawdsey (Baudreseie), also a witness to Hervey Walter’s charter, appears to be related to Osbert cleric of Bawdsey (thought to be cleric to Hervey de Glanville senior of Bawdsey in the 1140’s-50’s, and possibly a relative), and probably Roger priest of Bawdsey who named his son as Osbert in a Castle Acre Priory charter (see below). Rannulf de Glanville’s heirs were his three daughters- Matilda, the eldest, was gifted the town of Benhall, while her sisters, Amabilla and Helewise were each gifted half of the town of Bawdsey, the part-tithes of which were granted to Butley Priory by their father, plus Finburgh/Finborough. (Monasticon Anglicanum, v.6 p.3-4, Charter No. IV) (It would appear that Rannulf had a son and heir named William who pre-deceased him.)
A second foundation charter of Rannulf to Leiston Abbey (Suffolk) in the late 1180’s, was witnessed by Hervey Walter’s sons, and Rannulf’s brothers Roger, Osbert and Gerard, but again, Hervey Walter is not listed as a witness, and nor is Hervey de Glanville, so presumably deceased.
Cartulary of Leiston Abbey and Butley Priory Charters, (p.76):
Charter No. 27: Rannulf de Glanville endowed Leiston Abbey c.1186-1189
Henry II had granted Leiston Manor to Rannulf 1175-76 (p.75, No.26).
Witnesses included Huberto Walteri; Willelmo de Aubervill (Rannulf’s son-in-law, married to daughter Maud) as well as Willelmo filii Willelmi de Auberville (their son), Rogero de Glanvill, Osberto de Glanvill, Gerard de Glanville, William de Valeines, Radulfo de Arden (married to Rannulf’s daughter Amabilia) and their son Thomas de Ardene, Teobaldo Walteri, Rogero Walteri, etc.
There are no records of Hervey Walter in the Red Book of the Exchequer, only his son Theobald in the Cartae Baronum in 1066 owing 1 knight’s fee for his land in Amounderness which his father Hervey must have handed to him while he still lived. He also does not appear in any of the early Pipe Rolls, unless he is the Hervey filius Hervey in the Pipe Roll of Henry I in 1130-31.
However, as shown, Hervey de Glanville owed one knight’s fee in Suffolk to Nigel Bishop of Ely Cambridgeshire in the same Cartae Baronum.
Hervey de Glanville is also listed in the Pipe Roll, v.8, 11 Henry II, 1164-65 Honor of Eye, Suffolk (p.6), his only entry. He also witnessed a charter of Bertam de Bulmer in Yorkshire along with his brother Rannulf in 1164.
We will now look at other evidence of this close link between the two families.
As previously mentioned, there have been suggestions in some websites, based on a genealogical reference book written in 1882 on the de Glanville family, ‘Records of the Anglo-Norman House of Glanville’**, by William U.S. Glanville-Richards, that Hervey, father of Hervey Walter, was Hervey de Glanville of County Suffolk, father of Rannulf de Glanville who was such an important influence on the elevation of this family.
(** It should be noted that, although Glanville-Richard’s research of this family has been thorough and detailed, much of the speculative genealogical links, particularly the family trees, and claimed ancestral origins and descents are incorrect, unsubstantiated, or very questionable, but the number of de Glanville family members researched and the referenced records quoted by Glanville-Richards are useful in trying to establish fact from conjecture.)
Glanville Richards refers to an earlier publication, ‘The Norman People: and their Existing Descendants in the British Dominions and the United States of America’ (London 1874) by an anonymous author, which appears to be the first genealogical publication to canvas the idea of a biological link between the Butlers/Walters and the de Glanvilles, but again, much of the information presented and the author’s conclusions are questionable and speculative, with no evidence referenced for the direct biological link with the de Glanvilles.
The anonymous author claimed that ‘Hervey Walter’s grandfather, Walter (‘de Glanville’) appears 1086 as owner of estates in Leyland, Lancashire (Domesday)’. The actual Domesday entry for Leyland has land held by ‘Gerard, Robert, Ranulph, Roger and Walter’. There is no reference to a ‘de Glanville’ holding this land, and the author’s suggestion is purely conjectural. However, it should also be noted incidentally that those named in Leyland held the same names found in the de Glanville family in the following generations which may have been the basis of his unsubstantiated conclusions.
The author of ‘Norman People’ also makes statements such as: ‘Hervey Walter is a witness as Hervey de Glanville, to Rannulf’s foundation charter to Butley Priory’; and, ‘Hervey Walter or de Glanville had relinquished his barony of Amounderness to his son Theobald before 1165; at which time, as Hervey de Glanville, he held one fee in Suffolk from the See of Ely.’ These claims will be further analysed in detail.
There is sufficient evidence to make a reasonable, albeit speculative, conclusion that the two authors may have been on the right track in relation to Hervey de Glanville senior possibly being ‘Hervey father of Hervey Walter’, in relation to the lands of Lancashire, and a link in common is the Baron of Penwortham in Lancashire named Warin Bussel, and his son and heir Richard Bussel. This Bussel family and their Lancashire lands must be examined before we can link them with the Walters and the de Glanvilles.
The following records relate to the origins of the lands of Weeton in Amounderness, county of Lancaster, later held by the Walter family. They also relate to Hervey’s son-in-law Orm son of Magnus and his age which helps date this family.
In the 1070’s, the Lancashire lands of the Hundreds of Leyland (including Penwortham) and Amounderness, among many others in the district, were granted to Roger de Poitou, third son of Roger de Montgomery 1st Earl of Shrewsbury, one of William the Conqueror’s principal counsellors and most powerful supporters in the Conquest. Roger, the son, also held substantial lands in Suffolk, Norfolk and other counties. In the Domesday survey entries for Roger de Poitou in the land between the Ribble and Mersey ie. the Hundred of Leyland including Penwortham, West Derby, Newton, Warrington, Salford and Blackburn all included in the returns for Cheshire, and territory to the north of the Ribble in the Hundred of Amounderness forming part of West Riding of Yorkshire, Roger’s tenure is entered as a thing of the past- at the end of the section on this particular Hundred in Cheshire, there is a note that “When Roger de Poitou received these lands from the king it was worth £120. Now the king holds it and has 9 knights holding a fief.” And, “Roger de Poitou held the undermentioned land between the Ribble and the Mersey”….that “Now the king holds”. And, “The demesne which Roger held is valued at £23.10s., what he gave to the knights is valued at £20.11s.
Similarly, at the end of the Domesday entry on Amounderness Hundred which was previously held pre-Conquest by Earl Tostig (earl of Northumberland, brother of King Harold): “Amounderness- In Preston (Lancs.), Earl Tostig had 6 carucates to the geld (lists 61 vills that belong there, amounting to 164 carucates, including Weeton 3 carucates). All these vills and 3 churches belong to Preston (Lancs.). Of these vills, 16 are inhabited by a few people, but it is not known how many the inhabitants are. The rest are waste. Roger de Poitou had them.”
Knights named ‘Warin’ held six lands in Suffolk in the Domesday survey, as well as in several other counties, including, more relevantly, the Hundreds in Cheshire south of Leyland- several carucates of land in West Derby, Warrington and Salford were held by a knight named Warin from the gift of Roger de Poitou. Several Domesday entries in these Hundreds state, ‘of this manor, these knights hold by the gift of Roger de Poitou’. (Domesday Book: A Complete Translation, eds. Dr. A. Williams, Prof. G.H. Martin, 2003, pp. 737-740, 795-796)
These and other entries suggest that Roger’s lands were all ordered to be taken into the king’s hand before 1086. In some cases, it appears that the order was not known locally in time to be recorded in Domesday. Roger would be regranted his lands in 1088 by King William’s son and successor William Rufus, only to lose them finally in 1102 after Roger forfeited his English holdings when he joined his two brothers’ failed rebellion against Henry I’s succession in favour of Henry’s elder brother Robert Curthose in 1101.
At some point during William Rufus’ reign (1087-1100), part of Roger’s lands in Leyland and Preston (Amounderness), Lancashire, were granted to Warin Bussel, who became Baron of Penwortham, holding the Hundreds of Amounderness and Leyland, probably gifted by Roger himself. It is quite possible that the knight named Warin who held the lands described above in Lancashire ‘by gift of Roger de Poitou’, is the same Warin Bussel granted the Barony of Penwortham by Roger de Poitou after 1088.
The Domesday entry for Leyland, and Penwortham:
In Leyland Hundred: King Edward held Leyland TRE (pre-conquest). There is 1 hide, and 2 carucates of land. There is woodland 2 leagues long and 1 broad and a hawk’s eyrie. To this manor belonged 12 carucates of land which 12 free men held for as many manors. The men of this manor and of Salford did not work by custom at the king’s hall nor reaped in August. They only made I enclosure in the woodland and had the forfeiture for bloodshed and for a woman who had been raped. The whole manor of Leyland with Hundred rendered at farm to the king £19.18s. Of this manor Gerard holds 1 ½ hides, Robert 3 carucates of land, Ralph 2 carucates of land. Roger 2 carucates of land, and Walter 1 carucate of land. There are 4 radmen, a priest and 14 villans, and 6 bordars and 2 oxmen…. In part it is waste. King Edward held Penwortham. There are 2 carucates of land and they rendered 10d. Now there is a castle, and there are 2 ploughs in demesne, etc. there is half a fishery. There is woodland and eyries of hawks as TRE. It is worth £3
The Honour of Lancaster (of Roger de Poitou)
James Tait, ‘Medieval Manchester and the Beginnings of Lancashire’ (Manchester, 1904, pp.151+), in his discussion on the beginnings of Lancashire, supplied the following description of Roger de Poitou’s fief in Lancaster:
“When Domesday Book was drawn up, the region between Mersey and Solway, was rugged, poor and thinly peopled and contained much land that was lying waste. Its vills or townships were nearly all grouped around a few head manors. The 61 vills which “lay in” Preston covered an area virtually co-extensive with the late Lancashire wapentake, or hundred of Amounderness. Richer and more populous was the land between Ribble and Mersey. This remote and backward land had few attractions for Norman settlers; only some 20 knights had been enfeoffed there by 1086, and numerous thegns, drengs and radmen who remained undisturbed were bound to render assistance in the cultivation of the demesne of their hundredal manor. William gave at some date not ascertained to Roger 3rd son of Roger of Montgomery, the king’s cousin, besides ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ (‘Inter Ripam et Mersham’), it included the district of Amounderness- Preston and its group of sub-manors (including Weeton). One entry in Domesday Book implies that he had a castle somewhere, and it may have been at Penwortham where a castle is stated to have been built between 1066 and 1086. His tenure is specially recorded to have determined before that date when they were again in the hands of the Crown. William’s experience of the dangers of such compact fiefs may have induced him to resume these northern frontier lands and compensate Roger elsewhere. The small number of knights that Roger enfeoffed there suggests that he had not held those lands very long. The early years of the next reign under William Rufus saw Roger once more in possession of ‘Between Ribble and Mersey’ and Amounderness. The boundaries of Roger’s fief now coincided with those of the present county of Lancaster. At Lancaster, Roger fixed the seat of his power, and no doubt built the castle. Roger’s tenure of his mighty fief was of short duration, as he and his whole family were expelled from England in 1102. Roger’s lost Honour did not lose its individuality. When such an honour passed by forfeiture or escheat into the hands of the crown it still kept its name. Accordingly, Roger’s fief continued to be known as the ‘Honour of Roger the Poitevin’ or the Honour of Lancaster (which included some of Roger’s lands in Suffolk and Norfolk). This was a matter of great importance, as it meant that, although the tenants of the honour were tenants ‘in capite’ of the King so long as he did not grant it out again, they were not liable to the same burdens as tenants in chief by enfeoffment. Henry I did not keep the honour for long. It was a convenient means of providing for his fatherless nephew, Stephen of Blois, whom he brought up with his own children. The exact date of the transfer is not recorded, but in a document dated between 1115 and 1118, Stephen, now count of Mortain, appears in possession of the lands held here by Roger the Poitevin. Over and above Count Roger’s broad lands, Stephen received the great Honour of Eye (Suffolk) containing over 250 manors, forfeited by Robert Malet in 1106; and his marriage brought him the Honour of Boulogne. Holding estates in at least 17 counties. Stephen was perhaps the greatest landowner in England before he became king. As late as the 14th century certain tenants of the honour of Lancaster were called barons and their fiefs were described as baronies (in other great fiefs in which it was used in the Norman period, the term disappeared). “The barons who held of Roger”, says Harland, “were styled Barones Comitatus, or barons of the county, and held free courts for all pleas except those belonging to the earl’s sword”. (Harland, Mamecestre, i, 33)
Of older settlement in the Honour were the Bussels of Penwortham. Among the witnesses to Count Roger the Poitevin’s grant of Lancaster church and other property to the monks of Sées, in 1094, there appears a G. Boissel (Guarinus), presumably Warin Bussel, followed by A. frater eius (ie. Abardus/Albert ‘his brother’) (Lancashire Pipe Rolls, ed. Farrer, p.289-90). Roger’s gifts included “the tithe of Warin Boissel at Brestona” (ie. Preston in Amounderness). (quoting Round, ‘Calendar of Documents in France’, p.237)
The Butler fief of Weeton in Amounderness seems to have been created by Stephen of Blois when lord of Lancaster by favour of his uncle, Henry I.”
