NB. clicking on an image will open a higher resolution image
CONTENTS:
Introduction: Explanation of land tenure after the Conquest, and in
particular lands held by the Malet family in Counties Suffolk and Norfolk as
tenants-in-chief in the Domesday Book
Ancestral candidates named Walter in Co. Suffolk in the Domesday
Book
(A) Walter ‘who held of this manor’
(B) Walter the crossbowman
(C) Walter de Caen
(D) Walter fitzGrip
(E) Others named ‘Walter’ who held lands in East Anglia in Domesday:
The Malet Family
The previous
blog chapter concentrated on the evidence available on the immediate family of
Theobald Walter 1st Chief Butler of Ireland who was the ancestor of
the Ormond Butlers and the other Irish Butler aristocratic lines such as Barons
Dunboyne, Viscounts Mountgarrett, Earls of Carrick, Viscounts Galmoy, Baronets
of Cloughgrennan, Barons Cahir, etc., and many Butlers of Irish descent.
However, while the Butler surname in Ireland developed from the hereditary
title of Butler of Ireland, Theobald’s surname was Walter, and this chapter
explores the possible Norman origins and ancestry of this Walter family.
As discussed in the previous blog chapter, Theobald’s father, brothers, uncle and cousin, and possibly grandfather (in one record) all carried the unusual surname of ‘Walter’, as evidenced in all records of this family. No-one in this extended family was ever referred to as ‘FitzWalter’ in the records.
ANCESTRY OF THE WALTER FAMILY- Introduction
Authors, Pollock
and Maitland in their ‘History of English Law Before the Time of
Edward I’ (vol.1. pp.164-65, 1903), discuss the archbishop of Canterbury
Hubert Walter’s name: ‘Now the name ‘Hubertus Walteri’ was not merely an
uncommon name, it was a name of exceedingly uncommon kind. ‘Hubertus
filius Walteri’ would of course be a name of the commonest kind, but the
omission of the ‘filius’ is, among men of gentle birth, an almost distinctive
mark of a particular family, that to which the great archbishop belonged.’
The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (DNB- biography of Hubert Walter, by Robert C. Stacey, 2004) makes the statement that ‘Hervey Walter was a Norfolk knight of middling status’. In other words, Hervey’s Norman ancestor was not related to the royal family of the Conqueror and therefore did not hold high status, but was probably one of the lesser ranked knights who accompanied William at the conquest in 1066, or was one of the numerous Norman settlers who followed soon after the Conquest, and possibly held lands under one of the tenants-in-chief granted lands in the Domesday survey. The family's rise in status in the late 12th century was due to their relationship with Rannulf de Glanville Chief Justiciar of England and his close association with King Henry II and his sons and heirs, Richard and John. They must have held sufficient status for Theobald de Valoines, Lord of Parham, to grant the hand of one of his daughters to Hervey Walter. The de Valoines, the de Glanvilles and the Walters appear to have been of the same social level in Suffolk in the early 1100’s. And therefore, the Walter ancestor must have held lands in Suffolk/Norfolk in Domesday just as the Valoines and Glanville ancestors held lands in Suffolk under tenants-in-chief such as Robert Malet and Count Alan of Brittany.
The origin of the surname Walter remains the prime question.
How did this
family acquire this singular surname, and from whom did the surname Walter
originate?
Why did it
differ to the normal form of ‘filius Walter’ or fitzWalter?
Was it taken
from the paternal or maternal line?
Was it a case of
the name coming from a wife of superior status who was an heiress, or was the
name taken as a younger son to differentiate from the senior line?
Or was it
adopted to differentiate from other lines of FitzWalters of whom there were
several, including the eldest son of Walter de Caen named Robert fitzWalter; and the fitzWalter brothers, sons of Walter fitzOtho Castellan of Windsor and
tenant-in-chief of 21 manors in Domesday; and the later Robert fitzWalter of Dunmow Castle (descendant of the de Clare family), one of the leaders of the baronial opposition against King John.
The interesting point is that surnames in that era were fluid and often changed with each new generation to reflect their father’s name, or by taking the names of their estates as family appellatives, yet every member of this extended family for at least three generations used the same singular surname of Walter. This must have been in honour of their forebear, and the family’s desire to differentiate their family line from descendant lines from different ancestors named Walter, a common Norman name at that time. Notably, while there were several unrelated families of fitzWalters, this particular family was the only family that held the singular surname of Walter in Norman England.
One of the few surviving records of the 11th century was William the Conqueror’s magnificent survey of all landholders in England pre and post Conquest, called the Domesday Book. The lands in co. Suffolk belonging to Walter family members in the 12th century may be of importance in determining their ancestry, namely at WINGFIELD, INSTEAD (part of Weybread), and possibly STRADBROKE (maybe the unidentified ‘Sikebro’ in Hervey’s charter to Butley Priory) all held by Hervey Walter, and at FRESSINGFIELD belonging to the cadet Walter line (viz. Hubert Walter the elder and his son Peter Walter whose manor of Snapeshall was in Fressingfield). They were all located in the small area in the Hundred of Bishop in north Suffolk, near EYE and belonging to the Honour of Eye held by tenant-in-chief Robert Malet until c.1106, then held by the Crown, and from c.1113 by Stephen Count of Mortain, nephew and heir to King Henry I. These lands will be examined in detail, the importance of which will become apparent as we look at the Domesday Book records for these lands, and determine who held them.
The documentary evidence of Hervey Walter’s Suffolk lands occurs in the Butley Priory Cartulary –
The Cartulary
of Leiston Abbey and Butler Priory Charters, ed R.H. Mortimer, 1979, p.151-
Charter No. 146 dated c.1171-77:
Contemporary endorsement:
‘Hervey Walter of his fee in Wingfield’.
In Charter No.
147 in the same cartulary, a Gilbert de Hawkdon granted 6d rent in Instead
to Butley Priory ‘by the will of my lord Theobald Walter’, confirming
that Theobald held Instead in his lifetime. The charter was witnessed by
Peter Walter who donated rent from his mill at Instead to West Dereham Abbey
founded by his cousin Hubert Walter (viz. son of Hervey Walter).
Peter Walter’s Fressingfield lands were inherited from his father Hubert Walter the elder, and as he personally stated in a charter, his ‘predecessors’, the tithes of which were donated to Eye Priory.
Eye Priory
Cartulary and Charters, I, ed. V. Brown, 1994, p.231
Charter No.319- Peter Walter
Date: c.1180’s:
One of several
Eye Priory confirmation charters referring to Peter’s father Hubert Walter’s
land in Fressingfield, named Snapeshall, from which he donated the tithe to Eye
Priory:
(Eye Cart., pp.43-44)
Charter No.40- Bishop
of Norwich
Date: c.1155-61:
A suit in
1209 between Peter Walter son of Hubert Walter (‘Peter filius Hubert’), and the abbot of West Dereham Abbey confirmed
that Peter held land in Instead and in Weybread that he held from his ancestors
(under recognition of ‘mort
d’ancestor’ = death of an ancestor), the rents of which he had donated to his cousin Hubert Walter’s
foundation charter of Dereham in the 1190’s. Notably, this suit occurred after
the deaths of Theobald and his brother Hubert, and it would also appear, the
deaths of their brothers Roger and Hamon, which would explain the inheritance
of their mutual ancestor’s (viz Hervey’s) lands by Peter Walter.
Norfolk- Final concord at St Edmunds, 19 April 1209.
Between
Peter son of Hubert (Petrum filium Huberti), the claimant, and Henry
abbot of Dereham, the holder of 20 acres with appurtenances in Ysted/Instead
and three shillings worth of rent in Weybread, under the recognition
of ‘mort d’ancestor’.
('Feet of Fines for the County of Norfolk
for the reign of King John 1201-1215, and for the County of Suffolk 1199-1214', ed. Barbara Dodwell, London 1958 (p.238 No. 497 [Case 154, File 30, No.
435])
A mid-14th century Butley text revealed that Peter Walter gave the church of Bylaugh (Norfolk) to Butley Priory in conjunction with Hervey Walter, again linking Peter Walter with Hervey Walter’s family.
A
list of Butley’s donations:
(Notably, the
third donor, Robert filius William, also witnessed Rannulf de Glanville’s
charter to Butley Priory c.1171-74- his relationship to these families is
unknown. Belaugh in Norfolk was part of the Amounderness fee held by the Walter
family; part of Belaugh was granted to William Hervey in 1195 by Theobald
Walter; the first listed donation was from Guthe de Glanville, sister of Rannulf, and Alan de Withersdale, whose wardship in minority was held by his neighbour Peter Walter of Fressingfield.)
The system of land tenure under William
the Conqueror
King William established his favoured followers as barons by enfeoffing them as tenants-in-chief with great fiefdoms. Lands forming a barony were often located in several different counties, but usually a more concentrated cluster existed in a specific county. The name of such a barony is generally deemed to be the name of the chief manor within it, generally assumed to have been the seat or chief residence of the first baron. The feudal obligation imposed by the grant of a barony was set as a quota of knights to be provided for the king’s service. Commonly, he found these knights by splitting his barony into several fiefs, into each of which he would sub-enfeoff one knight, by the tenure of knight-service. This tenure gave the knight use of the fief and all its revenues, on condition that he should provide to the baron, now his overlord, 40 days of military service, complete with retinue of esquires, horses and armour. The fief so allotted is known as a knight’s fee. Scutage was a medieval tax levied on holders of knight’s fees, whereby the knights were allowed to ‘buy-out’ of the military service, and first existed under the reigns of Henry I and Stephen.
If the barony
contained a significant castle and was especially large, consisting of more
than 20 knight’s fees, then it was termed an ‘honour’, with the castle
giving its name to the honour and serving as its administrative headquarters.
(Wikipedia)
All land was ultimately owned by the Crown, but were held by tenants-in-chief/barons who provided military resources, or tax in return. The main landholders listed in the Domesday Book were tenants-in-chief, either King William himself, or one of around 1400 people who held land directly from the Crown, mostly higher status Norman knights and lords, and in turn, the tenants-in-chief granted many of these lands to a second tenant, usually a Norman knight, in return for tax and military service, and they were the immediate lord over the peasants and freemen working the farms. They were often connected to the tenant-in-chief through familial connections or from the same region in Normandy.
This system of the tenant-in-chief granting fiefs carved out of his own holding to his own followers was called sub-infeudation. At the time of the Domesday survey, the sub-tenants of a tenant-in-chief owed military service to their lord for their fiefs which they held ‘freehold’, ie. held for life or heritable by their heirs. The Norman kings eventually imposed on all freemen who occupied a tenement, a duty of fealty to the crown rather than to their immediate lord who had enfeoffed them, to prevent barons raising their own armies against the king.
The Malets as tenant-in-chief
The most powerful lord in Norfolk and Suffolk with huge land holdings in Domesday Book was named Robert Malet who accompanied the Conqueror with his father William Malet who held substantial property in Normandy with a castle in Graville-Sainte-Honorine (now in Le Havre), as well as lands near Caen. Another relation was Durand Malet who may have been a brother of William, or a second son, brother of Robert.
William Malet’s
mother was an Englishwoman, thought to be the possible daughter of Leofric Earl
of Mercia and Godgifu the supposed sister of Thorold the Sheriff in the time of
Edward the Confessor, and it has been conjectured that Malet’s grandfather was
probably one of the men who accompanied Emma of Normandy to England in 1002 for
her marriage with Aethelred.
William Malet was appointed high sheriff of Yorkshire in the 3rd year of William the Conqueror’s reign. He and his wife, Esilia/Hesilia, and younger children were captured by the invading Danes who slew 3000 Normans when they captured York, and were ransomed. This was followed by the infamous ‘harrying of the north’ resulting in widescale destruction and famine. After William’s release, he was appointed sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, granted the barony of Eye, building a castle at Eye as his military and administrative headquarters and starting a market. William died c.1171 and his extensive landholdings were inherited by his eldest son Robert who was granted the Honour of Eye, consisting of a widely scattered grouping of manors and land holdings spread over eight counties and was one of the largest estates in England after the Conquest. The bulk of the properties were in Suffolk and Norfolk. Robert’s seat was Eye Castle, where he built and endowed a monastery of Benedictine monks.
In the Domesday
survey of 1086, Robert held, as tenant-in-chief, 34 lordships in Yorkshire, 5
in Essex, 1 in Surrey, 1 in Rutland, 2 in Nottinghamshire, 8 in Lincolnshire,
and 27 in Norfolk and 173 in Suffolk whereof Eye was the
chief.