William Farrer editor of ‘Victoria History of the County of Lancashire’ (1906), Feudal Baronage- the Barony of Penwortham (p.282-3, p.335+), wrote:
In several charters of this period 1093-1102, Albert Grelley, Roger de Montbegon, Ralph Gernet, Warin Bussel and Albert his brother, appear as witnesses to Roger of Poitou’s grants to St Martin of Sées so that we seem to be justified in looking upon these persons as representing his greatest feudatories. (Register of Abbey of Sées, fol. 103b,104, 109b).
The mention in the charters of the period of the fee of Warin Bussel of Preston and the lands of Roger de Montbegon beyond the River Ribble, constitutes evidence to prove that portions perhaps of the fees of Penwortham and Hornby had been granted respectively to these knights by Roger of Poitou during the reign of the Conqueror or his successor.
(NB. The Preston fee of the Bussells included the vills listed in the Domesday Book under Preston, including Weeton- see Domesday entry below, line 9, and neighbouring lands later held by the Walters)
‘The History of the County Palatine and Duchy of Lancashire’, by Ed. Baines, 1836, p.117:
The barony of Weeton, which temp. W. Rufus was an appendant to the barony of Penwortham, and bestowed upon Abardus Bussel, brother of Warinus Bussel, and continued in the renowned noble family of Theobaldus Pincerna, from whom proceeded the duke of Ormond. And lastly, on that famous estuary of Ribble, at Penwortham, where remained an ancient castle from the time of the Saxons, here was placed the barony given to Warinus Bussel, who had this place bestowed upon him temp. William the Conqueror, though it had then no baron, Leyland and great part of Amounderness did anciently belong to the Bussels. (Unfortunately, Baines does not reference his claim that Weeton was bestowed upon Abardus Bussell)
Dr. Katherine Keats-Rohan in her ‘Domesday People: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166’ (1998):
Warin Buissel- Norman, Domesday tenant of Roger Pictaviensis. Brother of Albert Bussel. He occurs in the time of William II with his wife Matilda and issue Richard, Walter(?), Albert, Sibil and Matilda. Benefactor of Penwortham Priory. The Boissel family is evidenced in the Cartulary of Saint-Vincent du Mans (Le Mans, France). They survived Roger’s fall and became tenants of the new Honour of Lancaster; the Yorkshire land held by Warin Boissel, however, was given to Robert Malet by Henry I. Cf. Odard Boissel, who attested a gift to La-Trinite, Rouen by Benedict de Verly (Cart, no. xcvi)
(Robert Malet, one of the largest holders of Domesday lands, mainly in Suffolk and Norfolk, chamberlain to Henry I, thought to have died c.1106)
In Keats Rohan subsequent book, ‘Domesday Descendants: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents etc.’, Buissel, Albert p.190, she states “In 1094 the brothers Warin and Albert Bussel (al. Boissel) were associated in a charter (to the abbey of Sées) with Payn de Viliers and Albert Grelley, all being associated with Roger Pictaciensis’s (Poitou) holdings in Lancashire.
Warin Bussell made a substantial donation of his lands of Penwortham to the Abbey of Evesham (Worcestershire), following his marriage, which he confirmed by a second charter, and both charters were later confirmed by his son and heir Richard Bussel. The charters reveal a close relationship between the Bussel family and Orm son of Magnus who married Alice daughter of Hervey who granted lands in Amounderness to Orm as a marriage portion. Documents also reveal a connection between the Bussels and Sir Hervey de Glanville, the significance of which will become apparent.
The author and editor of ‘Documents relating to the priory of Penwortham’ (ed. W.A. Hulton Esq., Chetham Society, 1853), states that Warin Bussel’s first donation to Evesham Priory took place in the reign of William Rufus (1087-1100), the actual document no longer existing.
Warin’s second confirmation charter (Charter No III, pp.1-3), confirming his donations in the initial charter, states:
Hec est convencio quam Warinus Bussel cum assensu uxoris sue et liberorum coram dňo Roberto Abbate et omni convent de Eversham in pleno capitulo fecit, etc.
The author notes that while the original charter must be dated in William Rufus’ time, the second charter was perfected before Abbot Robert. There is some confusion over when Abbot Robert was appointed, but it would appear that he succeeded as abbot to the Abbey of Evesham in c.1104 following the death of Abbot Walter in February that year (as documented by contemporary chronicler and monk, Florence of Worcester in ‘Florenti Wigorniensis Monachi, Chronicon ex Chronicus’, v.II, 1848, p.53).
The ‘Chronicle of the Abbey of Evesham’ (‘Chronicon Annatie de Evesham A.D. Annum 1418’, ed. Wm D. Macray 1863, p.98) stated that Abbot Robert was at Evesham when Randulf, who was appointed Chancellor by Henry I in 1107, acquired the market of Stow (-in-the-Wold), a settlement established by 1086, controlled by the abbots of Evesham, and where the first weekly market was set up in 1107. Apart from accusations that Abbot Robert granted abbey lands to his relatives, continuing his predecessor Abbot Walter’s policy, no further records of Abbot Robert occur, and his tenure appears to have been a short one as Robert’s successor Abbot Maurice is recorded as having died in 1122.
(‘Documents of Penwortham’, Introduction, p.xviii):
Warin Bussel made the confirmation charter of a previous donation to the monastery of Eversham of the church of Penwortham with its tithes and appurtenances, the churches of Leyland and North Meols with their appurtenances, made during the reign of William Rufus. He granted also the township of Farington, a carucate and half of land in Marton, two bovates of land in Longton, and two parts of the tithes of the demesne of Leyland, Freckleton and Warton (Marton, Frecklington and Warton are in Amounderness, with Marton part of the Walter Weeton fee).
His second charter to the monastery of Eversham was attested:
‘Ex parte Warini, Walterus miles suus (Walter his soldier/knight), et nepos suus (and his nephew), filius Acardi, Willmus’. (William son of ‘Acardi’, probably Warin’s brother Abardus.)
The grants by Warin Bussel were made under the express condition that three monks and a chaplain, who subsequently became titular prior of the establishment, should be deputed from the monastery of Eversham to perform divine offices at Penwortham, which in monastic language were generally termed obedientaries.
The Lancashire Pipe Rolls, 2-3 Henry I- pp.383-386- ie. abstracts of Charters found in Pontefract Castle in 1325, ed. William Farrer, (Liverpool 1902):
In 1102, Henry I made two grants to Robert de Lacy, son of Ilbert (Domesday tenant of 164 manors) of 5 carucates of land in Amounderness to hold in fee. By the first of these charters: ‘the estates had formerly been Warin Bussel’s, one of Roger the Poitevin’s knights’ - Carta Henrici filii regis Willelmi per quam dedit Roberto de Laccio quinque Carucatus terre in feodo, quæ fuerunt Warini Bussell, scilicet in Cepndela, et in Achintona, et in Dotona, (viz. Chippingdale, Aighton, including Bailly in parish of Mitton, and Dutton in parish of Ribchester- all N.E. of Preston, in Amounderness).
William Farrer speculates that he was inclined to believe that the Bussels may have participated in the forfeiture which befell Warin’s chief lord Roger de Poitou,’ as the name Bussel does not reappear in Lancashire Charters until Geoffrey Bussell (Warin Bussell’s younger son) attests Count Stephen of Mortain’s foundation charter of Furness Abbey in 1127’ (Lancashire Pipe Rolls, 27 Henry I, pp.301-302).
The granted lands were manors that had formed part of Earl Tostig’s estate in Amounderness TRE (ie. on the day King Edward was alive and dead). Robert de Lacy’s downfall probably occurred in 1106 when the King at Tenchebrai finally overcame and took prisoner his elder brother Duke Robert, together with a number of great Conquest families who had again taken up arms in the Duke’s cause. However, the Bussells must have been forgiven as they continued holding the Barony of Penwortham.
The timing of Warin Bussel’s first charter to Evesham, which was made after his marriage (1087-1099) to Matilda who had territorial possessions in Evesham in Worcester, is important as it helps date the age of his son and heir Richard Bussell who must have been born about 1100, as it seems that Richard was of a similar age to Orm son of Magnus.
Warin Bussel and Matilda had sons Richard, Albert, Geoffrey, Warin, and six daughters who married Ranulph fitzRoger, Gillemichel fitzEdward, Hamo Pincerna (of Hocton), Alan son of Swein, Robert Hikeling, and Richard Spileman (the names of whom appear in various family charters). Albert Bussel gave one fee at Brocton in the barony of Penwortham in marriage with a daughter to Geoffrey de Valeines (according to Fees, 210), Sheriff of Lancashire 1164-66 (Domesday Descendants… by Keats Rohan p.190)
The Testa de Nevill (pp.210-11) and the Lancashire Inquests, Extents, and Feudal Aids, AD 1205-1307 (ed. Wm Farrer, 1903, pp.29-32) lists the fees of the Barony of Penwortham, and reveals that Warin Bussel settled lands on his first three daughters’ marriages, but his son and heir Richard Bussel settled lands on his three youngest sisters’ marriages, indicating that his father was then deceased. The lands granted were in the areas around Leyland; further south of Leyland near Standish; and in Amounderness very near Weeton and Preston.
Documents relating to the Priory of Penwortham’ (p.xl, and p.3-4)
Warin’s heir Richard Bussel made several charters, and notably, one of his prominent witnesses was Orm son of Magnus (Orm fil Magni), who was granted lands in Amounderness by Hervey on Orm’s marriage to his daughter Alice. Orm’s prominence in the list of witnesses which include clergy and other members of Richard’s family, would appear to indicate he was either a member of the family, a vassal, or a very close associate in Lancashire. It also shows that Orm held some status in Lancashire as a descendant of a pre-Conquest landowner in the area.
The exact origins of Orm son of Magnus are unknown, but possibly a grandson of one of the pre-Conquest Danish settlers who held lands under Tostig named Orm who had a berewick of the manor of Melling supposed to be Wrayton in Lonsdale rated as 1½ carucates; the same or another Orm who had a manor in Thornton in Lonsdale (3 carucates) and a moiety of Burrow in Lonsdale (just north of Wrayton) rated at 3 carucates, all three properties in close proximity to each other in Lonsdale Hundred in Lancashire north of Amounderness.
Historian William Farrer estimated that Richard Bussel’s charters probably dated c.1153-64, before his death in 1164.
Richard Bussel’s Charters, c.1153-64:
(p.3) Confirmation Charter IV to Eversham- list of witnesses:
NB. Orm son of Magnus is followed by ‘Warin his son’ (notably naming a son after Warin Bussel), indicating that Warin son of Orm and Alice, was an adult, therefore born before 1132-1143.
Historian William Farrer notes that Warin son of Orm son of Magnus probably died without issue as their known heir was named Roger (de Hutton). (Lancashire Pipe Rolls. ed. Wm Farrer, p.322)
Farrer had calculated that Orm had probably married Alice during the latter part of Stephen’s reign (1135-1154), however, the reference to their son named Warin, indicates a marriage much earlier, possibly in the latter part of Henry I’s reign (1100-1135) or the early reign of Stephen, pre-1143. (Lancashire Pipe Rolls, p.410). That would indicate that Hervey’s daughter Alice was born 1110-1122.
Richard also names two of his sisters as witnesses, Sibil and Matilda, who were unmarried at that time, which suggests an earlier date than those estimated by Farrer.
(p.40) Charter No. XXXV- Grant by Richard Bussel, with the consent of his brothers Albert and Geoffrey of the Church of Leyland to the abbey of Evesham- witnesses: William priest of Preston, Orm filus Magni, Warinus filius eius (his son), ….. Sibilla et Matildas, sisters of Richard.
The same list of witnesses suggest it was made at a similar time as Charter No IV.
(p.4) Confirmation Charter V, confirming a fourth part of Richard Bussell’s fishery in the Ribble at Penwortham c.1153-60- list of witnesses:
NB. Orm is listed first, ie. given precedence in the list of witnesses.
William was priest of Preston church.
Witness ‘Ulf de Waltuna’- Roger de Poitou gave Walton to his sheriff Godfrey. It then passed to the Barony of Penwortham. Town of Ulnes/Ulves Walton held of the lord of Penwortham, was held by the service of the fifth part of a knight’s fee by a family surnamed Walton. The earliest known member of it, Ulf de Walton, was living c.1160 (as signatory above) and no doubt gave the distinguishing name of Ulf’s (Ulnes/Ulves) to the township. He had a son Adam de Walton. (Townships: Ulnes Walton', in A History of the County of Lancaster: Volume 6, ed. William Farrer and J Brownbill, London, 1911, pp. 108-111)
(p.xl) Charter to Richard Fitton, c.1159-64, of lands, previously held by Richard’s sister’s husband Alan son of Swein (Lanc. Pipe Rolls, p.374/5), with consent of his brothers Albert and Geoffrey:
NB. Richard’s witnesses were ‘Albert, my brother, and Geoffrey (his younger brother),’ plus ‘Orm son of Magni’.
Rogero Pincerna is Roger Pincerna/Butler of Warton (whom Farrer erroneously suggested was Roger Walter- see blog on the Walters) married to Quenilda, daughter of Hugh son of Acard Bussel, brother of Warin Bussel as suggested by William Farrer.
('Townships: Warton', in A History of the County of Lancaster: Volume 7, ed. William Farrer and J Brownbill (London, 1912), pp. 171-174. British History online- quoting from ‘Lytham Charters at Durham’, 1 a, 2 ae, 4 ae, Ebor. nos. 46, 47)
Further charters in which Orm son of Magnus, or Orm’s son Roger, were listed as witnesses:
Lancashire Pipe Rolls, ed. William Farrer, 1902
p.430- Date c.1153-59- Orm son of Magnus witnessed a charter of William de Warren Count of Mortain (d. 1159 in France, son of King Stephen) to Ughtred (of Singleton, Kirkham, Lancashire) of a vill of Broughton in Amounderness
p.406/7- Date c.1160-1180- Charter confirmation by Roger de Marsey, son of Warin Bussel’s daughter and her husband Ranulf fitzRoger, to Roger son of Orm son of Magnus of the half part of Heaton in Lonsdale (near Lancaster), which his father Orm had held of the grantor’s ancestors (viz. Warin Bussel).
p.409- Date c.1160-80- Charter- grant by Roger son of Orm son of Magnus to Augustine (de Heaton), son of Waldeve (of Ulverston, ? son of Orm, son of Gamal, son of Eilif?), of a moiety of Heaton in Lonsdale, in exchange for the third part of Hutton in Leylandshire, witnessed by Albert Bussel, Geoffrey Bussel, etc. (Roger de Hutton, son of Orm, held the other 2/3rds of Hutton, part of the barony of Penwortham)
pp.437-38- Date 1189- Charter confirmation by John Count of Mortain, who received the Honor of Lancaster (in 1189), to Roger de Heaton of his lands (in Amounderness) “In the above charter we have particulars of various estates held by Roger de Heaton son of Augustine. The Count confirms other reasonable gifts of lands and tenements made to the said Roger by the Count’s knights and free tenants, viz. (1) grant of land in Wesham held of the earl; (2) by grant of Adam de Hoghton, son of Richard, son of Hamon le Boteler (whose wife was dau. of Warin Bussel) of the moiety of Heaton in Lonsdale; (3) by the grant of Roger son of Orm son of Magnus the vill of Grimsarg; (4) land in Urswick in Furness by the grant of Ulf son of Edward; (5) by the grant of Hervey Walter and his son Theobald Walter the lands between Scuavlowlwath and Murdeledale, and the land of Bradkirk (in Medlar); (7) grant of William de Lancaster (d.1184) of land of Corney in Greenhalgh”.
The following dispute relates to Roger de Heaton and Theobald Walter
In the second of King John, in the Lancashire Pipe Roll (p.115) Roger de Hetton/Heaton accounts for 15 marks “pro habenda seisina de quadam terra de Brome, qualem habuit die quo Theobaldus Walteri eum disseisivit et cartam suam abstulit.”-
ie. for holding seisin of certain land of Brome, as he held when Theobald Walter disseised and removed his charter.
An entry in the ‘Lancashire Pipe Rolls’ (p.120) states this was Bourne Hall in Thornton, Lancashire.
The following facts indicate an important link between these three families (viz. Orm son of Magnus, the Bussels and Hervey):
-Orm son of Magnus featured as a witness to several of Richard Bussel’s Charters (and the family relationship continued in the following generation), which would seem to confirm that Orm was a close associate, vassal or relative of Richard, and probably about the same age. It thereby suggests that Orm married Alice Walter in the latter part of the reign of Henry I.
-Orm received lands in Amounderness in marriage with the daughter of Hervey who had been granted the fee of Weeton and surrounding lands in Amounderness previously held by the Bussel family.
-Orm had held land at Hutton from Warin Bussel, about 2 kms SW of Penwortham, which was inherited by his heir Roger de Hutton (and his heir Elias de Hutton).
-Warin Bussel and his brother Abardus/Albert/Acard held the fee of Preston in Amounderness including the lands of Weeton and surrounding vills, before Weeton and surrounding lands (including Mithop) were granted by Stephen Count of Mortain to Hervey, as part of the Honor of Lancaster held by Stephen from his uncle Henry I.
The one question that has not been answered is why Stephen (of Blois) Count of Mortain who held the Honour of Lancaster, granted Hervey the lands of Amounderness, once held by the Bussels. There are no surviving documents that link Hervey with Stephen Count of Mortain or with Henry I, to help us understand why this grant was made. And the only known personal link between Hervey and the Bussels, in particular Richard Bussel, is through Orm son of Magnus, (or through Hervey de Glanville).
Orderic Vitalis, a contemporary Norman historian and chronicler from Saint-Evroul, wrote that ‘Henry I brought all his enemies to heel by his wisdom and courage, and rewarded his loyal supporters with riches and honors. So, he pulled down many great men from positions of eminence… He ennobled others of base stock who had served him well, raised them, so to say, from the dust, and heaping all kinds of favors on them, stationed them above earls and famous castellans.’ (Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, 6 Vols. [Oxford, 1969-80], 6,16)
Does that sufficiently explain why Hervey was rewarded, or is the explanation in the true identity of Hervey?
A connection between Hervey de Glanville (the elder) and Richard Bussel is revealed in the following documents.
A court case held in 1210 (found in Placitorum Abbreviatio) relates to Sir Hervey de Glanville’s daughter Gutha/Gina and her two marriages to, Adam de Biannery (issue Adam Biannery), and Alured/Alfred de Murious/Morieux (issue Geoffrey and Roger, and Alexander), and a dispute about some land in Co. Suffolk once held by ‘Richard Bussel who granted it to Hervey de Glanville for his homage and service’ who granted it to his daughter on her marriage.
(NB. a clerical mistake has been made in naming Rannulf’s father as ‘Henry’ de Glanville rather than Hervey de Glanville, given the document is dated well after both of their deaths.)
‘The Lancashire Inquests, Extents, and Feudal Aids’, ed. William Farrer, pp.28-35:
Inquest held 1st October 1212
The barony of Penwortham
In the barony of Penuertham there are the fees of five knights within the Lyme and without, Thorp, the fee of one knight was given to Gutha (als. Gina), sister of Rannulf de Glanville in dower, and so was alienated from the barony and [the jurors] know not who now holds that tenement. (see Testa de Nevil p.210)
The first Warin Bussel held a fee in Amounderness and probably also in Leyland Hundred, in the time of William Rufus. Upon the creation of the Honour of Lancaster by Henry I., the barony of Penwortham was incorporated and bestowed upon another Bussel. (Richard Bussel)
The service due to the King from this barony was that of 5 knights, three for lands within the Lyme ie. within the county of Lancaster, and 2 for estates in other counties. One of these latter consisted of the Manor of Thorpe-Morieux in co Suffolk, an estate of 4 carucates held by Roger the Poitevin in Domesday, and by Gilbert de Hastings in the year 1200.
(N.B. The Feudal Documents of Bury St Edmunds (D.C. Douglas), [also in the Chronicle of Jocelin de Brakelond], which contains “an account, in 1200 AD of the knights of St Edmund and of their fiefs, of which their ancestors had been possessed”, including: Roger de Muriaux, one knight in Thorp.”)
From a pleading in the King’s Court in Easter Term, 11 John, 1210, it appears that Roger de Murious (Morieux) was summoned to show his title to the fee of one knight in Gunetorp, which belonged to the honour of Penwortham. In his answer he stated that Richard Bussel, of whose inheritance that land was, gave it to Henry (sic. Hervey) de Glanvill, father of Ranulf de Glanvill, for his homage and service, that Henry (sic. Hervey) subsequently gave it in marriage to Adam de Biannery to his daughter Gina, whose son and heir Adam de Biannery gave it to Geoffrey de Murious, brother of the said Roger, for his homage and service, of which Geoffrey this Roger is heir. That the charter with King Henry’s confirmation was in the custody of Alexander, his brother, on his mother’s beheld. The court considered that a jury should be summoned by 12 true knights of county Lancaster and as many of co. Suffolk to try the plea.
(ref: Placitorum Abbreviatio, Record Commission. p.67- an abridgement of the pleas; a brief report of law cases decided in the reign of King John)
Placitorum Abbreviatio: Temporibus Regum Ric I, Johann, Henry III etc., pub.1811, p.67: Suffolk, Easter Term, 11 John, 1210
Lancashire Pipe Rolls (pp.22-24)- In the Notes by William Farrer on the Pipe Roll of 18 Henry II (Mich. 1171-1172):
Ranulf de Glanvil was excused his quota (of scutage) from one knight’s fee in Thorpe- Bussel, co. Suffolk which Albert (sic. Richard) Bussel had given to Gutha sister of the said Ranulf, in dower. It descended to Ranulf de Glanville’s daughter Amabil, who married Ralph de Ardern, who afterwards enfeoffed Roger de Muriell (Murious) in this fee. It had been part of the Domesday fief of Roger of Poitou (ie. the Honour of Lancaster).
Notably, this explanation of the family circumstances differs slightly to the one above. The descent of the fee of Thorpe to Ralph de Ardern (son-in-law of Rannulf de Glanville) is confirmed below.
‘Lanc. Inquests, Extents, etc.’ p.110:
(N.B. William de Auberville was a son of Rannulf de Glanville’s daughter Maud and her husband William de Auberville. William Farrer stated that this fee of Thorpe was held by William de Hastinges of William de Auberville of the honour of Lancaster.
Historian Richard Mortimer (‘Family of Rannulf de Glanville’) came to the conclusion that Farrer’s reference ‘Richard Bussel had given to Gutha sister of the said Ranulf, in dower’ meant that Gutha’s first husband was Richard Bussell. However, the original wording just states that the land of Thorpe was given to Hervey de Glanville for ‘his homage and service’, and that he subsequently presented it to his daughter in dower, not in marriage with Bussell, but to Adam de Biannery.
The following entry in the Testa de Nevill /Book of Fees (p.210), on the Barony of Penwortham, also appears to link Warin Bussel who held the Barony of Penwortham, Guthe de Glanville’s dower land of Thorpe, and Theobald Walter’s heir Theobald who was in the custody of the king, holding a carucate in Mithop (a hamlet of Weeton) from the barony. (NB. Multiple entries for the Barony of Penwortham, held by the Bussels, continue on the following page.) The entry on Guthe, sister of Rannulf de Glanville, states that Thorpe was alienated from the barony (‘alienate fuit a baronia’).
(The Book of Fees/Fiefs is a listing of feudal landholdings, a collection of about 500 written brief notes taken from earlier records in the reign of King John, for the use of the English Exchequer, concerning fiefs held in capite or in-chief, directly from the Crown, and in this case, fiefs in the barony of Penwortham.)
The relationship between Hervey de Glanville and Richard Bussel revealed by the document in Placitorum Abbreviatio, and the terms “homage and service”, needs further explanation.
A vassal was a holder of land by feudal tenure on conditions of homage and allegiance. As part of the feudal agreement, the lord promised to protect the vassal and provide the vassal with a plot of land, called a fief, or fee. This land could be passed onto the vassal’s heirs, giving the vassal tenure over the land. The feudal bond was thus a combination of two key elements: fealty, or an oath of allegiance and pledge of service to the lord, and homage, or an acknowledgement by the lord of the vassal’s tenure. Vassals held an overall status superior to that of peasants and were considered equal to lords in social status. They took leadership positions in their locality and also served as advisors for lords in feudal courts. Fealty carried with it an obligation of service, the most common form being knight service. (American Law and Legal Reference Library- law.jrank.org- ‘Feudalism’)
When Stephen Count of Mortain, the king’s nephew, was granted the Honour of Lancaster c.1113, Warin Bussel would probably have become a vassal of Stephen in order to hold onto the Barony of Penwortham. It is unknown whether Hervey de Glanville became a vassal of Warin’s heir Richard Bussel, as suggested by the contested land case, or was a vassal of Stephen Count of Mortain who may have granted Hervey the land that was part of the Honour of Lancaster (that had originally been part of Richard Bussel’s inheritance of the Barony of Penwortham fiefdom, but was alienated from the barony, as described), for his “homage and service”. As the case was heard at least 80 years after the original grant, with none of the people involved in the original grant still living, the facts presented would no doubt be somewhat confused.
The fact that Hervey [Walter] and Hervey de Glanville, both holding lands of the Honour of Eye in county Suffolk, received lands of the Barony of Penwortham held by Richard Bussel, part of the Honor of Lancaster, in the time of Henry I and his nephew Stephen Count of Mortain who held both Honours, and, given the close relationship of Hervey’s son-in-law Orm son of Magnus to Richard Bussel, it does give credence to the suggested idea that the two Herveys were one and the same.
It would also answer the questions as to why there are no records of Hervey (‘Walter’ the elder) in the official records whereas there are several records of Hervey de Glanville during that same period; and why Hervey (‘Walter’ the elder) was granted the Amounderness fief in Lancaster in the first place, given Hervey de Glanville’s prominent position in the affairs of the county of Suffolk, and his close association with Stephen Count of Mortain through the Honour of Eye in Suffolk; and Hervey de Glanville’s son Rannulf’s subsequent appointments as sheriff of Yorkshire, and of Lancashire, Westmoreland and Northumberland, and his nephew Theobald Walter’s appointment as sheriff of Lancashire.