Most of Malet’s estates in East Anglia had been granted as successor to the pre-1086 lord, Eadric of Laxfield, a wealthy and influential Saxon who was the third largest landholder in Suffolk. The total land area of the Honour of Eye is estimated at least 75,000 acres of which 47,000 were located in Suffolk, making Robert Malet the second largest landholder in Suffolk after the Abbot of Bury St Edmunds.
Robert Malet’s largest land-holding sub-tenants in Suffolk and Norfolk were:
Malet’s mother
Esilia (42 manors); Walter de Caen (38 attributed- 4 as ‘W. de Caen’, 7
as Walter filius Albrici/fitzAubrey, 14 as just ‘Walter’); Humphrey filius
Robert (28); Hubert de MonteCanisy (24 attributed- several just as ‘Hubert’);
William Gulafre (19 attributed- 4 just as ‘William’); Robert de
Glanville (17); Gilbert (17- possibly Robert Malet’s younger brother named
Gilbert, or Gilbert the crossbowman, or Gilbert Blund, or Gilbert de Wissant,
or Gilbert de Coleville); Gilbert Blunt/Blund (10); Walter (10 - see
Walter de Caen where 14 other lands in name of ‘Walter’ attributed to de Caen);
Walter fitzGrip (9); Gilbert de Wissant (6); Loernic (5); Walter
the crossbowman (4 attributed- 2 near Eye just named as ‘Walter’- see
‘Walter’ and Walter de Caen above); Northmann the sheriff (4- also lived in
England pre Conquest); Gilbert de Coleville (4); Fulcred (5) and Robert son of
Fulcred (4); Walter de Risboil (3 - in and near Parham); and 22 other
sub-tenants with less than 3 lands.
One of Malet’s most favoured sub-tenants was Walter de Caen, also listed as Walteri filius Albrici (fitzAubrey), who is said to have come to England with Robert Malet, and it has been suggested by some historians that they may have been related, although unsubstantiated.
A similar
suggestion is made by some historians that Hubert de MonteCanisy was
possibly related to Robert Malet through marriage. MonteCanisy near Deauville
in Normandy was very near the Malet’s seat at Graville-Ste-Honorine (near Le
Havre). Hubert de MonteCanisy was also a donor and prime witness to Malet’s foundation
charter to Eye Priory, and was appointed seneschal of Eye Priory after Malet’s
death in c.1106.
Robert Malet’s foundation charter to Eye Priory c.1103-05
Of these sub-tenants of Malet, the following made donations and/or witnessed Robert Malet’s foundation charter to Eye Priory:
Robert and Roger,
two sons of Walter de Caen (indicating that Walter must have been
deceased before 1103)- (donors and witnesses); Hubert de MonteCanisy (donor and
1st witness); Humphrey filius Robert; William Gulafre (donor and
witness); Hervey de Glanville an heir of Robert de Glanville, and the
father of Rannulf de Glanville (donor and witness); Walter fitzGrip; Jordan
of Wilby the heir of Loernic; Fulcred of Peasenhall; and, Walter the crossbowman
(donor and witness).
The Benedictine Priory dedicated to St. Peter in the town of Eye, a cell of the abbey of Bernay in Normandy, was supposedly founded by Robert Malet in the latter period of the reign of the Conqueror, after the Domesday survey in 1086. The new community must have still been in its early stages of development when King William died in 1087. Malet begins his charter: Foundation charter of Robert Malet whereby he announces that, with the assent of his lord king William, for his soul and that of his wife, queen Mathilda, for his own soul and for the souls of his father William Malet, of his mother Hesilia, and of his ancestors and kin, he is constructing a monastery at Eye and installing a community of monks therein.
However, historians
generally accept that the contents and donations therein of his foundation
charter, the original having been lost, is dated c.1103-05 under the reign of
Henry I, as Malet lost the Honour of Eye under the reign of William Rufus,
granted to Roger the Poitevan, and the Honour was not reinstated to Malet until
the succession of Henry I in 1100. Also taking into account the donors and
witnesses to the charter, including the sons of Walter de Caen (who, personally,
is missing from the charter), and Malet’s mother (who is also missing), both
presumed deceased, plus the ages of Walter de Caen’s sons, points to the later
date.
The text of Malet’s charter in the Eye Priory Cartulary dates back to c.1260, and contains the details of Malet’s charter donations from himself and from his sub-tenants and local knights, and the Eye Priory Cartulary includes a large number of confirmation charters in the early to mid-12th century by various monarchs, popes and bishops, including the confirmation of the donation of Peter and Hubert Walter’s land in Fressingfield which was not included in the original charter, but first appeared in the confirmation charter of King Henry I. (Eye Priory Cartulary and Charters, 2 vols, ed. Vivien Brown, 1992)
The witness list for Malet’s Charter contains many names of this small area of Suffolk that will become familiar, notably, Hubert de MonteCanisy, Roger filius Walter de Huntingfield (second son of Walter de Caen), Robert filius Walter (eldest son of Walter de Caen), Hervey de Glanville (father of Rannulf de Glanville Chief Justiciar), Walter Arbalestarius (the crossbowman) and William Gulafre:
The donations in
Malet’s charter are divided into two sections.
The first
section: “For their maintenance he confers upon them (viz. the monks at
Eye) and confirms to them from his own lands, churches and tithes the
following”.
He then lists a
large number of churches with their lands and tithes; then a few bequests of tithes
and lands held from him by Norman knights and barons, such as “at the
request of Osbert de Cunteville all the land which he held in Occold; with the
assent of Walter fitzGrip all the land which he had in Fresingfield with
the mill; the tithe of Oyn Compayn of Instead; the grant of Walter
the arblaster (crossbowman) of his tithe of Halegestowe and of Gosewolde
and the church of St Margaret with its land; the tithe of Humphrey of Playford
with the church of that vill with its lands and tithes”;
Followed by:
“all the tithes of the following manors of his (Malet’s) demesne: Eye, Stradbroke, Redlington, Dennington, Tannington, Badingham, Kelton, Hollesley, Leiston, Laxfield, Barrowby (Lincs), Sedgebrook (Lincs.), Welbourne (Lincs.), Wakes Colne (Essex), and South Cave (Yorks); They are to hold all their possessions free and quit of all exaction and to have soke and sake and toll and team and infangenetheof in Eye, in Dunwich and in all places where they have lands, and have all the other liberties which my lord William king of England granted me when he gave me my honour.”
It is possible that the first section was part of the original charter made in the time of King William I.
Notably, in the succeeding confirmation charters of various monarchs, popes and bishops in the Eye Priory Cartulary, Hubert Walter’s tithe donation is placed in the list of Malet’s ‘manors of his demesne’, between Badingham and Kelton, rather than as a separate donation in the second section of the charter, implying that Hubert Walter’s lands were located in Malet’s own demesne. Also, notably, Wingfield is not included in the above list of Malet’s manors, maybe because it was a berewick of Stradbroke in Domesday, and neither is Fressingfield (partly held by Walter fitzGrip) or Chippenhall.
The second section of the charter begins:
In addition, he grants and confirms the gifts
which his barons and knights made to them with his consent, namely, the tithes
of: Roger de Huntingfield of Huntingfield, Linstead and Byng (son of Walter
fitzAubrey de Caen); Richard Hovel of Wyverstone; William Gulafre of Okenhill
(son of Roger Gulafre); Oger de Pucher of Bedingfield; Ernald fitzRoger of
Whittingham (in Fressingfield) and Hasketon (son of Roger filius Ernald); Ralph
Grossus of Creeting St Peter; William de Roville of Glemham and Clakestorp; the
tithe of 30 acres in Glemham of the fee of [Alan] the count of Brittany (d.1093);
Hugh d’ Aviliers of Brome and Shelfanger; Odo de
Charun of Gislingham and Roydon; Godard of Gislingham; Hubert of Rickenhall (de
Montecanisy); Randulf de Glanville (of the hospital at Yaxley- possible father,
or grandfather of Hervey de Glanville); Hubert de MonteCanisy (of the hospital
at Yaxley; with Malet giving the church of Yaxley with all its appurtenances);
Robert Malus Nepos of Huntingfield (Huntingfield wholly held by Walter fitzAubrey
de Caen from Malet in Domesday- a charter witness named Hubert Malus Nepos);
Jocelin (Rocelin) of Hollesley (Hollesley held by Robert de Glanville from
Malet in Domesday); Geoffrey of Braiseworth; Fulcred of Peasenhall (held by
Fulcred in Domesday); and the tithe of Humphrey fitzUnuey.
Many of these named barons and knights were the sons of those named in the Domesday Book, and were living well into the 12th century. This implies that these donations were made after Malet regained the Honour of Eye after the succession of Henry I in 1100.
Malet concludes: to the other men, knights and sokemen of his jurisdiction he grants and commands that they shall make gifts to his monastery of Eye according to their resources.
All of these things with the consent of witnesses, Robert Malet has offered to the church of his monks upon the altar of St Peter’s of Eye and has confirmed for ever by this charter.
Robert Malet died
c.1106, and although his Honour of Eye reverted back to the Crown until awarded
to Stephen Count of Mortain c.1113 (Henry I’s heir), many of his lands in East
Anglia were inherited by his sub-tenants’ descendants who continued to live
there, on condition of loyalty to the Crown. The close association of many of
Malet’s subtenants’ descendants continued throughout the 12th
century, as knights and barons of the county of Suffolk and of the Honour of
Eye, and some intermarriages to consolidate the lands held by their ancestors.
Durand Malet was thought to be either a brother of William Malet or younger brother of Robert Malet.
There
are several questions relating to a man named Durand, and Durand Malet, and his
possible relationship to the Walter family.
A Walter shared ownership with Durand of 26 acres at Marham in Norfolk in
1070, which was still in Walter’s hands in 1086.
In Domesday,
the lands of Hugh de Montfort (who saved William Malet’s life at the Battle of
Hastings) shows that Walter continued to hold the land of Marham in 1086, but
no longer with Durand:
In Marham,
there are 26 sokemen whom Walter holds. St AEthelthyrth held them TRE in
soke. There were 8 bordars, now 9, Then 5 ploughs, now 4, 6 acres of Meadow.
Then it was worth 80s, afterwards 60s, now 40s. He received this land in
exchange and it has been measured in the return of St Aethelthryth (viz. Ely Abbey, Cambridgeshire).
Was this ‘Walter’ referring to Walter de Caen who held a close relationship with the Malet family, or another Walter? The most likely candidate is Walter de Caen.
Was this the same Durand who held Ickleton from Hardwin de Scales?
Ickleton was the estate of the Walter family inhabited by Hamon Walter, and donated by Hubert, Theobald and Hamon to West Dereham Abbey following Hubert’s foundation charter to the abbey. Notably, the grandson of Hardwin of Scales, Domesday holder of Ickleton, was a witness to Hubert’s Charter. Whether this is relevant is unknown. The estate called ‘Durhams manor’, was assessed at 1 hide, c.1235.
Count Eustace also held 19 hides at Ickleton which became part of the Honour of Boulgone, and later held by Roger de Lucy. It is unknown when the Walter family attained their smaller portion, but the W. Dereham donation indicated the manor was held by younger son Hamon, and another document, outlining a suit ‘about the land of Hervey Walter in the town of ickleton disputed by the canons of W. Dereham and the convent of Ickleton’ indicates that the land originally belonged to his father Hervey Walter (possibly in his marriage settlement).(Papal Judges delegate in the Province of Canterbury 1198-1254: A Study in the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Administration’ by Jane E. Sayers, Oxford Uni Press, 1971. p.xxv)
Was this ‘Durand’ named in the Domesday entries for Marham and Ickleton, also Durand Malet?
‘Durand Malet’ held, as tenant-in-chief in 1086, 22 lands in Lincolnshire, 3 in Leicestershire and 1 in Nottinghampshire’.
Cyril Hart, ‘William Malet and his Family’ (Anglo-Norman Studies XIX: Proceedings of the Battle Conference, 1996, p.145)
Hart speculated on whether
Durand Malet, either Robert Malet’s brother or uncle, was the same Durand who
held, as an undertenant, seven lands in Cambridgeshire, as well as a couple of
lands in Norfolk and one in Suffolk (viz. Cransford held by Robert Malet).
‘The
Durand who in 1072-5 shared ownership with one Walter (as undertenants of Hugh
II de Montfort-sur-Risle, the Conqueror’s constable) of 26 sokemen on 26 acres
at Marham on the edge of the Norfolk marshland may have been the same person as
the Durand who held a number of estates in Cambridgeshire in 1086 as an
undertenant of Hardwin de Scales, a despoiler of Ely, including half a hide at
Ickleton*.