Other entries in the ‘Lancashire Inquests’ show further links between the lands held by the Walter family in Amounderness and the lands held by Warin Bussel:
‘Lancashire Inquests’, p.30- The Barony of Penwortham
1 Oct 1212
The fee which Warin Bussel gave to Gilmichael, son of Edward, with his daughter in marriage, consisted of 2 carucates in Prees, par. of Kirkham, being the whole of the vill, one carucate in Newton, being half the vill (now Newton with Scales, par. of Kirkham), and 1 carucate in Mithop, a hamlet of Weeton.
And the heir of Theobald Walter, who is in the ward of the lord the King, holds one carucate in Mithop of that barony. (see Testa de Nevil, above)
Gilmichael had issue Robert, his son and heir, who gave one bovate of land in Prees, and land in Whittington of which he appears to have been a tenant to Cockersand Abbey and died about 1207.
‘Lancashire Inquests’, p.37- The Boteler’s Fee of Weeton in Amounderness:
Marton in Amounderness was an escheat from the Honour of Peverel to which a few Lancashire vills had been attached, before the creation of the Honour of Lancaster, and probably after the last forfeiture of Count Roger the Poitevin in 1102. In the reign of Stephen, the fourth part of Marton had apparently been in the possession of Warine Bussel, who gave to the abbey of Eversham “one carucate and a half in the vill which is called Meretun, with the moiety of all the turbary, which Warine possessed there, that is four cows and four oxen, and sixty sheep”. (Priory of Penwortham p.3).
The Testa de Nevill, (p.211) just under the entry on Hervey father of Hervey Walter granting land to Orm in marriage, is the following entry on Mereton/Marton in Amounderness held by the king who held custody of Theobald’s heir, related to above:
It is clear from the above records that Warin Bussel, his brother Abardus/Alfred/Acardus, and then Warin’s son and heir Richard Bussel held the Amounderness lands of Roger the Poitevin, as well as the lordship of Penwortham.
‘Lanc Inquests, Extents, etc.’ (pp.171-74)
The 1212 Inquest list of Theobald Walter’s lands held in Amounderness of the Honour of Lancaster, included:
Weeton, Marton, Mythop (named above), and Swarbrick, Quinscaldisherthe (belonging to Weeton), Lynholm, Greenhalgh, Esprick, Thistilton, Bradkirk, Mowbrick, Hassock, Treales, Wharles, Roseacre, Rawcliffe, Staynole, Middle Rawcliffe, and the manor and church of Belagh (Norfolk); and ‘Hulmstead’(?), and Newton and Boxted in Suffolk.
Blake Butler (Letters to Lord Dunboyne, pp.74-78) wrote that Theobald Walter’s re-grant of 22 April 1194 from Richard I of the whole of Amounderness was held by service of three knight’s fees which were included in the scutage of £73.6s.8d. of Knights of the Honour of Lancashire in 1189-1190.
In the accounts of the sheriff of Lancashire in the second of King John, are the following entries:
"Homines de Preston reddunt compotum de x marcis et I palefrido pro habenda pace de loquela quam Teobaldus Walteri versus eos de gibeto et gaiol in Preston; et Teobaldus Walteri r. c. de ii marcis pro feodo dim. militis."
In the 4th of John, we find in the Pipe Roll of Lancashire this entry,
“Teobaldus Walteri r. c. de vi marcis pro feodo trium militum, the service by which he held all Amoundernesse”;
and another in the fifth year of that prince to this effect,
“Teobaldus Walteri debet ii palefrid (palfreys) pro habenda licentia eundi in Yberniam [Ireland].”
Blake Butler continued: Of the lands in Suffolk/Norfolk so held by Theobald Walter from the Honour of Lancaster, (originally made up of lands held by Roger de Poitou) were the following:
½ a Knight’s fee in Boxtead in Babergh Hundred, Co. Suffolk (with Belaugh and Hulmstead, subject to a quitclaim by Theobald Walter to William fitzHervey by means of a fine by which fitzHervey, in consideration of this grant of lands which had been held by Hervey, Theobald’s grandfather, released all right to the rest of the estate which had been held by the said Hervey, in the Final Accord of 15th July 1195- Book of Fees p.211- unlike Belaugh, Boxtead was not recovered by the Butlers, and continued in the hands of William’s successors)
1/7th Knight’s fee in Newton Co. Suffolk (this has not been identified but according to the Feodary of Co. Lancaster 1199-1201 Theobald Walter held ½ a Knight’s fee here (Lanc. Pipe Rolls p.145)- thought to be Old Newton, near Haughley in Suffolk.
1/3rd Knight’s fee in Belaugh Co. Norfolk, which Peter Walter holds (ie. Belaugh St Peter in the Hundred of Sth Erpingham, near the abbey of St Benets of Hulme).
¼ Fee in ‘Hulmstead’ (not identified- probably near the vill of Hulme, near the ancient abbey of St Benets of Hulme/Holme; possibly a corruption of Horstead, or Hoveton [St Peter] both partly held by Roger de Poitou, adjacent to Belaugh which was part of the valuation of Hoveton and part of Horstead valuation.
T. Blake Butler suggested ‘Hulmestead’ could be a corruption of Hoveton [St Peter] with the Germanic word ‘Stadt’/stead meaning ‘town’.
It could also be the vill/town (‘stead’) of Hulme where the abbey is situated in Horning, but that has no direct association with Roger de Poitou, as all of Horning was held by the Abbey of St Benet which was very close by, at Horning, all situated on the Rover Bure.
In Domesday Book, Roger de Poitou did not hold Belaugh, which was held by the King, Ralph de Beaufour, and the abbey of St Benet of Hulme- the land in Belaugh held by St Benet’s was in the valuation of Hoveton [St Peter or St John] which is to the east of Belaugh. Part of Hoveton (St Peter), 1 carucate, ‘which used to belong to Tunstead’, was held by Roger de Poitou.
To the west of Belaugh is Horstead, 4 carucates of land ‘held by the King, but now part of the fief of Roger of Poitou.’
And also, in the ‘Lands of the King’: Belaugh, 1 carucate, ‘is in the valuation of Horstead’.
This comfortably explains how part of Belaugh became part of Roger de Poitou’s Honour of Lancaster (subsequently held by the Walter family), and gives the most plausible explanation for the location of ‘Hulmestead’.
Therefore, in my opinion, the most likely location of ‘Hulmestead’ is in the vicinity of St Benet of Hulme/Holme, and near Belaugh, possibly a corruption of Horstead or Hoveton.
Nearby, to the west of Horstead and Belaugh, Horsford and Horsham St Faith were granted by Robert Malet to Walter de Caen- he and his son Robert fitzWalter built a castle at Horsford, and founded a priory at Horsham St Faith.
NB. Horstead, Horsford and Horsham St Faith take their name from the River Hor, a tributary of the River Bure, joining near Belaugh.
There are also further interesting connections in this area – Honing (see map above) belonged to the de Glanville family in the 12th century, inheriting from Robert de Glanville who held Honing from the abbot of St Benet in Domesday, and according to Francis Blomefield, the de Glanvilles, namely Bartholomew de Glanville, also held land in Horning and the vill of Holm/Hulme from the abbey.
Horning: At the [Domesday] survey, this town was found to be part of the possessions of the abbot of Holm who had 3 carucates of land, and 2 carucates in demean, and 6 among the tenants, etc.
The family of de Glanville were early enfeoffed of considerable lands in this town, &c. held of the abbot. Bartholomew de Glanville, eldest son of William, founder of Bromholm Priory, had 3 parts of a fee here, and in Holm, (a part of this town), of the old feoffment in the reign of Henry II.
Holm was a solitary place in the marshes, called Cowholm/Couholm, and given (according to tradition of the monks) by Horus, a little prince, to a society of religious hermits, under the government of one Suneman about the year 800, who (with the chapel of St Benedict by them, here built) were all destroyed in the general devastation of this country by the Danes in 870. In the next century, Wolfric, a holy man, gathered seven companions here, and rebuilt the chapel and houses; they had resided here some years, when King Canute, the Dane, founded and endowed at Holm an abbey of Benedictine monks before 1020. This abbey was fortified by the monks with strong walls, that it resembled more a castle than a cloister, and as tradition says, held out some time against King William I till betrayed by the treachery of one of the monks, on condition of his being made abbot, and on his promotion, was ordered to be hanged directly.
This also raises the question of whether ‘Hulmestead’ held by Theobald was the same as the part of the fee in ‘Holm, a part of this town [of Horning]’, held by Bartholomew de Glanville ‘of the old feoffment in the reign of Henry II’. It is a pity Blomefield did not reference this statement.
However, in Domesday, while Horning in the Hundred of Tunstead is held entirely by St Benet of Hulme where their abbey is located, Honing, several miles to the north, but in the Hundred of Tunstead, is also held by St Benets of Holme, but sub-tenanted by Robert de Glanville. Whether Blomefield, who wrote both descriptions, has confused these two vills of Horning and Honing in relation to the de Glanvilles, is difficult to determine. It is possible that William de Glanville, or his son Bartholomew, was enfeoffed of lands in Horning and Holm at a later date than the Domesday survey, and possibly by Henry II, as suggested.
Francis Blomefield on Honing in Tunstead Hundred (p.42): the principal manor, was at the survey in the abbot of St Benet, with two carucates of land, and Edric (of Laxfield) held it of the abbot in the Confessor’s time, who on granting to Edric a moiety of his lordship: Edric granted the abbot a moiety belonging to his own fee, and then held the whole of the abbot on certain services; Robert Malet and Robert de Glanville held it at the survey of the abbot. William de Glanville, probably son of Robert, on his founding the priory of Bromholm (near Bacton, held by St Benet of Hulme in Domesday, and later granted to William de Glanville by Henry I and confirmed to son Bartholomew), gave two parts of the tithes of Honing and two parts of the tithes of a mill here, to that priory, which Bartholomew his son, who held 3 parts of a fee in this town, confirmed to them.
Domesday Book: Lands of St Benet of Holme: In Honing, St Benet held 2 carucates TRE and Eadric held it of it, so that the abbot gave to him half of its demesne and he had granted to the abbot the other half of his fief and he was thus holding it of the abbot and giving service. On this land, there were always 13 bordars. And 2 ploughs in demesne and 3 ploughs belonging to the men. There are 25 acres of meadow, and woodland for 8 pigs. There is 1 mill, 2 horses, 4 head of cattle 12 pigs, 40 sheep 30 goats. And 8 sokemen. 41 acres. The whole is worth 40s. And it renders 10d. of the geld, whoever may hold there. Robert Malet holds this and Robert de Glanville holds it of him.
Interestingly, the adjacent land of Worstead, was held in Domesday by Robert the crossbowman from St Benet of Hulme, and adjacent Tunstead (to the south) from the lands of Roger de Poitou. Could he also be Robert de Glanville? Robert de Glanville is recorded as holding 18 lands in Suffolk, but only the one, Honing, in Norfolk. Notably the Sire de Glanville was one of the ‘Commanders of the Archers du Val de Real and Bretheul’ at the Battle of Hastings. Robert the bowman also held ‘Appethorp’ (unidentified) in the Hundred of Forehoe in Norfolk as tenant-in-chief and lord, and [Great & Little] Finborough in the Hundred of Stowmarket in Suffolk from Roger de Auberville.
The Charters of the Priory of Butley, Monasticon Anglicanum, (vi, p.380-81), Num.IV: Progeny of Rannulf de Glanville, states that Rannulf’s second and third daughters, Amabilia and Helewise inherited Finburgh/Finborough from their father:
Amabilla, habuit ex dono patris sui, medietatem ville de Baudeseye et medietatem ville de Finbergh. Helwisa habuit ex dono patris sui, aliam medietatem ville de Baudseye predicta, et aliam medietatem ville de Finbergh predicta.
This appears to indicate that Rannulf acquired Finbergh/Finborough from Robert ‘the crossbowman’, who is therefore likely to be Robert de Glanville, which Rannulf bequeathed, along with his inherited demesne manor of Bawdsey, to his two younger daughters.
Concluding, it is therefore notable that the lands held by the Walter family at Belaugh and ‘Hulmestead’ were in the same small area of Norfolk as those held by the senior de Glanville family (ie. William de Glanville and his descendants) in the area near the abbey of St Benet of Hulme.
The other suggestion by the anonymous author of ‘Norman People’, on the ancestor of Hervey, is not as plausible as the above hypotheses. It relates to the Robert de Glanville named holding lands in Suffolk in Domesday, and Rainald/Rannulph de Glanville who accompanied William the Conqueror in the Conquest.
The author of ‘Norman People’ makes the conjectural statement that ‘Walter, ancestor of the Butlers’ was brother to Robert de Glanville, sons of Rainald de Glanville’, again without reference to a source, so this connection can only be considered very speculative without any plausible foundation. Presumably he made the connection through the association of Warin Bussel with ‘his knight’ named Walter, and the knight named Walter who held land in Leyland in Domesday from Roger de Poitou.
In Domesday, Leyland was held by Roger de Poitou until it briefly passed into the hands of the king, being restored in 1088. It is described: Of the lands in this manor, Gerald holds one hide and a half, Robert 3 carucates, Randolph two carucates, Roger two carucates, Walter one carucate.” Penwortham, from its superior dignity, is distinctly alluded to as belonging to Roger.
From the ‘Testa de Nevill’ it also appears that he granted not merely the greater part of that hundred, but other lands, to hold of Penwortham. By these sub-infeudations the extensive honour of Penwortham was created.’
The author of ‘Norman People’ then connects the Domesday entry for Leyland, with Warin Bussel’s second charter (‘Documents of Penwortham’ Charter No. III-pp.1-3) in which his witness is named as ‘Walter his ‘soldier’:
Hec est convencio quam Warinus Bussel cum assensu uxoris sue et liberorum coram dňo Roberto Abbate et omni convent de Eversham in pleno capitulo fecit, etc.
Ex parte Warini, Walterus miles suus (Walter his soldier/knight), et nepos suus (and his nephew), filius Acardi (son of Acardi- probably his brother Abardus), Willmus.
If the second charter was dated about 1107, then this Walter could have been the same knight named Walter holding land in Leyland in 1086, but whether this relates to the de Glanvilles remains highly speculative, and highly unlikely, given the de Glanvilles were based in East Anglia, not Lancashire, and their lands were all granted by Robert Malet, none by Roger de Poitou.
There is no evidence of the existence of a knight named Walter de Glanville living at the time of the Domesday survey.
The de Glanville and Walter families shared the same coat-of-arms, ‘a chief indented, azure’. This further added to the argument that they shared a common ancestry.
De Glanville arms, according to Glanville Richards in ‘Anglo-Norman House of Glanville’ (p.1) (some confusion of whether the colour was ‘or/gold’ or ‘argent/silver’)
Thomas Carte (Intro p.xxii) wrote:
Herveus assumed for a coat of arms, ‘Or, a chief indented azure’…. The two brethren-in-law (viz. Herveus and Ranulf de Glanville) lived in perfect friendship; Ranulf assumed for his coat ‘argent, a chief indented azure’, as near to that of Herveus as was possible. (NB. ‘argent’ is a tincture of silver)
Carte concluded that Rannulf assumed Hervey Walter’s arms, whereas the arms probably originated with Rannulf’s father Hervey de Glanville when he led the men of Suffolk and Norfolk on crusade to relieve Lisbon from the Moors in 1147, and was subsequently assumed by Theobald.
Theobald held the same arms as his uncle with the change of tincture from Argent/silver to ‘Or/gold’ to distinguish. If the suggestion is correct that Hervey Walter was the brother of Rannulf de Glanville, sons of Sir Hervey de Glanville, then that could also explain the shared arms.
This same Coat of Arms would continue down the centuries in the Butler/Ormond family.
The late Toby Butler wrote an article in the ‘Journal of the Butler Society’ (v.2 No.1 p.86), on ‘Heraldry of the Butlers in Ireland’:
It is from the earliest period that we have our first Butler shield. Towards the close of the twelfth century Theobald Walter, the founder of the family in Ireland, was sealing documents with a wax impression of a shield bearing his heraldic device- OR, A CHIEF INDENTED AZURE.
Displays on shield and banner, on sur-coat and horse trapper, simple yet colourful in blue and gold, this distinctive device will have been easy to recognize on the field of battle or in the lists.
In those early days it seems armorial bearings did not belong exclusively to an individual but may rather have been used collectively by a whole group of men connected with each other by ties of blood or marriage. It is fitting that by this method of collateral adoption Theobald should have taken the arms of his distinguished uncle, Rannulf de Glanville.
Throughout the medieval period the Chief Butlers and later the Earls of Ormonde continued to use the plain device of the chief indented on their shields. This can be seen in St George’s Roll of 1295 and the Rouen Roll of 1415, and many stone representations of it still survive in and around Kilkenny, on tombs and archways. These ancient shields usually depicted the indented partition line at the base of the chief with only four points uppermost, whereas the modern practice is to draw a line of five points, sometimes six; and the indentations were much deeper than they would be today. In some of the early Armorial Rolls only three points have been drawn.
Another device often seen in Butler heraldry is the covered cup; usually three covered cups, tinctured gold, are arranged two over one to fit the tapering shield.
In Ireland the cups were first seen, not as three heraldic charges, but as single emblems standing one at either side of the shield on Theobald Walter’s seal: “a very fair seal of green wax,” says Carte, “the impression on the shield is a chief indented… and on either side a cup to denote the office of Butler.”
It seems that in Ireland, the cups, or a cup, may have originated as the badge of office of the Chief Butler rather than as an heraldic charge. Badges were in use before the invention of Heraldry: whilst heraldic shields were confined to the use of the family, the badges of the great office-holders could be worn on the uniforms of their retainers or the liveries of their servants; at a much later date, they were often incorporated into the arms of the office-holders’ descendants. A cup was said to be the emblem of the cup-bearer as well as the butler. The covered cups eventually came into the arms of the Ormonde Butlers on a quartered shield, probably during the fifteenth century.
Wikipedia-Coat of arms: By the mid-12th century, heraldry had emerged in both England and Europe. In heraldic traditions of England, an individual rather than a family had a coat of arms. In those traditions, coats of arms were legal property transmitted from father to sons. Other descendants of the original bearer could bear the ancestral arms only with some difference, usually a colour change or addition of a distinguishing charge. Undifferentiated arms were used only by one person at any given time. Wives and daughters could also bear arms modified to indicate their relation to the holder of the arms.
Early heraldic designs were personal, used by individual noblemen who might also alter their chosen design over time. Arms became hereditary by the end of the 12th century in England during the period of Richard I and the Crusades when bodies of men of different countries and under different commanders were being assembled into one army, and it was necessary for each body to know their chieftain in a day of action and consequently for that chieftain to distinguish himself by some particular badge, or coat of arms, which he wore over his armour. After some time, this came to be regulated by certain rules and to serve for a distinction of noble families, and of the different branches of such families.
Therefore, if the ‘chief indented azure’ was the original arms of Hervey de Glanville, it is highly likely that Hervey adopted the arms as commander of the men of Norfolk and Suffolk in the large contingent sent to Lisbon in 1147 to drive out the Moors.
It would appear that the de Glanville arms were shared by both branches of the de Glanville family, ie. by the descendants of both William de Glanville (the elder) and his brother Hervey de Glanville senior, in which case, it may have come down through their father.
William’s great granddaughter Emma (daughter of Geoffrey, youngest son of Bartholomew, son of William de Glanville) was born 1207 the daughter of Baron Geoffrey de Glanville and his wife Margaret de la Haye. Emma married in 1230 at Shirland, Derbyshire to Sir John de Grey (Justice of Chester) a younger son of Baron Henry de Grey and Isold Iseaude Bardolph. The foundations of St. Leonard’s church at Shirland date to 1220 according to the inscriptions within the church. The church grounds contain many monuments to the de Grey family, who inherited the manor in the early 13th century. On the side of the ancient altar are carvings of the arms of families who patronized this church, including the fifth from the left which is the de Glanville arms of a ‘chief indented’, thereby showing the same arms as Hervey de Glanville’s line, and Theobald Walter. However, it should be noted that the carvings of arms on the front of the altar were made at a much later date than the death of Emma.
An old document (source unknown- featured on Glanville.net site) had a chart of several ancient coats of arms, including the two above, ascribed to Lord Middleham (argent, chief indented azure) and Rannulf de Glanville (crosses and crescents). According to another source, Ranulf fitzRobert, 4th Lord of Middleham and Spennithorpe, b.c.1180 d.1252, bore the arms of his grandfather Glanville, “argent, a chief indented azure”. Ranulf fitzRobert’s mother was Helewise de Glanville, Rannulf de Glanville’s daughter, and her husband Robert fitzRalph, also known as Robert de Taillebois, 3rd Lord of Middleham.
This would appear to confirm the theory that Theobald also probably took the arms of de Glanville (Or, a chief indented azure) from either his uncle Rannulf, or from Hervey de Glanville the elder.
Notably, the three sons of Robert fitzRalph and Helewise de Glanville, namely Waleran, Ralph and Ranulf, were each, in turn, in wardship of Hubert Walter. Whilst Ralph fitzRobert of Middleham co. York was in his custody, Hubert gave land in Saxthorpe, Co. Norfolk, to his brother Theobald; to recover which Ranulf, brother to Ralph, paid a fine in 1205. (Gale, Regist. Honoris de Richmond, App.235; Genealogist [New Series], iii. 32-3; The Victoria History of the County of Lancaster, ed Wm Farrer and J. Brownbill, 1906, V.1, p.351).
Hubert also held the wardship of Rannulf de Glanville’s grandson Hugh de Auberville, son of William de Auberville and Maud de Glanville, Rannulf’s eldest daughter. (ref: 8 N.S. 30, where Hubert Walter has a special writ from King Richard which excuses him the scutages of his wards, including Hugh de Auberville)
The arms, ‘argent, chief indented azure’ may have been the original arms of de Glanville, but at some point, it would appear that Rannulf changed his arms to that of crosses and crescents. The Crescent is said to denote one who has been honoured by the sovereign (reflecting his position of State as Justiciar) and the Cross is a symbol of Christianity and service in the Crusades, so it is possible he adopted these arms when he set out on the Crusades in 1190 shortly before his death.
Similarly, Theobald added a gold cup when he was granted the title Butler of Ireland.
Whether Theobald adopted the arms of his dear uncle Rannulf who raised and educated him to honour him, or, inherited it from his possible descent from Hervey de Glanville, will remain unresolved.
Arguments for this theory of descent from Hervey de Glanville
The similarity between the birth/death dates of both generations of Herveys living in Suffolk, is marked:
Hervey’s estimated birth was c.1180’s, similar to his daughter Alice's father-in-law Magnus, and his son Hervey Walter's father-in-law, Theobald de Valoines.
Hervey de Glanville’s self-proclaimed birth was c.1180-1182; died circa mid-to-late 1150’s
Hervey Walter’s estimated birth c.1110-1115, and died before 1188 (after his Charter to Butley circa 1171-1176, but before son Hubert’s Charter to W. Dereham in 1188);
Hervey de Glanville Junior’s estimated birth similar to brother Rannulf, c.1110-1120, and death before 1189 (after witnessing Rannulf's Butley charter in 1171-Jan 1174; before brother Roger de Glanville’s charter to Leiston Abbey dated c.1186-1189, who mentioned the 'soul of his brother Hervey')
2.The close association
The close association between the Walter family and the sons and grandsons of Hervey de Glanville and of his brother William de Glanville, appears to indicate a strong biological link rather than just a marital link between Rannulf and Hervey Walter. The fact that Stephen de Glanville, the grandson of William de Glanville and son of Bartholomew de Glanville, was the prime witness of Hervey Walter’s Charter to Butley Priory seems to indicate a close association with this senior line of the de Glanville clan. Plus the fact that Hervey appears to have named his youngest son after Bartholomew de Glanville, and his third son after Roger de Glanville, when one would expect him to have named a son after Rannulf de Glanville. This relationship with the extended de Glanville family would seem to point to a biological link in the family lines.
3.Coat of Arms
The sharing of the de Glanville Coat of Arms with Theobald Walter, suggests a close family link such as descent from a common ancestor.
4.Care of Hervey’s sons
The fact that Hervey Walter’s two eldest sons were given into the household of Rannulf de Glanville for their education in the 1150’s-early 1160’s, before Rannulf held any great office, implies a closer relationship than just through their wives. The affection that Hervey Walter’s sons held for their Uncle Rannulf and Aunt Bertha is reflected in their dedications in their own charters, giving equal honour with their own parents. These dedications to people other than direct relatives were most unusual in charters of that time. It implied that their uncle and aunt were held in equal if not greater affection and esteem than their parents.
5.Lack of records of Hervey Walter
Apart from the charter of Hervey Walter to Butley Priory in 1170’s, another in the Lancashire Pipe Roll of King John along with his son Theobald confirming an earlier grant of land, and the retrospective record in the 1212 Inquest of Lancashire naming his father as Hervey and daughter Alice’s marriage to Orm, there are no listings for Hervey Walter in the Red Book of the Exchequer, the Cartae Baronum owing knight’s fees for property held in 1166, or land transactions in the Pipe Rolls. Even his ‘younger’ brother Hubert Walter was listed in the 1158 Pipe Roll. Despite donating his Wingfield fee to Rannulf’s foundation Priory of Butley, he did not witness Rannulf’s charter, nor any charters of family members such as the Valoines or de Glanvilles, only his sons having been named as witnesses to de Glanville and Valoine charters.
There are no records of Hervey receiving the lands in Suffolk before or after Henry II's succession, only the 1130 Pipe Roll record of ‘Hervei filius Hervei' involving the Suffolk lands of Hamo Pecche which may or may not refer to him, but may refer to Hervey son of Hervey de Glanville. Hervey’s first and last appearance was in his charter to Butley Priory in 1171-76.