Hart also stated that,
‘this holding at Marham had been seized by Hugh from Ely
after the fenland uprising of 1070-1’ (during which William Malet was
killed). It is not impossible that Durand was given all these
under-tenancies after the mission of William Malet which followed the uprising.
For two different Durands to be holding estates in the eastern counties would
be a most odd coincidence. A pedigree constructed a century ago by the Malet
family places Durand Malet as William’s brother. This is plausible, but unsupported
by conclusive evidence.
Prof. Katherine Keats Rohan suggested that the links between Durand’s land and those of Alfred of Lincoln (related by marriage) indicates that Durand was probably a younger brother of Robert Malet. (‘Domesday Book and the Malets’ 1996, printed in Nottingham Medieval Studies 41)
It is unknown whether this information on Durand Malet has any relevance to this quest.
N.B. FOR THE SAME REASONS OF LACK OF EVIDENTIAL DOCUMENTATION, THE SUGGESTIONS OF ANCESTRY IN THIS ARTICLE CAN ONLY BE SPECULATIVE.
CANDIDATES NAMED ‘WALTER’ IN Co. SUFFOLK IN DOMESDAY
In several entries, once the full name
was used for one entry, the successive entries in the same ‘Hundred’ of a
county, held by the same person, often only used the first name without
repeating the appellation, some entries saying “the same Walter holds”. This
became confusing when there were several Walters holding land in the same or
adjacent areas.
Looking at the lands in Suffolk held by the Walter family, namely parts of Wingfield, Instead/Weybread, ‘Sikibro’ (unidentified but possibly Stradbroke/Stetebroc), and the manor of Snapeshall a part of Fressingfield, all in the Hundred* of Bishops, there were four Normans named Walter who could be candidates for the origin of the ‘Walter’ surname, who held lands in this area in the Domesday book as sub-tenants of Robert Malet- Walter de Caen, Walter the crossbowman, Walter fitzGrip, and a man just named ‘Walter’. We will look at these Walters to try and determine which could be the most likely forebear of this family.
* Hundred=
a division of an English shire for administrative, military and judicial
purposes under the common law, consisting of 100 hides/enough land to sustain
approximately 100 households.
Bishop’s
Hundred also known as the Hundred of Hoxne, named after the nearby village of
Hoxne, the site of St Edmund’s martyrdom in 870A.D. at the hands of the
Vikings. A church and small priory were situated in Hoxne from before the
Norman Conquest.
NB. In Domesday,
Fressingfield in Bishops Hundred was not specifically named, but is
considered by Domesday researchers to have been part of the adjacent lands of
Chippenhall. A small holding of 6 acres named ‘Fressingfield’ was
listed in the neighbouring Hundred of Hartismere held only by Robert Malet.
There is no place currently named Fressingfield in Hartismere, so its placement
there may have been a clerical error, or the place did not exist for long.
Fressingfield near Chippenhall encompasses a much larger area than the 6 acres
indicated in that Domesday entry, so is considered likely to have been part of
the Chippenhall entry in Domesday, held by Robert Malet (value £6), the Abbot
of Bury St Edmunds (value £3.2s) and Hervey de Bourges (value £1), including 56
households (of freemen, small holders and villagers) and land for 20 plough
teams*, 24 acres of meadow, and woodland for 403 pigs. In later times,
the small hamlet of Chippenhall was part of the parish of Fressingfield.
*a plough team= area of land needed for an 8-oxen
plough team to work it; often called a ‘carucate’ of land, thought to be about
120 acres.
Instead is a
small hamlet or manor containing a mill near the river Waverney, which is
considered to be part of Weybread.
Domesday Book: ‘In
Instead, 1 free man with 10 ½ acres and the fourth part of a mill. It is
worth 2s. William Malet held this; afterwards Robert his son held it, thinking
it belonged to his father’s fief’.
1.WALTER WHO ‘HELD OF THIS MANOR’
The first possible, and most likely candidate is the sub-tenant holding lands from tenant-in-chief Robert Malet in the Domesday Book, just named ‘Walter’ and in several entries as ‘Walter who held from this manor’, who also held all of the lands that subsequently were held by Hervey Walter and Peter Walter in this same area of Suffolk- viz. the Wingfield fee held by Hervey Walter, Weybread/Instead mill held by Hervey Walter and Theobald and Peter Walter, as well as part of Fressingfield held by Hubert Walter (the elder) and his son Peter Walter, and Stradbroke, adjacent to Wingfield, which is possibly the unidentified ‘Sikebro’ in Hervey Walter’s Butley charter, all situated in the Hundred of Bishop or Hoxne in northern Suffolk.
Butler historian Theobald Blake Butler also identified ‘Sikebro’ as Stradbroke in his ‘Origins of the Butlers of Ireland’ article. (Theobald Blake Butler, ‘The Origin of the Butlers of Ireland’, The Irish Genealogist, v.1. No.5, April 1939, pp.147-157), but this remains speculation.
In the Domesday Book, Wingfield is listed as a ‘berewick’ of Stradbroke in Malet’s list of lands.
(berewick
[als. ‘barton’] defined as a detached portion of farmland that belonged
to a medieval manor, reserved for the lord’s own use, often a monastic
institution or other major landowner.)
Map of the Hundred
of Bishop (Hoxne Bishops), and neighbouring Hundred of Hartismere to the west,
centred around Eye.
The entries for
these lands in the Domesday Book need to be explored in detail to see how
Walter is connected.
‘Domesday Book:
A Complete Translation’, eds. Dr Ann Williams, Prof. G.H. Martin, 1992, 2002,
pp.1219-20:
The Domesday
Book entries for this small area of Suffolk known as the Hundred of Bishop:
ie. Laxfield,
Badingham, Bedfield, Stradbroke and berewick of Wingfield, Horham (1st),
Wilby, Chippenhall (ie. including lands of Fressingfield), Weybread (x3
entries), Horham (2nd), Chickering, Bedingfield.
Of the above lands held by Malet in the Hundred of Bishop's or Hoxne:
Laxfield consisted of 6 carucates of land and 80 acres, worth £8 (TRE=£15).
Stradbroke/Wingfield
consisted of 5 ½ carucates of land worth £16 (TRE=£14)
Badingham held
9 carucates of land, worth £10 (TRE=£15)
Chippenhall held
2 ½ carucates of land worth £6 (TRE=100s)
All of the other
lands named were much smaller and valued well below £1
All of these lands were held by six sub-tenants of Malet: Walter, Walter de Caen, Walter filius Grip, Robert de Glanville, Humphrey filius Robert, Loernic, and Malet’s mother Esilia
(It should be noted that, while Robert Malet was by far the largest land holding tenant-in-chief in this area, there were other tenants-in-chief who also held some lands in this area apart from Malet- ie. Roger de Poitou, the Abbey of Bury St Edmunds, Bishop William of Thetford, Hervey de Bourges, and King William.)
Original pages in the Domesday Little Book- Suffolk- Robert Malet- Bishop’s Hundred, beginning with Laxfelda/Laxfield and Badincha/Badingham[1]; Stradbroke/Stetebroc and Winebga/Wingfield near bottom of 1st page. Cibbehala/Chippenhall end of 2nd page
NB. several held by ‘Walter or Galter de hoc manerio’/of this manor:
Summary of lands
held by ‘Walter’ in Bishops Hundred, co. Suffolk (Parish of
Hoxne) from tenant-in-chief Robert Malet in ‘Little Domesday:
Lands of Robert Malet’ in 1086
Terms:
TRE= Tempore
Regis Edwardi- in the time of King Edward; pre-Conquest 1066)
Sokeman: A sokeman belonged
to a class of tenants found chiefly in the eastern counties, especially the
Danelaw, occupying an intermediate position between the free tenants and
the bond tenants in that they owned and paid taxes on their land
themselves. Forming between 30% and 50% of the countryside, they could buy
and sell their land, but owed service to their lord's soke, court,
or jurisdiction
Villan: a
peasant of higher economic status than a Bordar and living in a village.
Notionally unfree because subject to the manorial court.
Bordar: a
cottager; a peasant of lower economic status than a villan
Carucate of land-
notional area of land able to be farmed in a year by a team of 8 oxen pulling a
carruca plough, usually reckoned at about 120 acres.
Acre- an
amount of land tillable by one man behind one ox in one day. Traditional acres
were long and narrow due to the difficulty in turning the plough.
A Hide-
amount of land needed to support one peasant family; In 12-13th
centuries, the hide commonly appeared as 120 acres of arable land, but was in
fact a measure of value and tax assessment.
A Hundred- a sub-division
of the shire or county used for administrative purposes (larger than a parish),
each having its own representative body from local villages. Nominally 100
hides to sustain approximately 100 households, but in practice the size of a
Hundred varied widely from place to place.
Antecessor of Robert Malet pre-Conquest (TRE) was Eadric of Laxfield (ie. predecessor or previous landholder from whom the 1086 holder might claim legal title):
1)Badingham- Walter holds of this manor 100 acres, 2 villans and 6 bordars, worth 30s. (also, Loernic 40 acs.; Robert [? de Glanville] 40 acs)
2) Laxfield- Walter holds of this manor, 3 villans with 50 acres worth 20s. (also, Loernic 40 acs. Worth 10s.)
NB. In his
charter to Eye Priory, Robert Malet donated the church of Badingham and all its
lands and tithes and one carucate of land in that vill, and the church of
Laxfield with all its lands and tithes, and his demesne manors of Badingham and
Laxfield to the monks of Eye Priory.
3) Stradbroke and it’s berewick Wingfield- Walter holds from this manor 2 sokemen with 40 acres worth 8s. (also Robert de Glanville held 4 sokemen with 20acs worth 5s; Walter fitzGrip held 1 sokeman with 15 acs. worth 30d.; Loernic 1 sokeman with 20 acs worth 3s)
Notably the
original has a later inclusion, by the same cleric, in the section on
Stradbroke/Stetebroc:
‘And Wingfield [‘Winebga’] to wit a berewick in the same account and valuation’ (berewick= an outlying estate)
4) Chippenhall
(includes the land of Fressingfield)- Of this manor Walter
holds 4 sokemen with 1 carucate of land (about 120 acres) worth 30s.
(also,
Humphrey 1 sokeman with 20 acres worth 5s; Walter fitzGrip 1 freeman, 120 acs.
worth 40s; Malet’s mother 3 sokemen and 80 acs worth 45s.)
5) Weybread- Humphrey [filius Robert] holds 5 sokemen and Walter 1 sokeman worth 10s; 72 acres and 5 bordars, 1 plough and 4 ½ acres of meadow; woodland for 14 pigs. Then as now 1 mill. It is worth 17s.
Instead- In
Instead, 1 freeman, over whom Bishop Ǣthelmar had the commendation TRE, with 10
½ acres and the fourth part of a mill. 1 bordar. Then half a plough, now 2
oxen. It is worth 2s. William Malet held this; afterwards Robert his son [held
it], thinking it belonged to his father’s fief.
Humphrey also
held another large part of Weybread from Malet- In Weybread, 1
freeman with 2 carucates of land which Humphrey holds as a manor with 10
bordars. I freeman holds 20 acres- the same Humphrey holds this. In the same
vill, Humphrey holds 3 freemen with 91 acres and 17 bordars, one mill and 3
parts of another, etc.
Humphrey filius
Robert
The sub-tenant
named Walter shared lands of Robert Malet in Weybread and
Chippenhall/Fressingfield with Humphrey filius Robert, one of
Malet’s largest sub-tenants in Domesday. Humphrey also held Mendham (and his
descendants held Withersdale [not included in Domesday], between Mendham and
Weybread).
Looking at the
map above, it appears that Humphrey and his heirs held the lands east of ‘Weybread
Street’- ie. Weybread to Mendham, Withersdale to Chippenhall/Fressingfield,
while ‘Walter’, and subsequently the ‘Walter’ family, held the lands west of
this same ‘Weybread Street’- ie. Stradbroke to Wingfield, to part of Fressingfield
(known as Snapeshall manor, just north of Fressingfield), to Instead/Weybread.
Humphrey’s ancestry is unknown, nor the origin of his obviously close relationship to the Malets. He held Playford from Malet in Domesday and the tithes of Playford and the church of that vill were donated to Eye Priory in Malet’s Charter to Eye in c.1103-05, which his two sons confirmed, so it would appear that Humphrey was deceased before then. And there appears to have been an ongoing relationship between Humphrey’s descendants and the ‘Walter’ family and the de Glanville family.
Humphrey’s sons
were his eldest Adelm who died without issue before 1125, his fees inherited by
his brothers Fulcher of Playford, and Peter of Playford whose son was Hervei
filius Peter of Playford.
According to
Vivien Brown (Eye Cart, II, p.75), apart from two small holdings, all of
Humphrey filius Robert’s Suffolk manors including Playford, parts of
Fressingfield, Weybread, and Withersdale, were held by Alan II of
Withersdale (d.bef.1241), in the early 13th century. Alan II,
son of William of Withersdale (d.1194-1200), son of Alan I (d.1184) who
inherited ten fees of Fulcher (relationship not clear) son of Humphrey filius
Robert. Alan I is known from a plea in 1194 between his son William and Hervey
filius Peter, wherein William stated that his father Alan had pledged land in
Playford to Hervey (Rolls of King’s Court 1194-5, 50). Alan I is also
mentioned in a fine of 1213 in which Alan II disputed the advowson of Weybread
church with the prior of Butley (Feet of Fines, No. 556). Alan I of
Withersdale is recorded, along with Gutha de Glanville (sister of Rannulf;
children of Hervey de Glanville), as having donated the church of Weybread, as
found in the 14th Century Rent Roll of Butley Priory (East
Anglian: Notes and Queries... counties of Suffolk, Cambridge, Essex &
Norfolk, v.11, Jan 1906, ed. C.H. Evelyn-White, p.46: An Unpublished
Fourteenth-Century rent Roll of the Priory of Butley, Suffolk):
The rent of half
a mark in the town of Playford was the gift of Hervey filius Peter of Playford
to Hubert Walter’s foundation charter to West Dereham Abbey. (His
gift statement in the charter mentioned the homage of Alan son of Thurstan with
his whole tenement which he held of Hervey in Playford- whether this is the
same Alan is unclear.) (Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. Wm Dugdale, 1846,
v.6ii, Abbey of West Dereham, Charter No.II, p.900)
Peter Walter was
custodian of Alan II de Withersdale during his
minority after father William’s death c.1195-1200, until his majority before
1204, as stated by Alan in a record of an assize of ‘darrein presentment’
to the church of Playford, the advowson of which the prior of Eye claimed
against the bishop of Norwich and Alan of Withersdale dated 1227. (Eye Cart.
II, p.117, No.391)
Withersdale is
adjacent to Weybread and just north of Fressingfield, and was not listed in Domesday.
(See Eye Cart.,
Charter Nos. 346 and 347, re. Adelm and Fulcher and his witness Roger de
Glanville; Eye Cart II, p.75 re Playford; p.117 No.391; Three Rolls
of the Kings Court in reign of Richard I, A.D.1194-95, p.50 re Alan and
William of Withersdale and Playford)
In Domesday,
William Gulafre often shared lands with Walter de Caen as subtenants of Malet.
And secondly,
Peter Walter was close to Roger II de Huntingfield son of William de
Huntingfield, son of Roger I de Huntingfield who was second son of Walter de
Caen. Peter’s relationship with this family will be explored in detail, below,
in the section of Walter de Caen.
Also notable is that Loernic also held lands in Laxfield, Badingham and Wingfield/Stradbroke, as well as neighbouring Wilby where ‘Loernic held 20 acres which Aelfric had held TRE’. Loernic’s successor Jordan granted his tithes of Wilby to Malet’s charter. The name ‘Loernic’ is not Norman in origin, but Anglo-Saxon, as was ‘Eadric’, indicating that Loernic probably lived in this area pre-Conquest and held some status maybe as the son of a Saxon lord. Notably, Robert Malet’s father William Malet’s mother was Anglo-Saxon, but whether there is a connection is unknown.
EYE in the
Hundred of Hartismere (adjacent to the Hundred of Bishop)
Robert Malet held the Honour of Eye, with his seat and administrative centre at Eye Castle, where he also built and endowed a monastery of Benedictine monks. His father William had built the castle and granted the barony of Eye by King William, who then granted Robert the Honour of Eye on his father’s death.
The Domesday
Book entry on Eye states that Robert Malet holds it in demesne. A demesne is
described as “all the land retained and managed by the lord of the manor
under the feudal system for his own use, occupation or support”.
A small select number of knights and close associates of
Malet were granted lands from his demesne lands viz. Malet’s mother Esilia,
Walter, Walter the crossbowman, Walter de Caen and Herbert were the only people
so honoured, which is probably an indication of their relationship to Malet.
(As there are no
records of a ‘Herbert’ in Suffolk, presumably it refers to Hubert, the first
prior of Eye Priory in the time of William the Conqueror and Henry I)
Domesday:
Eye (in the
Hundred of Hartismere, adjacent to Bishops Hundred)- Lands of
Robert Malet:
Eadric held Eye
with 12 carucates of land TRE; now Robert Malet holds it in demesne, and his
mother holds 100 acres, worth £21 (TRE= £15)
To this manor
belong 48 sokemen with 121 acres of land. Of these sokemen 37 are in demesne.
Herbert holds 9 with 20 acres and Walter 1 with 5 acres and Walter the
crossbowman 1 with 16 acres. All this is worth 9s. Then 4 ploughs, now 3,
and 1 acres of meadow. Then it was worth £15, now £21. Eadric had soke and sake
of the bishopric. There belong also to this manor 9 free men with 110 acres of
land in the soke and commendation of Eadric TRE (names 9 Saxon free men).
In the same vill
1 freeman, Wulfric commended to Eadric (of Laxfield, TRE) held 30 acres as one
manor TRE; now Walter de Caen holds it from Robert (Malet). Then as now
2 bordars, worth 20s.etc
(ref: Domesday
Book: A Complete Translation, pp. 1213, 1219-1220)
Comment: The entry for Eye specifically named the ‘Walter who held 1 [sokeman] with 5 acres’ and ‘Walter the crossbowman who held 1 [sokeman] with 16 acres’. The difficulty is identifying the man named ‘Walter’. The wording clearly makes a distinction between ‘Walter’ and Walter the crossbowman. It could refer to Walter de Caen, however, it is odd that he should just be named Walter in this paragraph, then given the full name Walter de Caen in the following paragraph. And as Walter de Caen was granted a free man’s manor with 30 acres, why would he also just be given an insignificant ‘1 sokeman and a mere 5 acres’, less than Walter the crossbowman who received 16 acres? It would appear to suggest that there were three knights named Walter granted lands out of Malet’s demesne.
Walter the
crossbowman also held lands at Brome and Thrandeston, adjacent to Eye, and
Walter de Caen held several lands just north of Brome and Thrandeston over the
border in Norfolk, and at Horham to the east of Eye.
The question is
whether the Walter who held 5 acres at Eye was the same Walter who held lands
in Stradbroke and its berewick of Wingfield, Weybread, Chippenhall (Fressingfield),
Laxfield and Badingham, or whether it was referring to Walter de Caen..
In his Charter to Eye Priory, Robert Malet donated the church of Eye with all its lands and tithes, and the tithe of the market of Eye, and part of his burgage in Eye with one fishpond.
Domesday Book entry for EYE:
Similar
wording appears for Wingfield/Stradbroke- ‘Of these, the soke and sake is in
Hoxne, the bishop’s manor and Eadric held half from the bishop. Then it was
worth £14, now £16. Walter holds from this manor 2 sokemen with 40 acres
worth 8s in the same valuation, etc.”
Similarly,
with the wording for the lands in Laxfield and Badingham. While there are
several other lords holding lands from Robert Malet in these same lands,
‘Walter’ is listed firstly, and as he is listed under the lands held by Robert
Malet not Bishop William of Thetford who held the manor of Hoxne (predecessor
Bishop Ǣlmar) in Domesday, the lands of the manor must refer to the half
portion held by Eadric of Laxfield from the Bishop, which in turn became Robert
Malet’s and became part of his demesne.
On what basis Walter held this particular group of lands from the manor and from Robert Malet’s demesne lands, is the mystery. It may explain why the cartulary entry for Hubert Walter (the elder) who donated his tithes of his manor of Snapeshall in Fressingfield to Eye Priory, was placed in amongst the list of Malet’s ‘manors of his demesne’ which he personally donated to the Priory, rather than a separate entry of a donation as with all other contributors.
The manor of Hoxne was a residential episcopal manor, the seat of the bishopric at the time of the Confessor, and Bishop Ǣlmar held 9 carucates of land in Hoxne Bishops in 1066. This was granted to Bishop William of Thetford in 1086, and, as stated, Eadric held half of the manor’s lands from Bishop Ǣlmar, which was then granted to Malet.
The following example shows how the land portions of the different sub-tenants’ of Malet were expressed in the Little Domesday Book entry, ‘Lands of Robert Malet’, and in each case, Walter is named firstly:
In
Chippenhall, 9
free men by commendation [held] 2 ½ carucates of land. Then as now 17 bordars.
And 10 ploughs and 12 acres of meadow. Woodland for 300 pigs. Then it was worth
100s., now £6. Half a church with 20 acres and 1 plough. It is 2 leagues long
and 1 broad. 15d in geld. The soke is in Hoxne [manor], but Eadric held half
from Bishop Ǣlmar. Of this manor Walter holds 4 [freemen] with 1
carucate of land [It is worth] 30s. and it is in the same valuation of £6.
The mother of Robert Malet [holds] 3 [freemen] with 80 acres [worth] 45s.
in the same valuation. Humphrey [holds] 1 [freeman] with 20 acres. It is
worth 5s. in the same valuation. Walter fitzGrip [holds] 1 free man, 120
acres and it is worth 40s. in the same valuation.
Similarly:
Eadric
held Stradbroke pre-Conquest [TRE] with 5 ½ acres of land. And Wingfield
to wit a berewick in the same account and valuation. Then and afterwards
10 villans, now 11. Then 11 bordars now 30. Then 11 ploughs in demesne,
afterwards 6 now 5. Then and afterwards 12 ploughs belonging to the men, now 5.
Altogether 20 acres of meadow. Woodland for 400 pigs. Then 3 horses. Then 16
pigs, now 30 and 30 sheep. 2 churches with 40 acres and half a plough. 17
sokemen with 1 carucate of land and 3 ploughs. Woodland for 40 pigs. 5 acres of
meadow. Of these, the soke and sake is in Hoxne, the bishop’s manor,
and Eadric held half from the bishop. Then it was worth £14 now £16. Walter
holds from this manor 2 sokemen with 40 acres. worth 8s. in the same valuation.
Robert de Glanville [holds] 4 [sokemen] with 20 acres [worth] 5s. in the
same valuation. Walter fitzGrip [holds] 1 with 15 acres [worth] 30d. in
the same valuation. Loernic 1 with 20 acres worth 3s. in the same
valuation. Eadric had the soke and sake. It is 2 leagues long and 1
leagues broad. 14 1/2d. in geld. Others hold [land] there.
Terms:
Berewick- a detached portion of farmland belonging to a
medieval manor and reserved for the lord’s own use.
Demesne- all the land retained by a lord of the manor for his
own use and occupation, or management.
Domesday: Laxfield and Badingham- Lands of Robert Malet
Eadric
held Laxfield with
6 carucates of land and 80 acres. etc… Then it was worth £15, now £8. It is 1½
leagues long and 1 league broad. 6½ d. in geld. Walter holds of this manor 3
villans with 50 acres. It is worth 20s. in the same valuation. Loernic
holds 40 acres worth 10s. in the same valuation.
The
same Eadric held Badingham with 9 carucates of land etc…. Then it was
worth £15 now £10. It is 1 league and 6 furlongs long and 1 league broad. 10d.
in geld. Walter holds of this manor 100 acres and 2 villans and 6 bordars,
worth 30s. It is in the same valuation of £10. Loernic holds 40
acres in the same valuation. Robert holds 40 acres in the same
valuation. Eadric had the soke and sake.
The two lands of Laxfield and Badingham belonged to Eadric of Laxfield TRE, and subsequently, his successor Robert Malet, not the bishops of Hoxne. Once again, Walter ‘held of this manor’, and it would appear that in this case, it refers to Eadric’s manor, as Eadric had the soke and sake of both lands, and Laxfield was the demesne manor of Eadric pre-Conquest.