However, in contrast, Hervey de Glanville Junior is in the Pipe Rolls of 1163-4 and in the Cartae Baronum in 1166 paying fees for his lands in Suffolk, and appears as a witness in a York charter in 1165 with his brother Rannulf the sheriff, and in Roger de Glanville’s charters to Castle Acre c.1160’s and to Coxford Priory c.1171, with his last appearance as a witness in Rannulf's charter to Butley in 1171-74 (which coincides with Hervey Walter’s first and last appearance in his subsequent donation charter).
The marriage of Hervey Walter with Maud de Valoines indicates social equality with the Valoines and the de Glanvilles, both of whom appear frequently in the various records.
Both families have links with Lancashire, and in particular links with the Bussel family, Lords of Penwortham who held the Amounderness fee after the forfeiture of Roger de Poitou who held it in the Domesday survey. Sir Hervey de Glanville received lands of the Penwortham fee from Richard Bussel which he gave as dower to his daughter Gutha de Glanville in the reign of Henry I or Stephen. Hervey (Walter the elder) was granted lands from the Amounderness fee in the reign of King Henry I. Three of Richard Bussel’s confirmation charters were witnessed by Orm son of Magnus who would receive lands in Amounderness from Hervey in marriage with Hervey’s daughter Alice Walter; all demonstrating a close relationship between these families.
The fact that both Hervey and Hervey de Glanville held a close association with Richard Bussel, and received Bussel lands, does give credence to the suggestion they were one and the same.
After holding the position of sheriff of Yorkshire since 1163, Rannulf was appointed high sheriff of Lancaster 1173-74, with Theobald holding the position of High Sheriff of Lancaster from 1194. He also held Lancaster Castle for Prince John when he was ordered to surrender it by his brother Hubert in 1193.
7.Land held by the Hervey Walter in Suffolk
The fee of Wingfield held by Hervey Walter in Bishops Hundred in Suffolk, was also partly held by Robert de Glanville in Domesday from Robert Malet.
8.The family name of Alice
Hervey Walter's sister was named Alice/Aliz (married to Orm). Hervey de Glanville Junior's daughter was named Alice (married to Geoffrey de Lodnes), possibly indicating a family name.
Arguments against this theory of descent from Hervey de Glanville
1.Hubert Walter the elder
The primary argument against this relationship being closer than by marriage, is the family placement of Hubert Walter (the elder) who was named in several documents confirming his land held in Fressingfield in Bishops Hundred, Suffolk (adjacent to Wingfield and Weybread held by Hervey Walter), which was inherited by his son Peter Walter (who in turn named his son Hubert). Peter Walter, whose age was contemporary with Theobald Walter, was named in several documents associated with Hervey and Theobald Walter, sharing family lands in Suffolk and Norfolk, and as witness and donor to Walter family charters. (This family is explored in greater detail in the first chapter.)
The sharing of the surname ‘Walter’ indicates a close biological relationship, probably with Hubert as brother to Hervey Walter (II), which makes the likelihood of their shared father being Sir Hervey de Glanville less probable.
It is also notable that, despite Peter Walter being a knight prominent in the county affairs of Suffolk, he does not feature in any of the de Glanville charters as a witness, nor did Hubert appear in any early de Glanville documents as a witness, which one would expect if they were also of de Glanville heritage, especially if they were a son and grandson of Sir Hervey de Glanville Snr. However, as Hubert disappears from the records in 1168 and was probably deceased by then or even earlier, this would explain his absence from later de Glanville charters, unlike Hervey Walter and his sons who were also related to Ranulf through Hervey’s wife, but that does not explain the absence of Peter Walter from the de Glanville charters.
The redrafting of the Confirmation Charter of Henry I to Eye Priory with an estimated date range of 1119-1135, made a point of including Hubert Walter as the donor of tithes of his land in Snapeshall in Fressingfield to Eye Priory, indicating a determination by the monks to establish that Hubert or his forefather held this land back in the reign of Henry I. The fact that Hubert Walter is named as such in the Eye Priory charters dated in the 1150’s and 60s confirms that the surname ‘Walter’ was adopted early and he may have been the first in the family to hold that surname.
There is no recorded ‘Hubert de Glanville’ in the de Glanville clan in that period of time, (although there are references to a Hubert de Glanville as a juror in Suffolk in 1201 in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, p433, Roll 21. m. 14d. Easter 2 John (1201) Suffolk; and in the Curia Regis Rolls, i, 188, as a juror in Norfolk in 1200. His de Glanville origin is not recorded, but as a juror in Norfolk/Suffolk, he must have been related to the senior lines of de Glanvilles. Unless he was Hubert, son of Peter Walter, who only appears in a couple of charters of the de Huntingfield family, as Hubert filius Peter? Notably his father Peter was recorded as Peter Walter in the Walter family charters, yet in several writs in the early 1200’s, he called himself Peter filius Hubert.
But there is the reference in the Charter of Roger de Glanville, in which one of the witnesses was "Hubert his nephew".
2.The Walter surname
The second negative argument is the origin of the ‘Walter’ surname held by both Hervey and Hubert (the elder) and their issue, and possibly by their father Hervey the elder who was recorded as Theobald’s ‘grandfather Hervey Walter' in the suit between Theobald Walter and William Hervey in 1195 over inherited lands. As has been pointed out by various historians, the singular surname ‘Walter’ held by this family for several generations and by two distinct family lines, was exceedingly unusual for this time period. Hubert (the elder) is the earliest member of the family to be recorded as using the surname ‘Walter’. If they were from the de Glanville male line, one would expect them to hold the de Glanville surname, not ‘Walter’. This could be explained by a marriage between a Norman named Walter and a de Glanville female.
The questions that arise:
Why did the family hold the distinct and unusual surname of ‘Walter,’ and did not use the surname de Glanville like so many other members of the family? Was it a case of wanting to make a new family line, differentiated from the de Glanville lines which were becoming numerous with each new generation?
What is the reason that they did not use the appellation ‘fitzWalter’, if Hervey was the son of a Walter?
Did Hervey Walter adopt the surname AFTER his brother and his sons, or was it just a case that he did not appear in any records that have survived? And did they adopt the surname because Hubert Walter the elder adopted the surname?
Did the surname come from a maternal line? Was Hervey Walter the elder, married to a de Glanville female, a sister of Hervey de Glanville Senior and of William de Glanville, thereby gaining the fee of Wingfield from Robert de Glanville who held from Robert Malet?
Or was the link a generation further back, maybe a sister of Robert de Glanville who may have married Walter who also held the lands of Wingfield and Stradbroke and Weybread in Bishops Hundred in the Honour of Eye in Suffolk from Robert Malet, possibly linking Robert the crossbowman and Walter the crossbowman? This would account for the ‘Walter’ surname as well as the close relationship with the de Glanvilles.
Was Hervey Walter’s fee of Wingfield in Suffolk inherited from the Walter who held lands in Wingfield and Stradbroke in Domesday (possibly Walter the crossbowman or Walter de Caen), or was he given the lands by the de Glanville family (who also held these lands in Domesday, although notably, they did not hold Instead in Weybread, or Fressingfield), or, were the lands held in Bishops Hundred a gift from the Crown?
Or, as suggested in the chapter on Normans named Walter, did one of the de Glanvilles hold custody of an underage Hervey, son of the Walter who held lands in Bishops Hundred, thereby cementing a close relationship with the extended de Glanville family?
Was Hervey [Walter the elder] also Hervey de Glanville Senior?
All of the evidence above proves a very close relationship between the Walter family and extended de Glanville families, but whether by birth or just by marriage, is yet undetermined.
While there is still a viable possibility that the Walter family came from de Glanville stock, there are many unanswerable questions and uncertainties about this theory.
4.HERVEY DE BOURGES and HUBERT DE MONTECANISY
Another question speculated upon, is the origin of the family names ‘Hervey’ and ‘Hubert’- there were only a few Norman settlers in England that carried those names at that time, with two possible contenders named as Hervey de Bourges (Bituricensis) and Hubert de Monte Canisy/Munchensy who held lands in Suffolk in the Domesday Book, both holding a close relationship with Robert Malet, but again, only speculative.
HERVEY DE BOURGES
The Archaeological Institute of Suffolk published a paper by the President, Rev. Lord Arthur Hervey M.A. (A Paper read before The Archaeological Institute of Suffolk, by Rev. Lord Arthur Hervey, [Bishop of Bath], Lowestoft, 1858, p18-19), in which he thoroughly explores the ancestry of the ‘Hervey’ family, including a Hervey associated with Suffolk and Norfolk from the Conquest to Domesday.
In Domesday Book, in the list of those who held in capite, four pages of description of divers lands are headed ‘Terra Hervei Bituricensis’ ie. ‘The land Hervey de Bourges’. This Herveus was one of 70 (sic) proprietors among whom the whole county was divided. He held lands in capite in the hundreds of Stow, Bosmere, Claydon including Thredling, Hoxne (als Bishops Hundred), Colneis, Carlford, Willford, Loes, and Plomesgate (then follows a list of 32 parishes in Suffolk)- and he is the same Herveus whose name appears as holding, not in capite, in many other parishes in Suffolk and Norfolk (several under Robert Malet tenant-in-chief). It appears further, that the descendants of this Herveus were settled or had large possessions in Norfolk and Suffolk in times immediately following the conquest. For Carte in his life of Ormonde, proves from documentary evidence that the father of Theobald Walter, the first Butler of Ireland was Hervey Walter, and that the father of Hervey Walter was Herveus. And as Herveus, Hervey Walter and Theobald are known to have had large property in Norfolk and Suffolk, it seems almost certain that Herveus the grandfather of Theobald Walter must have been identical with Herveus Bituricensis. (He then references the Pipe Roll Henry I, 1130- ‘Herveus filius Hervei’ etc.).
However, the chronology of his theory is incorrect- Hervey, father of Hervey Walter, was born c.1080-90s, so could not be the Hervey de Bourges named in Domesday in 1086. His theory is supposition not backed by evidence, and he makes a number of assumptions in his paper that are incorrect. There is no evidence that Hervey de Bourges had a son and heir, and, if he had a son named Hervey (father to Hervey Walter), he did not inherit any of the many lands held by Hervey de Bourges in Domesday (with one possible exception of some land held in Chippenhall/Fressingfield in Bishops Hundred , also held by Robert Malet, part of which was later held in demesne by Peter Walter and his father Hubert Walter), and a considerable number of de Bourges’ lands, held as tenant-in-chief, were inherited by his daughter’s marital Pecche family which would seem to discount a male heir. Hervey’s daughter Isilia married William Pecche whose son and heir was named Hamo Pecche. Curiously, there is the reference to ‘Hervei filius Hervei’ in the Pipe Roll of 1130, as previously mentioned in the Introduction, in which ‘Hervey son of Hervey renders account of 10 silver marks for his land of Hamo Pecche’, that does indicate a possible link through a maternal line, and can’t be dismissed.
According to G.E. Cokayne (Complete Peerage, v.10 p.332): It appears from the record of a suit as to the advowson of Grundisburgh in 1250 (Curia Regis Rolls, 139 [33-34 Henry III], m.21d ; 143, m.7d , 146, m.36d) that Isilia de “Bergwes” was reputed to have been joint founder with Bartholomew de Glanville of the church of Grundisburgh. And Hamon Pecche confirmed to St Edmund’s Abbey the gifts of his grandmother Jenita and his mother Isilia, the latter witnessing his Charter (Douglas, ‘Feudal Documents from the Abbey of Bury St Edmunds’, no.179- see below). This cumulative evidence suggests very strongly that Isilia was the da. and h. of Hervey de Bourges. William Pecche had a daughter Basilia who held Martley, a Bourges fee, by his second wife, Isilia (Red Bk, Exch. p.366- Hamon describes Basilia as his sister).
It may be a coincidence, but Bartholomew de Glanville’s mother was named Basilia- maybe she was the daughter of William Peche and Isilia de Bourges named Basilia, which would explain why Isilia and Bartholomew co-founded the church. (see section on the de Glanvilles which explores the link between Hervey Walter and Hamon Pecche)
Historical researcher and author of “Domesday People: A Prospography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166”, (1999), Vol 2, Dr Katherine S.B. Keats-Rohan, wrote on Hervey de Bourges/Bituricensis:
A tenant-in-chief whose lands were acquired in or shortly after 1075, since most if not all had earlier been held from Ely Abbey by William son of Goran, a Breton who fell in the revolt of 1075. Hervey himself may have been a Breton. He had a tenant with the Breton name Euan, and another Peter de Paludel, whose name could refer to La Palvelle near Saint-James in Normandy. The seigneurs of Saint-James were of a Breton family, one of the few to use the then still rare name of Peter.
Herve held no land of the abbot of Bury St Edmunds, but a certain Peter clericus did. Peter’s manors passed to Herve’s heirs of the Pecche family. Though there is no trace of an enfeoffment to Pecche by the abbot, we do know that Herve’s wife and her daughter Isilia Pecche were benefactors of the abbey. In the 1090’s Abbot Baldwin’s charter were twice attested by Peter Bituricensis. Between 1107 and 1118, Henry I granted to the abbot’s demesne the land that had been held by Peter Bituricensis and by Peter clericus Ambianensis. A late Ms of Bury states that the two Peters were the same man. This suggests that the Domesday Peter clericus and Peter Bituricensus were the same and that Peter was a relative of Herve, a suspicion reinforced by the unexplained descent of Peter’s manors to the heirs of Herve.