The
fact that Walter was the first listed in each entry, and that he ‘held of
the manor’ in each case, would seem to indicate that he either had some prior
association with Eadric of Laxfield, or, with Robert Malet or his father
William Malet, who were granted all of Eadric’s properties, as Malet appears to
have shown particular favour to this Walter and enfeoffed large parcels of
Eadric’s demesne lands to him.
The lands held by this Walter from Malet, at Laxfield and Badingham, were granted to Eye Priory by Malet as part of his list of demesne manors. Notably, this original list of Malet’s demesne manors in his charter did not include Wingfield or Weybread, or Snapeshall in Fressingfield, but did include Stradbroke:
Malet’s
Charter to Eye Priory:
Translation:
However, the
later Eye Priory confirmation charters of various monarchs, popes and bishops,
place Hubert’s tithe donation of his land in Snapeshall in Fressingfield in
this same list of Malet’s manors of his demesne.
Eg. Charter of Pope Alexander III in 1168 (no.56, p.60):
And, Charter of
Henry I, c.1123-1134 (no.3, p.18)
Of all of
Malet’s list of donors to his charter, the placement of this particular entry,
albeit in later confirmation charters, is unique.
Eadric of
Laxfield
In Suffolk all
of the estates which were under the personal management of Eadric of Laxfield
in the lordship of Eye, valued at £198 pre-Conquest, became the demesne manors
held by the Malet family (viz. William, his wife Hesilia, and son Robert). In
Norfolk, the Malet family only retained one third of Eadric’s estates. Around
four fifths of the honor of Eye had descended from Eadric of Laxfield, while
around a quarter of his estates passed to lords other than the Malet family.
The consequence of these descents was that the honour of Eye was more closely
focused upon Suffolk than the lordship of Eye had been.
(Lords and
Communities in Early Medieval East Anglia, by Andrew Wareham, Institute of
Historical Research, Chapter: The Formation of Lordships and Economic
Transformations, p.105)
The author of ‘Domesday Book and the Law’, Robin Fleming (p.81) wrote:
William Malet
had been the beneficiary of some early celebrity forfeitures- the most
important of which was his succession in East Anglia to the lands of Eadric of
Laxfield, one of the richest men and greatest lords in the Confessor’s England.
Eadric/Edric of Laxfield is thought by some researchers, to have been the falconer to King Edward the Confessor, and a thane/thegn or nobleman of the first rank. There are several Edrics named in the Domesday Book, including ‘Edric the falconer’ who held part of Shelfanger, and several other lands nearby in the Hundred of Diss near the Suffolk border, pre-Conquest, and in 1086 as tenant-in-chief of Shelfanger (other parts held by King William, Bury St Edmunds, and Count Alan of Brittany, sub-tenanted in Shelfanger by Hervey de Ispania/ Epaignes/Espaine [in Normandy, dept. Eure, who also held several lands of Count Alan in Essex]).(Domesday A Complete Translation p.1178-9). Whether this is the same man is debatable.
Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, by Ann Williams (2004) on ‘Eadric of Laxfield’:
Eadric’s name
is one of the commonest in 11th century England, and only where
Little Domesday gives him the distinctive toponymic from his estate at Laxfield,
or refers to him as the antecessor of Robert Malet, can he be securely
identified. All that is known of him comes from Little Domesday Book, the
return of the Domesday commissioners for the East Anglian circuit, which
reveals that he had held some 123 carucates of land in Suffolk and Norfolk. He
had also attracted the commendation of large numbers of lesser thegns and free
men (a minimum of 82 named individuals can be identified).
Little
Domesday also records the outlawry of Eadric at some time in Edward the
Confessor’s reign, though the reason is unspecified. His lands were confiscated
by the king and his men sought other lords. When he was subsequently pardoned
and reinstated, Edward issued a writ and seal permitting Eadric’s men to return
to their allegiance, if their lord wished it. This was the cause of several
disputes after 1066, when Eadric’s lands were redistributed among the incoming
Normans.
Anglo-Norman Studies XIX: Proceedings of the Battle Conference, 1996, edited by Christopher Harper-Bill:
William Malet
was given a huge fief in Suffolk, Norfolk and Essex. It was by far the largest
to be granted out by the Conqueror in East Anglia, and the most concentrated of
all the Norman fiefs in England. How was room made for him? Was Eadric of Laxfield,
his antecessor, who must have been of the greatest landholders in England
towards the end of the Confessor’s reign, deprived by the Conqueror of his vast
East Anglian holdings in order that William Malet could be endowed with them,
or did Eadric die conveniently without heirs, just at the right moment?
Several historians, including Blomefield (History of Norfolk, 1810, v.10, p.433), Augustine Page (History of Suffolk, p.180) and Rawlinson (MS Oxon Bod. Library 78-80), all suggest that Walter de Caen was married to the daughter of Eadric of Laxfield, on what basis is unknown, as there are no records to confirm this theory, Augustine Page describing Walter de Cademo’s grandson William’s donation to Sibton Priory of ‘Friers manor at Shelfanger, formerly the possession of Edric the falconer, his great grandsire, with which Robert Lord Malet, enfeoffed his brother Walter de Cademo.’.
As stated, it is unknown how these historians arrived at this theory of marriage, but, if there is some unidentified evidence, one could also make the suggestion that the same theory could apply to the subtenant named ‘Walter’ who seemed to have a close association with the lands of the demesne of Eadric of Laxfield in this Hundred of Bishop, several held by Eadric from the Bishop of Hoxne, subsequently granted to the Malets post-Conquest, with Walter holding his lands ‘of this manor’, maybe due to a marriage to Eadric’s daughter (speculation only).
THE IDENTITY OF 'WALTER’
Walter could be an individual who just held the singular name of Walter, one of numerous knights named as such in the Domesday Book.
However, as suggested by Theobald Blake Butler, this ‘Walter’ could also be Walter de Caen who held numerous lands as sub-tenant of tenant-in-chief Robert Malet, including lands surrounding those held by the Walters. At neighbouring Horham, Walter de Caen held 3 freemen by commendation with 60 acres and 2 bordars, worth 12s. He also held lands at Eye, and at Linstead, Huntingfield and Sibton (east of Laxfield), inherited by his two eldest sons. (see map below).
Theobald Blake
Butler initially thought that this ‘Walter’ was the most likely candidate as
ancestor of the Walter family, and he later came to hold the view that the ‘Walter’
who held these lands was probably Walter de Caen.
Just north of
the border with Norfolk, at Thelveton, Burston, Semere and Roydon which
were held by Robert Malet, his subtenant was named as ‘Walter’, which
have been attributed to Walter de Caen by Domesday historians.
Diss
Half Hundred- Robert Malet:
In
Roydon, [near Diss] 1 freeman of Eadric’s by commendation held 20 acres; now
Walter holds them.
In Thelveton, there are 2 free men of the same by commendation with 8 acres of land; and Walter holds them.
The argument against this theory is that Hervey Walter held close ties with the extended de Glanville family and his wife’s de Valoines family, as shown in the witness list to his charter to Butley Priory, yet there was no association with the descendants of Walter de Caen, as would be expected, particularly Walter’s second son Roger de Huntingfield and his descendants who lived in close proximity to the lands held in Bishops Hundred, and who were prominent knights of the county, and whose descendants one would expect to have witnessed Hervey's Charter to Butley, if they were close relations. Only Peter Walter appeared to hold a close relationship with the third generation of the de Huntingfield family, and that could be down to the close proximity of their manors, and as knights of the county.
A second likely candidate for this ‘Walter’ is Walter Arbalista/the crossbowman who held lands in Eye, as well as two lands nearby at Thrandeston and Brome where notably he was only named as ‘Walter’ in Domesday but identified as the crossbowman by his donation to Malet’s charter to Eye Priory of a manor situated in these lands (named ‘Gosewolde’ between Thrandeston and Brome), and the second adjacent to Shottisham (named ‘Halegestowe’- held in Domesday by Malet’s mother from Robert Malet, who must have given it to the bowman after his mother’s death), plus the church of St Margaret in Shottisham held by Walter the crossbowman. He was also a witness to Malet’s charter, indicating a close association with Malet, in which case, one would expect him to have held more lands from Malet than just those few attributed to him. So, therefore, the nearby lands in Bishops Hundred were quite possibly also held by him.
Hundred
of Hartismere- Robert Malet
In Thrandeston, 2 free men commended to Eadric held 15 acres. Walter holds it from Robert. In Brome 2 free men commended to Edric held 4 acres. The same Walter holds this. In Thrandeston the same Walter holds 2 villans with 24 acres of the demesne of Eye.
The third, less likely candidate who held lands in this same area from Robert Malet, including Stradbroke, Wingfield, and Chippenhall (Fressingfield), Horham and Chickering, was named Walter fitzGrip, however, he cannot be the same man named ‘Walter’ in several Domesday entries, as ‘Walter’ is listed firstly and separately to Walter fitzGrip, holding adjacent portions in some of the same entries and the way it is worded indicates two different individuals, which increases the likelihood that ‘Walter’ is either de Caen or ‘the crossbowman’. Eg. Stradbroke/Wingfield: “Walter holds from this manor 2 sokemen with 40 acres worth 8s in the same valuation. Robert de Glanville holds 4 with 20 acres 5s in the same valuation. Walter fitzGrip 1 with 15 acres, 30d. in the same valuation”.
FitzGrip donated his Fressingfield lands to Malet’s charter to Eye (which was later confirmed by his nephew William Martel, steward to Henry I and to King Stephen), but what happened to his other lands in Bishops Hundred is unknown, and may have reverted back to Malet, or to the Crown, after his death.
However, again, an individual just named ‘Walter’, closely associated with either Malet or Eadric of Laxfield pre-Conquest, should also remain in consideration.
A theory to be considered
Robert Malet endowed Eye Priory with the tithe of all ‘his demesne lands’ in the Hundred of Bishop, as evidenced in his charter. That indicates that Walter and the other sub-tenants (Walter de Caen, Walter the bowman, Walter fitzGrip, Robert de Glanville, Loernic and Humphrey fizRobert) were enfeoffed with lands in Bishops Hundred as part of Malet’s demesne lands, suggesting a close personal connection. All of these sub-tenants, or their sons, were either donors or witnesses or both, to Malet’s foundation charter to Eye Priory. The fact that an individual named just ‘Walter’ (if not de Caen or the bowman) did not contribute his tithes to Malet’s foundation charter, nor was he a witness to the document, suggests that he may have died before the charter in circa 1103-05.
As Hervey Walter
the elder was born c.1080-95, he could have been the son of this Walter but
would have been a minor at the time of his father’s death, in which case, Walter’s
lands would have reverted back to Malet, and after Malet’s death in 1106, if Hervey
was still in his minority, back to the Crown, so his claim of inheritance when
he reached his majority would have been at the will of either Malet or the
Crown. The lands of Laxfield and Badingham which were quite valuable, had been
granted to the priory, unlike Weybread, Wingfield and Snapeshall which were not
listed as donations in the original charter. It may explain, why Hervey did not
hold all of the lands originally held by this Walter.
This then poses the question of, whom held the wardship of the young Hervey [Walter]. It would probably have been held by someone from the local Suffolk community, and particularly one of the families who held lands in the Hundred of Bishop. As the Walter family held a close relationship with the extended de Glanville family, including members of the senior de Glanville line descended from William de Glanville (as evidenced by them witnessing Hervey Walter’s charter to Butley priory), as well as the junior de Glanville line including Rannulf de Glanville, son of Hervey de Glanville (viz. brother of William de Glanville), implying a closer relationship than just a tie by mutual marriage with the Valoines family, it is possible that the wardship of Hervey was tied up with this family. It is also possible there was a blood connection, maybe with a de Glanville sister. It should also be noted that the Walter family adopted the coat of arms of the Glanville family.
Hervey’s choice
to apply the ‘surname’ of ‘Walter’ to himself and his sons Hervey and Hubert,
may have been to distinguish from Hervey de Glanville and his son ‘Hervey
filius Hervey’. It is also notable that Hervey Walter (junior) named two of his
sons Bartholomew and Roger, both names in the extended Glanville family, which also seems to imply a close relationship, whether through wardship or through a
blood relationship.
In Domesday, Robert de Glanville held 20 acres in Stradbroke and its berewick of Wingfield (value 5s.), which was not inherited by either William or Hervey de Glanville, in contrast to his carucate of land at Horham (value 40s.) held from Malet which was subsequently inherited by descendants.
A ‘Robert’ also
held 40 acs in Badingham (value 10s), probably either Malet or de Glanville, but, as with
Walter (who held 100acs), this land was not inherited by de Glanville descendants but was
donated to Eye Priory by Malet.
Malet had
donated several churches with the lands and tithes to the monks of Eye Priory,
including Bawdsey (Hundred of Wilford) and Benhall (Hundred of Plomesgate),
held by Robert de Glanville from Malet in Domesday, and later held by de
Glanville’s descendants, Hervey de Glanville and his son Rannulf de Glanville.
The fact that
Robert de Glanville held several lands in the same area as ‘Walter’ could
explain the close association between the descendants of de Glanville and of
Walter. As the de Glanville lands in Normandy were close to Malet lands also indicates a close ancestral family association.
A brief summary
of the de Glanville family
(see next blog
chapter for extensive exploration and detailed account of the de Glanville
family, with records)
‘Le 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.
It is well established that Rannulf de Glanville 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.
Some historians
have suggested that Hervey de Glanville was not only the father of Rannulf de
Glanville, but also of Hervey Walter who they suggest also used the name Hervey
de Glanville (junior). The next blog chapter (detailing the de Glanville
family) explores this theory. While possible, and the chronology and coincidences
between the two lines of Herveys living in Suffolk in the same period of time
are marked, no evidence was produced, or can be found to prove it.
However, this blog author’s theory about the wardship of the young Hervey, son of Walter, being linked with the de Glanville family, has not been explored before, and could explain the closeness of these families.
In Hervey
Walter’s charter to Butley Priory c.1171-77, the witnesses included Rannulf’s
son William de Glanville, as well as Rannulf’s cousin Bartholomew de Glanville’s
two sons, named Stephen de Glanville and William de Glanville ‘cleric’.
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, but likely.
‘Le Sire de
Glanville’ was one of
the’ Commanders of the Archers du Val de Real and Bretheul and other places' at the
Battle of Hastings in 1066, 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). To have such a high status and commanding role in the
Conquest, he must have been of mature age.
‘Rainaldus
de Glanvilla’, about
1066, witnessed a charter in favour of Roger de Mowbray also known as Le Sire de Mowbray,
another of the Conqueror’s commanders listed in Foxe's battle Abbey Roll. (Gallia Christiana, xi, 60)
Hervey de Glanville witnessed Malet’s charter to Eye Priory in c.1103 in which a Ranulphus de Glanvillis donated the hospice he had at Yaxley (near Eye) along with Hubert de Montecanisy who also donated land in Yaxley and the hospice. Notably, only Hubert held this land in Domesday from Malet, as well as Robert Malet’s mother (‘from the Queen’s fief’), and William de Beaufou Bishop of Thetford (d.1091) held as a second tenant-in-chief (Montecanisy and Beaufou are located very near Glanville in Normandy). The donation by Ranulphus could have been made when Malet first made the foundation document in King William I’s reign c.1086, while Hervey de Glanville may have been a witness to the renewed foundation document post the succession of Henry I in 1100. He may have either died or returned to his lands in France, before the Domesday survey was made.
The difficulty is working out the exact relationships, but the scenario appears to be that, Sire de Glanville was Rainaldus de Glanville, and he appears to have had a son named Robert. Whether Rainaldus de Glanville was also Radulphus de Glanville, or whether they were father and son, is unknown. It is likely that there were other sons who would have participated in the Conquest, under their father’s command of the Archers.
Although William de Glanville and his younger brothers Hervey de Glanville and Roger de Glanville inherited the Domesday lands of Robert de Glanville, it is unknown if Robert was their father or an uncle.
There is an interesting theory by several past historians that Robert had a brother named Walter de Glanville. Author, William U.S. Glanville-Richards in his book, Records of the Anglo-norman House of Glanville, from A.D. 1050 to 1880, published in 1882, wrote:
Rainald de Glanville was Lord of Glanville circa 1040, and he, about 1066, witnessed a charter in favour of Robert de Mowvray. His son, Ranulph de Glanville, “Le Sire de Glanville”, entered England in the train of William Duke of Normandy. Among the 71 commanders of the Archers du Val de real and of Bretheul and of many other places, who fought at the Battle of Hastings, is Le Sire de Glanville. He also gave his house in Yaxley to the monks of Eye. His brother William de Glanville was Dean and Archdeacon of Liseaux in Normandy 1077. By his wife Flandrina he had issue, Robert de Glanville, William de Glanville, Walter de Glanville and Sir Hervey de Glanville. He is not mentioned in ‘Domesday Book’- he might have died before the survey was made, or returned to his Lordship in Normandy.
Glanville-Richards gave evidence for the issue of Randulph and Flandrina as, ‘Dodsworth MS: “Out of the Annals of Normandy in French, whereof one very ancient written booke in parchment remaineth in the custody of the writer thereof.” (ie. Roger Dodsworth, antiquarian, 1585-1654- MS at Oxford University Bodlein Library)
The author appears to have made a mistake that ‘William and Sir Hervey de Glanville’ were brothers of Robert de Glanville, as Hervey himself proclaimed that in 1150 he was about 70 years of age (b.c.1080), and William’s son and heir Bartholomew de Glanville was born c.1113. The mistake could have been made in the original Dodsworth document by confusing the dates of a Charter in the Cartulary of Castle Acre Priory, Charter of Roger de Glanville, dated c.1160’s, in which his witnesses were listed as “Herveio de glanvill. Will ‘fil’ flandine. Rob de Glanville, ‘fratres’ mei” ie. Hervey de Glanville, William son of Flandina, Robert de Glanville, my brothers, which sounds coincidently similar to the claims of Glanville-Richards, although the ‘Walter de Glanville’ is missing from the list of brothers.
However, it is possible that there was a younger brother of Robert de Glanville named ‘Walter de Glanville’ as Glanville-Richards claimed- as a younger son, he would not necessarily carry the same appellation as the heir, Robert de Glanville, and was quite possibly a bowman under his father’s command of the Archers, and could be Walter the crossbowman who also held lands under Robert Malet.
He could also be the ‘Walter’ who was granted lands in Malet’s demesne at Stradbroke and Wingfield, along with Robert de Glanville, as well as holding several other lands in Malet’s demesne of Eye and Hoxne. The heirs to Robert de Glanville’s lands were William and Hervey, possibly his sons, or possibly nephews if they were sons of Radulphus.
If Walter de Glanville also had a son and heir named Hervey born c.1080-1090, the two Herveys would need to distinguish themselves with different surnames for purposes of distinguishing land holdings in the same area of Suffolk, hence Hervey de Glanville and Hervey Walter. The scenario painted by this theory is very plausible. However, the veracity of the document held by Glanville-Richards, given the obvious mistakes, is, however, questionable and unable to be verified, and therefore the existence of a ‘Walter de Glanville’ remains speculative.
Glanville-Richards also refers to an earlier published book, ‘The Norman People: and their Existing Descendants in the British Dominions and the United States of America’ by an anonymous author, who claimed a Walter de Glanville held lands in Leyland, Lancashire in Domesday, which is not backed up by evidence as the ‘Walter’ so named does not have an appellation ‘de Glanville’.
The Domesday lands of Roger de Poitou in Leyland: 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. The author may have come to the conclusion, given the other names holding these lands which are all names common in the de Glanville clan.
This book also 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 (see next chapter for details).
Sources: Records of the Anglo-norman House of Glanville, from A.D. 1050 to 1880, by William U.S. Glanville-Richards, London, 1882, p.1; Cartulary of Castle Acre Priory, British Library, Harley, Ms 2110, fol.67; The Norman People: and their Existing Descendants in the British Dominions and the United States of America’, by an anonymous author, London 1874
Robert de Glanville was probably the eldest son and heir of ‘Sire de Glanville’. Robert held 18 (possibly 19) lands in Suffolk and one in Norfolk from Malet, and possibly another 3 lands held by ‘Robert the crossbowman’ who could have been Robert de Glanville- one of his lands, Finborough, subsequently held by Rannulf de Glanville, and another, Worstead, adjacent to William de Glanville’s inherited manor of Honing in Norfolk, inherited from Robert de Glanville. Robert de Glanville would almost certainly have fought under his father’s command of the archers, and would therefore also be known as ‘Robert Arbalester/the crossbowman’. This also possibly links him with Walter the Arbalester/Crossbowman.
Determining the
relationship between Robert de Glanville and the next generation, William and
his brothers Hervey de Glanville and Roger de Glanville, is difficult due to
lack of records.
We know that Robert
de Glanville must have been of age in the 1086 Domesday Book, therefore born
pre-1065, probably in the 1050’s. After his death, his lands were inherited
by the William, Hervey and Roger de Glanville, but their exact relationship to
Robert is uncertain. If they were sons of Rannulphus de Glanville, they may have
inherited from Robert de Glanville if he died without issue and was their paternal
uncle.
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). He was born prior to 1080 and died before 1138. His son and heir, Bartholomew de Glanville (born before c.1114) had issue Stephen, William and Geoffrey de Glanville.
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 that he ‘a very old man’ (at least 70 years of
age by his own calculation), therefore born about 1080. Issue (not in order):
William, Robert, Hervey, Rannulf, Roger, Gerald, Osbert, and a daughter Gutha.
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 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 Anglicanum
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 the records relating to the later Roger de Glanville the son
of Hervey de Glanville.(see next chapter for details of these records).
Hervey de Glanville’s age can be calculated from a speech he made c.1150, in which he told the assembly of bishops, abbots, barons, knights and gentlemen of Norfolk and Suffolk who had gathered to discuss the legalities of the liberties and privileges of St Edmund at Bury, 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 Hervey was born about 1080.
The report of his speech continued: “he assured them, that in the time of King Henry I when justice and equity, peace and fidelity, flourished in England, though now, alas! war silenced justice and the law.” (‘An East Anglian shire-moot of Stephen’s reign 1148-53’ by Helen M. Cam [English Historical Review xxxix [1924] pp.568-71]- JSTOR).
The second crusade occurred in 1147-49, and 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. 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 de Glanville 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. (Speech reported in ‘De Expugnatione Lyxbonesi’/’On the Conquest of Lisbon’, an eyewitness account of the Siege of Lisbon at the start of the Second Crusade, sent to Hervey’s personal cleric at his home at Bawdsey in Suffolk, Osbert de Bawdsey, written by someone identified only as ‘R’ (thought to be a ‘fighting’ priest), probably Osbert’s father Roger de Bawdsey who was Hervey’s private chaplain and would have accompanied Hervey on Crusade- see next chapter for details.)
In the Domesday survey, the lands Robert de Glanville held from Robert Malet:
Alderton,
Bawdsey, Benhall, Boulge, Bredfield, Burgh. Charsfield, Creeting [All Saints
etc], and Creeting [St Peter], Dallinghoo, Debach, [Great] Glemham, Hollesley,
Hoo, Horham, Stradbroke/Wingfield, ‘Turtanestuna’ (near Woodbridge), all in
Suffolk, and Honing in Norfolk, (and possibly Badingham in Suffolk).
Of the lands
held by Robert de Glanville, 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 in Norfolk. He also co-founded a church at Grundisburgh (adjacent to Burgh) with Isilia de Bourges.
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 son, as he inherited the bulk of Robert’s properties, with his seat at Bacton (held only by Malet in Domesday) and Honing in Norfolk (near Bacton), and his descendants became the senior line.
Hervey de
Glanville, the second
son, inherited Bawdsey, his seat, and Great Glemham, and his son Rannulf held
Benhall and Bawdsey after his death.
Conclusion
Whether this 'Walter' was related to Eadric, or whether he was a close associate of Robert Malet, or was
possibly Walter the Crossbowman or Walter de Caen, is unknown and speculative. Although there
is no direct, only circumstantial evidence, several authors, including Theobald
Blake Butler, have attributed this ‘Walter’ to Walter de Caen. As the Hervey
Walter and his sons did not show any close association with the sons and
descendants of Walter de Caen as evidenced in the witness lists of their
various charters, this theory seems unlikely. However, the theory that this
‘Walter’ could have been Walter the crossbowman is plausible, or, as evidence
would seem to suggest, he was just a knight named ‘Walter’ who was somehow
closely associated with Robert Malet,
It is still speculation that this ‘Walter’ was the ancestor of Hervey Walter the elder. However, given that all four lands in Bishops Hundred held by the Walter family in the 12th century were held by this Walter from Robert Malet in Domesday, there is a strong possibility that this Walter is the source of the surname ‘Walter’, and should be kept in mind.