Herve’s wife Judith was perhaps a sister or daughter of Robert Malet, since his daughter and heiress Isilia bore the name of Robert’s mother and there was a strong Malet connection with the lands of Herve’s fief. Herve was probably the father of Herve who challenged Isilia’s son Hamon Pecche’s possession of Herve Bituricensis’s lands in 1129/30 (a reference to the ‘Hervei filius Herve’ entry in the 1130 Pipe Roll- NB. no lands were named in the Pipe Roll entry). Isilia’s marriage occurred after 1107, when her husband William Pecche’s first wife was still living. Certain evidence for the name of Herve’s wife survives in the corrupt form of Ieuitia in a charter to Bury St Edmunds given by Hamo Pecche. Onomastic evidence show this form to be a corruption of Judith, comparable with the hypocoristic form Jueta.
Charter of Hamo ‘Peccatum’ (Pecche) confirming to the abbey of St Edmund the gift made thereto by his mother, Isilia, and his grandmother Jeuita:
De honore Sancti Edmundi terram tenentibus Haimund Peccatum in Christo salute. Sciatis me concessisse terram et redditum quem Ieuita aua mea et mater mea Esylya dederunt et concesserunt domino meo Sancto Edmundi et conuentui scilicet xxv solidos quos Radulfus de Selfangre et heredes sui reddent unoquoque anno Sancto Edmundi… (Feudal Documents of Bury St Edmunds, ed. D.C. Douglas, London 1932, p.179)
Keats-Rohan therefore makes the suggestion that the reference to ‘Hervei filius Hervei’ in relation to the land of Hamo Pecche, as found in the 1130 Pipe Roll of Henry I, related to a son of Hervey de Bourges, but there is no further evidence of such a son. Hervey de Bourges held a sizeable number of lands as tenant-in-chief in Suffolk, only one of which matched lands held by the Walter family (Chippenhall/Fressingfield held by Peter Walter), making the likelihood of descent from a son of de Bourges, highly improbable.
Hervey was also subtenant to a considerable number of lands under the Abbey of Ely (St Etheldreda) where his possible brother Peter was steward. Hervey’s level of esteem by King William is revealed in his holding of land as tenant-in-chief in Thorney. King William also held land at Thorney, previously held by King Edward, his subtenants including Frodo (brother of Abbot Baldwin of Bury St Edmunds), Hugh de Montfort, Count Robert of Mortain (William’s half-brother), Roger d’Auberville, Roger de Poitou (son of one of William’s closest companions) and King William himself. Thorney had a recorded population of 112 households in 1086, putting it in the largest 20% of settlements recorded in Domesday and is listed with 5 owners: King William (value £40), Roger de Poitou x2 (value 5s.), Hugh de Montfort (value £3) and Hervey de Bourges (value £2.7s)
A ‘Hervey’ held lands under Hugh de Montfort in Haughley, Wyerstone (also held by Hubert de Montecanisy) and ‘Caldecota’ (unidentified in Hartismere) in Suffolk. Haughley is close to Thorney partly held by Hervey de Bourges in Domesday as tenant-in-chief. Whether this unidentified ‘Hervey’ was Hervey de Bourges is unknown. There are no links between these lands of ‘Hervey’ and the Walter family, making this link unlikely.
According to G.E. Cokayne (Complete Peerage, v.10 p331-334), an examination of the Domesday holdings of Hervey de Bourges in Suffolk show that a number of them can be traced as later forming part of the Pecche barony; thus Martley, Cransford and “Chesthalle” (Chippenhall?) were held by Hamon Pecche in 1166 (Red Book of Exchequer- Rolls Ser.- pp.366-67); Glevering by Gilbert Pecche in 1206 (Curia Regis Rolls vol. iv, p.153); Thorney, Bealings and Darnford by Gilbert Pecche in 1242-43- (Book of Fees p.913); while Grundisburgh with Great and Little Bealings was held by Hugh Pecche in 1302-03 (Feudal Aids, vol. v, p.33). These lands were inherited by Hervey’s daughter Isilia, married to William Pecche, parents of Hamon and Basilia. (Hamon f/o Gilbert f/o Hamon II f/o Gilbert II)
Peter Bituricensis/the cleric/steward, thought to be the brother or close relative of Hervey Bitericensus, held several lands from the Abbey of Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk in Domesday. He could give or sell the lands, but the soke and sake and commendations still belonged to St Edmunds. However, it is difficult to determine if there were more than one named ‘Peter’ who held land from the abbey. (Peter de Valognes was a holder of land from the abbey but he was designated so; there is also a ‘Peter brother of Burchard’ named holding Westley and Honington- whether this referred to ‘Peter clericus’ is not specified.) Burchard/Burcard also held Bardwell and Barningham from the abbey of St Edmunds along with Peter of Valognes; and he held Hunston from the abbey.
The lands held by ‘Peter’ from the abbey of Bury St Edmunds in Domesday:
Rattlesden, Culford, Honington, Westley, Fornham (St Genevieve), Harleston and Hawstead.
Rattlesden is of particular interest as it was subject to a land dispute and fine involving Geoffrey de Lodnes and his wife Alice de Glanville, daughter of Hervey de Glanville, who inherited Rattlesden (see the section on ‘de Glanville’ above for the full case).
‘Peter’ also held land in Bredfield from Hervey de Bourges: In Bredfield, Peter holds 1 freeman by commendation to Durand of Offton, with 12 acres and 3 oxen and 23 sheep, worth 2s.
Hervey de Bourges held a further 6 acres in Bredfield from the Abbot of St Ǣthelthryth.
However, Hervey’s subtenant in Ingolestuna was named Peter de Paludel, so may be the same Peter who held Bredfield.
Prof. Katherine Keats Rohan in her article on the Malet Family:
‘Domesday Book and the Malets: patrimony and the private histories of public lives’ (1996 Printed Nottingham Medieval Studies 41)
The fee of Hervé Bituricensis is especially interesting for the high level of association of its lands and men with William Malet or his precessor Edric, already mentioned. Other parts of 23 of the 33 manors held by Hervé were held by Robert Malet in 1086. In 16 of them William Malet and/or Edric of Laxfield were named as Hervé's predecessor. In one case the land had been held by Robert Malet in succession to his father William; in another, Robert Malet claimed a man held by Hervé. Very many of Hervé's manors were also mentioned in connection with the past or present jurisdiction of Ely Abbey. In one case it was recorded that the land had been held by W. son of Gorhan. In fact, it is clear from a suit brought by the abbey between 1072and 1075 that most if not all of Hervé's land had been previously held by William son of Gorhan - a Breton who fell in 1075 - who had usurped it from the abbey.146
Much of Hervé's land passed to a daughter Esilia, wife of William Pecche and bearer of the same name as Robert's mother. The simplest explanation for the composition of much of Hervé's fief is that his wife was another of Robert's sisters. Her name occurs in a Bury St Edmund's charter as Jeuita, doubtless a corrupt form of Judith comparable with the hypocoristic form Jueta.147
F/note 146. Printed in Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis, ed. N. Hamilton (1876), 193.
F/note 147. Feudal Documents of Bury St Edmunds, ed. D. C. Douglas (1932), p.159, no. 179; cf the variants Iuetta, Juditta for the name of Baldwin II of Jerusalem's youngest daughter Joveta, abbess of Bethany. Esilia was perhaps not Hervé's only child. A Walter fitz Hervé** attested a Bury document of c.1115 (ib. p. 156): Peter Bituricensis, clericus, probably Hervé's brother, and his nepos Walter were Bury tenants in 1086 (ib. 20; cf. 66, no. 39, 68, no. 34, 105-6-see below) A Hervé fitz Hervé sought land against Esilia's son Hamo Peche in 1130, Pipe Roll 31 Henry I, p.97.
Hervé's surname Bituricensis normally refers to Berry or its capital Bourges; though Hervé and Peter may have had ancestral connections with that region, it is highly improbable that they came from there to England.
** Feudal documents of the Abbey of Bury St Edmunds
p.174- Sale by Alan son of Frodo (brother of Abbot Baldwin) of the land at Downham to Geoffrey the sacrist of Bury St Edmunds, date c.1115, witnesses included ‘Walterus Hervei filius’, Bartholomew de Creke, Adam de Cokefield, etc.
(an unusual order of names with ‘filius’ at the end instead of in between the two names- difficult to assess whether it means ‘Walter son of Hervey’, or ‘Walter [and] Hervey his son’, or ‘Walter Hervey’s son’. Keats-Rohan has concluded it was ‘Walter fitzHervey’)
Feudal Docs of Bury St Ed.- The Feudal Book of Abbot Baldwin (abbot from 1065 to 1097), a survey of the possessions of St Edmunds and their tenants, made between 1087 and 1098:
p.18- In Rattlesdena 1 liber homo de dimidia carucate terrae et habent [sic] 4 bordaios… Petrus tenet de abate. Ad Ratlesdene tenet Petrus dapifer (steward) de Sancto 40 acrias et 6 bordarios.
Domesday Book- Lands of Bury St Edmunds- In Rattlesden 1 free man with half a carucate of land. 4 bordars have then as now 1 plough. 2 acres of meadow. Woodland for 4 pigs. Then it was worth 10s…now 20s. Peter holds from the abbot. He could give and sell his land but the soke continued to belong to St Edmund.
p.19- In Westlea 11 liberi homines de 2 carucatis terrae. Petrus tenet 1 de abate. 5 bordarii…Hi potuerunt dare et uendere terre sed saca et soca reman’ Sancto. Ad. Horningeseorde et ad Westlea Petrus frater Burchardi tenet de Sancto 1 carrucatam terre et 111 bordarios. (difficult to assess whether this ‘Peter brother of Burchard’ is the same Peter, clericus of Bury St Edmunds)
Domesday Book- In Norwich Hundred, there are in the borough 50 houses from which the king does not […] have his customary dues. Of these…. Theobald the Abbot of St Edmund’s man 1 house and Burgheard 1 house, ……, and Peter, the Abbot of St Edmund’s man 1 messuage… and Walter 1 house (could be Walter de Caen, or ‘Walter nephew of Peter’) etc.
p.20- In Litla Livermera 7 liberi homines (freemen) de 2 carucatis terrae… Ex his tenet Walterus 3 liberos homines de 1 carucata terre. Ad LittleLivermere tenet Walterus nepos Petri clerici de Sancto 1 carrucatam terre et dimidiam et 2 bordarios et 1 liberum de 3 acris. (ie. Walter nephew of Peter cleric of St.Edmunds)
Domesday Book- lands of Bury St Edmunds: “In Little Livermere 7 freemen with 2 carucates of land, 3 borders, 4 ploughs, ½ ac land. These men could give and sell their land but the sake and soke and commendation continued to belong to St Edmunds. A church with 12 acres of free land. Then as now worth 30s of these [men]. Walter holds 3 freemen with 1 carucate of land and 1 plough, worth 15s. in the same valuation”.
On the same page (20), in Feudal Documents of Bury St Edmunds:
Melafordam renuit Sanctus Edmundus pro manerio 12 carucatas terre. Ex hac terra tenet Walterus 40 acras de abate… Et 2 socmanni de 80 acris terrae. Idem Walterus 1 de 40 acris de abate. Ad Meleforde tenet Walterus de Sancto 80 acres terre et 1 ( ).
Domesday Book - lands of Bury St Edmunds: “[Long] Melford held by St Edmunds TRE as a manor with 12 carucates of land. Of this land Walter holds 40 acres from the abbot. Then as now 37 villans. Then 25 bordars and now 10. Then 8 ploughs in demesne, now 6. Then 20 ploughs belonging to the men, now 13. Then as now 16 slaves, 50 acres of meadow. Woodland for 60 pigs. 2 mills. Now 3 horses. Then as now 30 head of cattle. Now 300 sheep. Then as now 140 pigs. Now 12 [bee]hives. 40 wild horses now. 2 sokemen with 80 acres of land. The same Walter held one from the abbot with 40 acres. Then as now 2 ploughs. Over these men St [Edmund] has commendation and sake and soke and every customary due and they could never give and sell their lands without the abbot’s full consent. A church with 2 carucates of land. 4 villans. 9 bordars. Then as now 2 ploughs belonging to the men. Then this manor was worth £20, now £30. It is 18 furlongs long and 1 league broad. In geld 20 ½ d. whoever holds [land] there.
Whether this ‘Walter’ of Long Melford was the same Walter who held Little Livermere and was nephew to Peter clericus is uncertain, but would appear so. Also unknown if he is the ‘Walter Hervei filius’ named as a witness to the charter of Alan son of Frodo on p.174 (above) in 1115.
However, Walter may have been the son of Burchard, brother of Peter. Notably, Walter holds a considerable estate in Melford from the abbey.
(Feudal Docs cont.) Intro p.lxxxvi- About 1200 here was drawn up a document describing the knight’s fees of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds according to the enfeoffment of before 1135, and assigning them to their contemporary holders: Hii sunt milites de veteri feffamento:
Thomas de Mendham 4 milites; Gilbertus Pecche 2 milities; Ricardus de Ikeworth 2 milites; Robertus filius Walteri 1 militem; Petrus de Livermere et Hamo de Flemt’ 1 militem; Osbert filius Hervei 1 militem qui est in custodia Willelmi de Huntingfeud; etc.