This map showing the Domesday Book lands of Robert Malet held by his sub-tenants, ‘Walter’, Walter de Caen (als. Walter fitzAlbrici, marked with *), Walter the crossbowman, and Walter fitzGrip, as well as Robert de Glanville, gives weight to the argument that the lands held by ‘Walter’ were possibly held by either Walter the crossbowman or Walter de Caen, given that the lands held by ‘Walter’ in Bishops Hundred were surrounded by lands held by de Caen and the bowman. However, he could be just a knight named Walter.
NB. Halgestou
near Shottisham was held by Malet’s mother in Domesday, but donated by Walter
the crossbowman to Eye Priory in Malet’s charter.
2.WALTER ARBALESTARIUS (crossbowman)
A ‘Walter’ features as a sub-tenant of Robert Malet in the area around Eye, named Walter the Arblaster, an Anglicization of the Norman word meaning a Crossbowman, the derivation taken from the Latin “arcuballistarius”, a compound of “arcus”, bow, and “ballista”, a catapult.
R.
Payne-Gallwey in his book, ‘The Book of The Crossbow’ (New York 2019)
explains that the crossbowmen were variously known as -Arbalista,
Arbalistarius, Arbalistator, Balistarius, etc. The crossbow was,
probably, introduced into England as a military and sporting arm by the Norman
invaders in 1066. Early in the 12th century, the construction of
this weapon, the bow of which was not yet formed of steel, was so much improved
that it became very popular in both English and Continental armies. The wounds
caused by a crossbow in warfare were, however, considered so barbarous, that
its use, except against infidels, was interdicted by the second Lateran
Council, in 1139, under penalty of an anathema, as a weapon hateful to God and
unfit for Christians. This prohibition was confirmed, at the close of the same
century, by Pope Innocent III. The employment of crossbowmen, nevertheless,
again became common in English and Continental armies in the reign of Richard
I, and the death of this king, which was caused by a bolt from a crossbow, in
France in 1199, was thought to be a judgement from heaven inflicted upon him
for his disobedience and impiety in permitting crossbowmen to enter his service.
Richard was an expert with the weapon.
In 1075, there was an uprising against the Conqueror by Earl Ralph Wader of East Anglia and Roger Earl of Hereford and Waltheof Earl of Northumberland. Robert Malet’s role in this appears in a letter of Lanfranc to the Conqueror announcing the surrender of Norwich Castle. It was occupied by Bishop Geoffrey of Coutances, William de Warren and Robert Malet, together with 300 men-at-arms, supported by ballistarii and many engineers. It is evident that Robert, the sheriff and largest landholder loyal to the king, must have played a key part in the suppression of the revolt. He acquired some of Ralph’s holdings. From this time onwards he was an intimate of the king, often at court and witnessing many of his charters.
(Anglo-Norman
Studies XIX: Proceedings of the Battle Conference, 1996, ed. Christopher
Harper-Bill- article William Malet and his Family by Cyril Hart,
p.153-54)
Out of the 1400 tenants-in-chief named in the Domesday survey, thirteen were crossbowmen, indicating that they held quite high status in the Norman hierarchy. Four bowmen held lands as tenant-in-chief in Norfolk/Suffolk: Ralph held 5; Gilbert held 8; Berner held 10, and notably Robert held only one, however the location of the three lands he sub-tenanted indicate he was possibly Robert de Glanville who held a large number of lands as sub-tenant of Robert Malet.
The
other crossbowmen who held as tenant-in-chief in other parts of England: Odo
held 27 lands in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire; Nicholas held 14 in Devon and
Warwickshire; Godebold held 16 in Devon; Heppo held 13 in Lincolnshire; Fulcher
held 7 in Devon; Odard held 2 in Surrey; Hugh held one in Sussex and one in
Derbyshire; Warin held one in Wiltshire; and Reginald held one in Essex albeit
a valuable manor.
How many in Domesday were named Walter the Crossbowman?
In
the Domesday survey, the name of ‘Walter the crossbowman’ is listed as
holding four lands as tenant-in-chief in Gloucestershire, and as sub-tenant of one
land (Combwich) in Somerset from a prominent Domesday landholder Ralph of
Limsey. ‘Walter the crossbowman’ also held the four lands in Suffolk
from Robert Malet, as mentioned.
In comparison with the other crossbowmen listed in Domesday who held their lands in one county or adjacent counties, the distance between Gloucestershire and Suffolk in this instance would seem to suggest they were two distinct individuals, also taking into account the name of ‘Walter’ was so prolific in Domesday.
Walter the crossbowman in Suffolk held a close association with Robert Malet, as indicated by his donation to Eye Priory in Malet’s foundation charter which Walter also witnessed, however, Malet had no association with Gloucestershire, which also appears to confirm that the Suffolk bowman was a different individual to that in Gloucestershire.
Walter the crossbowman of Gloucestershire
'Walterus
Balistari' held
the four lands in Gloucestershire, at Bulley (Westbury), Ruddle (Westbury) and
Ruddle (Bledisloe), and Frampton [Cotterell] (Langley) as tenant-in-chief, with
much of the hundred of Westbury laying within the boundaries of the Forest of
Dean. These lands appear to have reverted to the Crown at his death indicating he
died without issue or he only had daughters, as there are no records of his
issue continuing to hold his Gloucester lands. No records of the Westbury
hundred court have been found and Westbury hundred belonged to the Crown, with
the sheriff accounting for the profits of courts in 1169 with an income of 20s.
received from the court (Pipe Roll, 1169, xiii, p117).
Bulley, Ruddle in Westbury and Ruddle in Bledisloe
(Frampton [Cotterell] was further south towards
Bristol)
In the
Gloucestershire entries he was listed as Walteri Balistarius, in
comparison with the entries for the Suffolk lands where he was either listed as
Walter/Galter Arbalestarius, or just ‘Walter’.
Walter the crossbowman of
Suffolk
Walterus
Arbalestarius/ the crossbowman, held lands in Suffolk under Robert
Malet, at Eye, Thrandeston and Brome in the Hundred of Hartismere, as well as
at Shottisham in the Hundred of Wilford.
Shottisham tenet
Walterus arbalastarius de R. Malet’
Walteri
Arbalestarius gave 2/3rds of his tithes of Halgestou (near
Shottisham) and ‘Goseweld’ (between Thrandeston and Brome), plus the church of St Margaret
(Shottisham) with its land, to Malet’s Charter to which he was also named as a
witness, which would appear to indicate a close association with Robert Malet.
Halgestou,
adjacent to Shottisham, was held in Domesday by Robert Malet’s mother from her
son, so Robert Malet may have granted this to Walter after his mother’s death.
Vivien Brown (Eye Cart. p.65) suggests that it is possible that Walter
may have held this land of William Malet and subsequently of his widow. Malet’s
mother also held a part of the lands of Eye and nearby Yaxley.
In several later
confirmation charters the gift is referred to as the ‘tithe of Walter the
arblaster’ without specifying a location (Eye Cart., Nos.15,40,55), the
church being listed separately.
‘Goseweld’ or
Gosewould (Hall) is between Thrandeston and Brome. In Domesday, Thrandeston and
Brome, near Eye, were held by a ‘Walter’ and ‘the same
Walter’ from Malet- they have been attributed by scholars to Walter the
bowman due to his donation of Gosewold to Malet’s charter:
Eye Priory Charter No.1:
Witness:
(Eye Priory
Cartulary and Charters, 1, ed. V. Brown, pp.12-14)
(Copyright permission notice: "This map is based on data
provided through www.VisionofBritain.org.uk and uses historical material which
is copyright of the Great Britain Historical GIS Project and the University of
Portsmouth".)
Domesday Book
The entries for
Thrandeston, Brome and Shottisham in Domesday (Robert Malet as tenant-in-chief),
in the first two of which, he is only identified as ‘Walter’:
In Thrandeston,
2 freemen, Godric and Leofstan commended to Eadric held 15 acres in the king’s
and the earl’s soke. And half a plough. It is worth 26d. Walter holds it
from Robert.
In Brome,
two free men commended to Eadric (of Laxfield) held 4 acres in the king’s soke worth
8d. The same Walter
holds this (as Walter who holds Thrandeston).
In Thrandeston
the same Walter holds 2 villans with 24 acres of the demesne of Eye,
worth 4s.
Walter the crossbowman holds Shottisham from Robert Malet, which Osmund, a free man commended to Eadric (of Laxfield) held TRE with 44 acres as a manor and 1 bordar. Then 1 plough, now a half, 2 acres of meadow. Then it was worth 20s. now 10s. It is 7 furlongs long and 4 broad, 1 church with 13 acres worth 32d. In the same place, 12 free men commended to Eadric and 3 commended to Godric of Peyton held 80 acres. Then 3 ploughs now 1 ½; 1 acre of meadow. Then it was worth 16s, now 20s. Walter the crossbowman holds this from Robert Malet.
Malet’s mother
holds Halgestou which Godric, Eadric’s sokeman, held. 1 carucate of land
and 20 acres. 1 mill. Then as now worth 17s.4d. (She also held adjacent
Culeslea.)
Notably the
surrounding lands of Hollesley, Bawdsey and part of Alderton (see map above) were held by
Robert de Glanville, and the other part of Alderton, and part of Sutton (just north of Shottisham)
were held by Walter de Caen, all held from Robert Malet.
‘Laneburc’, east
of Sutton (held by de Caen) and north of Shottisham (held by the bowman), was a
small holding of 5 acres worth 12d., which ‘Walter’ holds in demesne.
(This cannot be assigned to a particular Walter.)
Domesday Book-
Eye: Eadric held Eye with 12 carucates of land held TRE: now Robert Malet holds it in demesne and his mother holds 100 acres. To this manor belong 48 sokemen with 121 acres of land. Of these sokemen 37 are in demesne. Herbert (?Hubert, 1st prior of Eye Priory?) holds 9 with 20 acres, and Walter 1 with 5 acres and Walter the crossbowman 1 with 16 acres. All this is worth 9s.
In the same vill
1 freemen Wulfric commended to Eadric held 30 acres as one manor TRE: now Walter
de Caen holds it from Robert.
The main point
of the entry of Eye, is that there is a definite distinction between Walter who
held 5 acres and Walter the crossbowman who held 16 acres, meaning they were
not the same man. However, the reference to ‘Walter’ could refer to Walter de
Caen, although, as de Caen held such a close relationship to the Malet family,
and he was granted a vill with 30 acres in Eye, it is inexplicable why he would
also receive an insignificant parcel of 5 acres and 1 sokeman. The other
inconsistency is why he is named only as ‘Walter’ in the first section and his
full name of Walter de Caen in the second section- one would expect the
reverse.
Given Walter the bowman’s close association with the Malet family, as evidenced by his donation to Malet’s charter which he also witnessed, it would seem most likely that Malet would have granted him more lands than just the four attributed to him, so it could be highly likely he was the ‘Walter’ who held lands at Wingfield/Stradbroke, Weybread and Chippenhall/Fressingfield, Laxfield, Badingham, etc, all part of Malet’s Honour of Eye, and close to the other lands held by the bowman. And similarly to the entries for Wingfield etc, the bowman was just listed as ‘Walter’ in Thrandeston and Brome.
Notably Thrandeston and Brome are adjacent to Yaxley,
donated by Randulf de Glanville and Hubert de MonteCanisy to Malet’s charter.
There are possible,
yet it must be acknowledged, highly speculative scenarios:
Sire de
Glanville was a commander of the Archers in the Conquest, 1066. As has been
suggested in the next blog chapter on the de Glanville family, it is possible that
Robert de Glanville of Domesday was also Robert the Crossbowman. If so, there
could be a couple of explanations for an association between Robert de
Glanville and Walter the crossbowmen both holding lands in the same areas from
Robert Malet in the Honour of Eye, Suffolk:
A)
It
could be possible that there was a marriage link (either wives of children) between Walter the bowman and Robert de Glanville (the bowman), linking Walter with the de Glanville
family. This could then account for some of their younger issue adopting the
surname ‘Walter’, to distinguish from others in the extensive de Glanville
family, and to honour their forebear, and could also account for the close
association between the Walter family and the extended de Glanville family in
the 12th century (and the adoption of the Glanville coat of arms as
the Walter family arms). But again, it must be noted that this is highly speculative.
B)
If William Glanville-Richard's statement that Robert de Glanville had a brother named Walter (de Glanville) and his sources were legitimate, then the theory that Hervey Walter was a son of this Walter de Glanville, who could also be Walter the crossbowman, then becomes a highly probably scenario, but unfortunately, his sources cannot be verified, and the theory remains speculation.