This Peter of Livermere owing a hereditary 1 knight’s fee to St Edmunds in c.1200 would appear to indicate descent from Walter of Livermere. Nothing else is known of this Peter.
(Jocelin de Brakelond’s Chronicle also listed ‘the account, made in 1200AD, of the knights of St Edmund and of their fiefs, of which their ancestors had been possessed:
Peter of Livermere and Alan de Flemetun, one knight in Livermere and Ampton.’ (Ampton adjoining Livermere)
p. 109- Petrus Bituricensis witnessed two charters, nos. 105 and 106: of Abbot Baldwin granting manors to the abbey of St Edmunds dated 1087-1098; and of Abbot Robert confirming the grant previously made by Abbot Baldwin dated c.1098-1102.
p.66, No 30- Writ of Henry I. All the land which Peter de Bourges/ ‘Petrus Bituricensis’, held of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds is to be in demesne of the church, dated 1104-1107- indicating that Peter may have died.
p.68, No 34- Writ of Henry I confirming in the possession of the abbey of Bury St Edmunds the homage, customs, lands, tithes and churches of Peter the clerk of Amiens/Petrus clericus Ambianensis, dated 1106-1110.
Katherine Keats Rohan, in her Domesday People (V.2), on Hervey de Bourges/Bituricensis, wrote: Henry I granted to the abbot’s demesne the land that had been held by Peter Bituricensis and by Peter clericus Ambianensis. A late Ms of Bury states that the two Peters were the same man. This suggests that the Domesday Peter clericus and Peter Bituricensus were the same, and that Peter was a relative of Herve, a suspicion reinforced by the unexplained descent of Peter’s manors to the heirs of Herve. However, Keats-Rohan did not specify which lands of Peter descended to the heirs of Herve. The Writ of Henry I (no. 30 above) appears to contradict the statement of Prof Keats-Rohan that Peter’s lands descended to the heirs of Hervey de Bourges, but the land of Rattlesden which ended up with the daughter of Hervey de Glanville (jnr) should be kept in mind, although it should be noted that there were several tenants-in-chief holding land in Rattlesden in Domesday. None of the lands held from the abbey by Peter’s nephew Walter (Little Livermere and Melford), ended up in the hands of the Walter family.
Possibly significantly, Hubert Walter is reported to have claimed, in a dispute with the abbot of Bury St Edmunds, that ‘he would deal more gently with the church of St Edmund, by reason of his native soil, for he was native born of St Edmund, and had been his fosterling’ (12th century ‘Chronicle of Joselin de Brakelond’- see details below).
Whether there is a familial link between Hervey de Bourges and the Walter family and the de Glanvilles, probably through Hervey’s daughter Isilia (Pecche) or another unknown daughter, (or even through Walter of Livermere), remains undetermined, but should not be discounted.
HUBERT DE MONTECANISY (ALSO NAMED AS MUNCHENSY)
Hubert de Mont-Canisy came from Deauville in Normandy which can be traced back to 1060 when seigneur Hubert du Mont-Canisy (possibly his father) dominated the magnificent land previously known as Aueville. (Wikipedia)
Deauville is on the north coast about 10 kms north of Glanville (of the de Glanville family), and about half way between Graville-Sainte-Honorine (of the Malet family) and Caen (the de Caen family).
Deauville, Caen and Glanville are in the department of Calvados, Normandy. During WWII, the Germans built an artillery battery on the highest ground in Normandy, named the ‘Mont Canisy Battery’, at Benerville-Sur Mer adjacent to Deauville.
Hubert held a close relationship with Robert Malet’s family, possibly by marriage, as suggested by Vivian Brown, editor of ‘Eye Cartulary and Charters’ Vol. II, p.10, who speculated that a wife of Malet was Mathilda, named in a charter in the secular Goldingham cartulary linking lands with Malet and Hubert de MonteCanisy.
Vivien Brown’s speculation:
As to Robert Malet’s immediate family, there is only one certain reference to his wife. A charter in the secular Goldingham cartulary which purports to be a grant of Robert to Hugh of Goldingham of lands in Bulmer and Little Belstead, names Robert’s wife as Matilda and says that it is at her request that he receives Hugh’s homage. Robert held a manor at Belstead and Goldingham Hall (in Bulmer) in 1086, which suggests that the grant to Hugh is before that date. The association of Robert’s wife with the gift may imply relationship to the Goldingham family or possibly to the Montechensy/MonteCanisy family. The two manors were held of Robert in 1086 by Hubert de Montecanisy/Montchensy who became, after Robert’s death, the seneschal of Eye. Presumably Hubert was overlord of the Goldingham’s in this fee.
Keats-Rohan suggests that Richard I King of England, in a charter dated 15 January 1195, confirming donations to the abbey of Saint-Taurin, Evreux, including donations made by ‘Robert Malet, and Emelina his wife’, probably relates to the same Robert Malet.
Hubert also held 14 lands in the Domesday survey under Robert Malet in cos. Suffolk and Norfolk and two in Essex, none of which were subsequently held by the Walter family. He was the first witness to Robert Malet’s Foundation Charter to Eye Priory c.1103, indicating a close relationship, and granted his hospice at Yaxley (along with Rannulph de Glanville, which may indicate a close relationship- see the ‘de Glanvilles’ above) and Rickinghall Superior which was held by Hubert de Montecanisy under Malet in Domesday, the tithes of which were granted by a ‘Hubert’ to Malet’s Charter to Eye.
Hubert de Montecanisy was appointed seneschal of the Honor of Eye, from 1107-c.1113, during the period immediately after the death of Robert Malet who held the honor, when the honor was in the hands of the Crown. Five writs of Henry I and one of Queen Matilda are addressed to him. (Eye Priory Cartulary and Charters Vol. II, ed. V. Browne, xi).
Prof. Katherine Keats Rohan wrote in her Domesday People: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166 (V.2, p.256, Boydell Press 1999):
Hubert de Montecanisio- A Norman from Mount-Canisy, Calvados, comm. Bénouville-sur-Mer (adjacent to Deauville); important Domesday tenant of Robert Malet and also a minor tenant-in-chief in Suffolk. He gave the manor of Yaxley to Robert’s priory of Eye at the time of the foundation, and was also a benefactor of Thetford Priory. In 1115, when his son and successor Hubert began to attest his charters, Hubert was enriched by the grant to him of many of the fees of Godric Dapifer. He died as a monk of Abingdon in the time of Abbot Faritius (d.1117). He and his descendants were benefactors of Abingdon’s cell of Colne in Essex, founded in the time of Faritius by Alberic I de Vere. Hubert was twice married. His first wife, according to an item in the cartulary of St Benet’s, Holme, was an Englishwoman, granddaughter of a certain Aslac* (by his son Asard), by whom he had issue Hubert, Gilbert and Warin. His second wife was Muriel, daughter of Peter de Valognes, by whom he had three further sons, Roger, Geoffrey, and Hugh whom his mother made a monk of Thetford.
(NB. There is some debate in genealogical forums about the validity of the above-named marriages and order of issue.)
Two possible daughters of Hubert de Montecanisy have been documented:
i)Beatrice de Montecanisy/Montchensy, by his first wife, who married Robert (Harold) de Vallibus de Vaux (died Pentney Norfolk early 1100’s, after establishing an Augustinian Priory there).
ii)Sarah married William Le Blount 3rd Baron of Ixworth Suffolk; son of Gilbert and grandson of Robert Blount/Blunt tenant-in-chief of 17 Suffolk manors in Domesday, including part of Wyverstone also held by Hubert, and Robert Malet.
Domesday- *Aslac of ‘Rodenhala’ in the Hundred of Lothing Suffolk (near Lowestoft), lord in 1066, and overlord in 1066 of Bixley and Rockland (St Mary) in Henstead Norfolk, and Ashby (St Mary) and Claxton in Lodding Norfolk.
“In Ashby, 6 freemen and the moiety of 6 other freemen under the commendation of Aslac, and Leofric, in the reign of King Edward, held here a carucate and a half, and 20 acres of land; on their expulsion, Ralph Earl of Norfolk had a grant of it who forfeited it after his rebellion and granted to Godifer the steward. William de Cheney was lord afterwards of it, and of Claxton.”
Similarly, “In Claxton, Ralph Earl of Norfolk, on expulsion of two freemen who held it under the protection of Aslac and Leofric, in the reign of King Edward.”
(An Essay Towards a Topographical History of the Co. of Norfolk, by F. Blomefield)
Hubert’s second wife, Muriel de Valognes, daughter of Peter de Valognes (no relation to Theobald de Valoines of Parham) and Albreda de Rye, was widow of Theoderic de Bacton, brother or nephew to Walter Diaconus (the Deacon) who held 29 lands as tenant-in-chief in Suffolk and Essex. Bacton, in Hundred of Hartismere adjacent to Wyverstone, was held by Theoderic’s brother Walter. Muriel and Theoderic’s son was William de Bacton. The respected Domesday researcher, Dr. Katherine Keats-Rohan speculated that Walter the Deacon may have also been Walter fitzOtho de Windsor (castellan of Windsor Castle), father of Robert fitzWalter de Windsor, however there is no direct evidence to prove this theory.
Hubert held part of Wyverstone in Suffolk as tenant-in-chief (later held by Robert Hovel/Houel, son of Hubert’s subtenant Richard) in 1086, and held several properties under Robert Malet including Edwardstone in Suffolk which he made his chief seat. He is also listed in domesdayonline as holding Malet’s land of Rickenhall Superior, the tithe of which was donated to Malet’s foundation charter to Eye Priory by ‘Hubert of Rickenhall’. Whether this ‘Hubert of Rickenhall’ who donated to Malet’s charter was the same as Hubert de Montecanisy is uncertain, and both Huberts should be kept in mind in relation to the Walter family.
The Domesday entry in Rickenhall followed a number of consecutive entries in the Hundred of Hartismere held by ‘Hubert’, including Wyerstone identified as being held by de Montecanisy as tenant-in-chief.
Hubert de Montecanisy, in the same charter to Eye donated his tithe of Yaxley hospice, along with Rannulph de Glanville who also donated his hospice at Yaxley, presumably the same hospice (see de Glanville below). In Domesday, Yaxley was held by Hubert de Montecanisy and Robert Malet’s mother from Robert Malet, and a third part held by William (de Beaufeu) Bishop of Thetford.
Hubert de MonteCanisy was benefactor to Thetford Abbey and witnessed a charter of the founder of that house, Roger Bigod, which was confirmed by Henry I probably in September 1107.
Hubert’s son Warin de Monchensy’s (Montecanisy) daughter married Stephen de Glanville, son of Bartholomew de Glanville, and cousin to Rannulf de Glanville and Hervey de Glanville (see above).
‘The Great Roll of the Pipe for the 31st year of the reign of King Henry I: Michaelmas 1130’, Edit. by Judith A. Green (Pipe Roll Society, London, 2012) p78:
Hubert de MonteChensy [MonteCanisy] renders account of £100 that the king will cause him to have an exchange for his manor. In the treasury 20 silver marks. And he owes 130 silver marks.
(ie. Hubert de MonteCanisy’s son of the same name, possibly exchanging Wyverstone which his father held in the Domesday Book as tenant-in-chief, for Edwardstone which became the family seat)
Again, there is no documentary evidence of a link between Hubert de Montecanisy and the Walter family, but the origin of the prominent name ‘Hubert’ in the Walter family must have some basis in their ancestry, and there were few named Hubert in the counties of Suffolk and Norfolk in the early 12th century, so whether there was some link through a female line can't be discounted.
CONCLUSION ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE VARIOUS ANCESTRAL THEORIES
We can comfortably dismiss the theories of origin from the de Clares, who were of a higher social class, and the Beckets who do not match chronologically. The links with Hervey de Bourges and Hubert de Montecanisy are very flimsy and show little evidence except the names in common. However, the theory of a biological link with the de Glanville family is highly plausible, but the theory still raises too many inexplicable questions to be considered a certainty.
The theory linking the Walter family with the Walter who held lands in Bishops Hundred in Suffolk is still the most likely origin of this family. But the identity of this Walter, and his Norman origins, will remain a mystery.
And because none of these theories can be proven beyond doubt, the origins of the Walter family beyond Hervey [Walter] the elder, will remain unresolved.
The next chapter will look at the details of lands held by the Walter family in Suffolk, Norfolk and Lancashire
Email contact: butler1802 @ hotmail. com (no spaces)
Links to chapters in this blog, published in 2022:
Part 1: The Ancestral Origins of Theobald Walter, Ancestor of the Butlers of Ireland
Part 2: Possible candidates for the Walter surname named 'Walter' in the Domesday Book
Part 3: Analysis of the various theories of the origins of the Walter family
Part 4: Lands of the Walter family
Chapters of the earlier blog on the Butler History, published in 2013:
History of the Butlers, Earls of Ormond and Chief Butlers of Ireland (Chapter 1):
Butler Pedigree (Chapter 2):
History of Irish Butlers- various Butler Branches (Chapter 3):
History of the MacRichard Line (Chapter 4):
Blog on Richard, 1st Viscount Mountgarrett and the Butlers of Co Wexford