C)
The
other theory has already been discussed in the section on ‘Walter’, viz. that
when Walter the crossbowman died just after he witnessed Malet’s charter; or,
similarly if ‘Walter’ who held several manors from Malet, died, his son and
heir Hervey could have been still a minor, and his wardship may have gone to
one of the de Glanville family.
However, none of those suggested scenarios can possibly be proven.
Vivien Browne in her Eye Priory Cartulary and
Charters II (p.65) wrote about Walter the arbalister and the lands in
Suffolk:
p.71-72: Gosewolde
in Thrandeston. Walter the arblaster gave two thirds of his tithe in
Gosewolde. In 1086, he held one freeman with 16 acres belonging to the manor of
Eye, and Gossewold Wood or Goosewood is listed as a parcel of the manor of Eye
in 17th century surveys. The tithe was confirmed by bishop Ralegh in
1242 (Charter 42) and in 1254 and 1291 the tithe, worth 5s., was listed in the
parish of Thrandeston and pertained to the sacristan. The 1308 list includes
the tithe of bracken, pannage and agistment of cattle in Gosewolde (No.396) the
name is preserved to the present day in Goswold Hall, Thrandeston.
p.49: Shottisham,
St Margaret. Walter the arblaster gave the church of St Margaret with its
land. Usually referred to in general confirmations as in ‘Halegestowe’, the
confirmation of archbishop Theobald of c.1150-60 (No. 52) and that of bishop
William Ralegh of 1242 (No. 41) refer to it as being in Shottisham, which manor
Walter held in 1086. Despite the wording of the foundation charter, there is no
evidence that the monks ever enjoyed any rights in the advowson, which later
presentations show pertained to the manor, their portion in the mid 12th
century being merely the offering of candles on the feast of St Margaret (44).
In 1254, the portion was valued at 1m, in 1291 at 10s.
While the lands donated to Eye Priory, such as Thrandeston and Shottisham would probably have remained with the priory, the lands Walter the bowman may have held in Bishops Hundred would probably have stayed in the family as inheritances, and, as alluded to, he may well have been the source of the surname ‘Walter’.
Walter the crossbowman was obviously still alive in the early 12th century as evidenced by his witnessing Malet’s charter c.1103-05, but may have died shortly after. He may have joined Robert Malet in support of Henry I against the Norman army of his elder brother Robert Curthose. It is thought that Malet died at the Battle of Tinchebray, Normandy on 28 September 1106 between an invading force led by Henry, and the Norman army of his brother Robert, resulting in a decisive victory for Henry’s knights and the capture of Robert Curthose.
3.WALTER
DE CAEN
Theobald Blake Butler finally came to the conclusion that Walter de Caen, also named Walter filius Alberic in some Domesday entries, was the most likely candidate as the ancestor of the Walter family, probably by a daughter. His original research on the ‘Origins of the Butlers of Ireland’, about which he which he gave a speech in 1939 that was published in ‘The Irish Genealogist’, (vol.1 No.5 p.147-158, April 1939), came to the conclusion that ‘Walter’ who held several lands from Robert Malet in Bishops Hundred in Suffolk in Domesday, was the ancestor of the Walter/Butler family. In January 1961, he wrote to Lord Dunboyne, saying:
‘So far, I have
identified 16 lands of the Butlers of which 9 were held by Walter de Caen in
Domesday' (comment- unfortunately, he does not list those lands,
and I have had difficulty associating nine de Caen held lands with the Walter
family- he obviously assigned the lands of ‘Walter’, such as Wingfield etc, to
de Caen).
'There seems
little doubt that Robert fitzWalter was the eldest son of Walter de Caen and
inherited much of his father’s estate; also, that said Walter died before 1105
when Robert fitzWalter founded Horsham St Faith (Norfolk). A Hervey fitzWalter
does not, so far as I have discovered, appear in any of the records of this
time and if he was a younger brother of Robert fitzWalter, he is unlikely to
have inherited much of his father’s property, so I am now working on the
supposition that Hervey married a daughter of Walter de Caen and that the lands
above mentioned came to the family by way of a marriage settlement.’
(Letters of
Theobald Blake Butler to Patrick Lord Dunboyne, the Butler
Society, p.53-54)
Certainly, Walter de Caen held vast lands as one of Robert Malet’s most favoured sub-tenants, and the close association of Robert Malet and Robert Malet’s mother Esilia (daughter of Gilbert I Crispin, castellan of Tillieres in the Norman Vexin) with Walter de Caen has led to speculation that Walter was the brother or half-brother or illegitimate brother of Malet, however, there is no evidence for such a conclusion. While he is not specifically named as the holder of the lands later held by the Walter family in Bishops Hundred, he does hold several neighbouring lands from Malet, and in several instances he has been proven to hold lands under just the name ‘Walter’, therefore this could be a case of sloppy record keeping by the recorder, so that he may be the ‘Walter who holds from the manor’. The maps below show the close proximity of ‘Walter’s’ lands to those held by Walter de Caen.
Comparison maps of the lands held by ‘Walter’ and Walter de Caen in Norfolk and Suffolk in the Domesday survey.
(NB. Halesworth
is east of the lands of Bishops Hundred in Suffolk)
Theobald
Blake Butler wrote:
The
Domesday survey gives a clear picture of Walter’s importance in East Anglia;
though never a tenant-in-chief, his holdings are such as to throw into the
shadow many a man whose name appears in the Survey as holding direct from the
Crown. The manors with which he is credited in Domesday are as follows: 25(?)
in Norfolk, 54(?) in Suffolk, 1 in Essex, and he is probably that Walter who
held one carucate of land in Leyland (? in Lancashire). In addition, he held
one lordship in Norfolk direct as undertenant of the King and one of the 50
houses in Norwich “of which the King has not the custom”. ie. freehold.
(NB. Comment-
Blake Butler makes a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions here on which lands
Walter de Caen held, including many of the lands held by sub-tenants just named
‘Walter’; and the carucate of land in Leyland, near Amounderness in Lancashire,
held by a knight named ‘Walter’ is pure speculation that he was Walter de Caen, and cannot be substantiated).
Of
the manors in East Anglia, out of a total of 81 manors held by Walter, no less
than 64 were held by Robert Malet, whose own holding was 223 in East Anglia,
and they were held for the most part of the Honour of Eye which had been
created before Domesday by William Malet, Robert’s father. It is impossible
to be quite certain that every entry either under Walter de Caen or Walter,
definitely refers to him but there is no doubt that the great majority do,
and from this fact it transpires that he was by far the largest of Robert
Malet’s tenants. This in itself show that Walter held a prominent position
under the Malets either by reason of his service or relationship or more likely
both. In considering the 17 manors in Norfolk and Suffolk which were held by
Walter from other tenants-in-chief, it must be remembered that it is difficult
and often impossible to find contemporary evidence to elaborate the facts found
in Domesday and that consequently there is the possibility that all the entries
that have been gathered do not refer to Walter de Caen, and this difficulty is
increased by the difference of opinion show by the various translators of this
part of Domesday, some transcribing entries simply as ‘Walter’ while others
write ‘Walter de Caen’, when dealing with the same manor.
He
appears to have married the daughter of Edric the Falconer of Shelfanger in
Norfolk (Rawlinson MS Bod. Oxon B 78-80) who appears to have been identical
with “Edricus liber homo Edrico de Laxfelda”.
(Comment-
again, there is no evidence for this theory, only supposition.
Some
of the manors held by a ‘Walter’ in East Anglia also referred to Walter the
Crossbowman, Walter fitzGrip and Walter the Deacon, according to some Domesday
researchers.)
Domesday lands (39) attributed as being held by Walter de Caen/Walter filius Albrici (Aubrey) in the Domesday book (Domesday online- opendomesday.org, and ‘Domesday Book: A Complete Translation’):
The lands recorded
in Domesday as being held by ‘Walter filius Albrici [Aubrey]’:
Huntingfield and
Linstead [in Blything Hundred]; Capel (St Andrew) and
Loudham [in Wilford Hundred]; Butley [in Loose Hundred], Parham
[Parham Hundred], and Chilton [Babergh Hundred].
Historians have
concluded that de Caen and fitzAubrey were the same man. Confirmation charters
to Eye Priory by Popes Adrian and Alexander, list “the tithe of Roger son
of Walter in Huntingfield, Byng and Linstead”. In Domesday,
Huntingfield and Linstead were held from Robert Malet by ‘Walter fitzAlberic’,
while Byng/Bing was held by ‘Walter de Caen’, indicating they were one and the
same.
List of Lands in Suffolk/Norfolk held by just ‘Walter’ in Domesday, and which tenant-in-chief they were held from.
It is unclear which of these can be attributed to Walter de Caen
Lands held by ‘Walter’ from Robert Malet, attributed to Walter de Caen:
In
Suffolk: Cransford
(held by ‘Walter, Robert, Gilbert and Durand’, the last two possibly
Malet’s brothers), Eye, Gissing (held by ‘Walter and William’,
attributed to Walter de Caen and William Gulafre), Great Glemham, Linstead, Thorpe
[Hall], ‘Laneburc’;
Snape,
also held by ‘Walter’, but attributed to Walter fitzGrip.
In Norfolk: Burston, Roydon (Diss), Fersfield (Diss), Semere (Earsham), Shotesham, Thelveton (Diss), Saxlingham and Woodton
‘Laneburc’
in Suffolk was near Shottisham held by Walter the crossbowman, and also near
Sutton held by ‘W. de Caen’.
Thorpe
[Hall] in Clayton Hundred was
just south of the lands of Bishops Hundred, consisted of 16 acres worth 3s.,
and ‘is in the manor of Bedingfield’ held by Malet’s mother of the queen’s
fief’. Bedingfield was part of Bishop’s Hundred held by the Malets. Thorpe
Hall, was held by Walter, William Gulafre, Gilbert and Tigier from Robert
Malet.
In Essex: Colne [Engaine] from Rob Malet (attributed to de Caen)
Other lands in East Anglia held by a ‘Walter’, all held from William de Warenne, Godric the Steward and Roger Bigod, probably Walter de Caen:
In
Norfolk:
Fersfield (Diss), Colney (Humbleyard), East Carleton (Humbleyard), Hetherset
(Humbleyard), Holkham (Greenhoe), Marham (Clackclose), Methwold (Grimshoe),
Ottering [Hithe] (Grimshoe), Santon (Grimshoe), Swanton (Depwade), Tochestorp
(Forehoe), and a house in Norwich City
(NB.
the three lands in Grimshoe were just south of West Dereham- all held from
William de Warenne)
In
Suffolk:
Poslingford (Risbridge) from Ralph Baynard, Long Melford (Babergh) from Abbey
of Bury St Edmunds
In
Essex: 14
lands (held from Geoffrey de Mandeville and Swein of Essex)
In Cambridgeshire, Walter de Caen held 3 lands from Walter Gifford (Barrington, Harlton, Orwell).
A ‘William de Caen’ /'Willm de cada' held land from Malet in Thrandeston (along with Walter [the bowman] and William Gulafre), and it is unknown whether Walter de Caen and William de Caen were related, or whether this was a clerical error.
Walter de Caen’s
ancestry:
Caen was the
ducal centre of Normandy, in the Calvados department, near which the Malets
also held lands (their demesne lands being at Graville-Sainte-Honorine [Le
Havre] in the Pays-de-Caux) held by the beginning of the 11th
century. Much of their Norman honour was held by the Gifford family of Bolbec
and Longueville. Walter de Caen held 3 lands in Cambridgeshire from Walter
Gifford.
Dr. Katherine Keats-Rohan, researcher and Associate Member of the Faculty of History, Linacre College, Oxford University, who specializes in prosopography, and who has made a thorough study of all of the people named in the Domesday book, and published several books, including ‘Domesday People, A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166’, (Boydell Press 1999), p.449, wrote about Walter de Caen also listed as Walter fitzAlberic (fitzAubrey) in Domesday, and his eldest son Robert fitzWalter:
Walter de Cadomo
Walter
fitzAlberic de Cadomo [Caen], a Norman from Caen (in Calvados). Important
Domesday tenant of Robert Malet. According to a foundation narrative of Sibton
Abbey (Cart. No. 470), in 1066 Walter came to England with Robert Malet “Walterus
de Cadomo venit in Angliam cum Roberto Malet”, and afterwards held the
barony of Horsford (co. Norfolk) under Robert. Horsford was but a manor held
under the Honour of Eye by Walter’s descendants, but the word reflects the
importance of Walter’s holdings from Robert. Walter fitzAlberic attested
a gift of land to the abbey of Montivilliers made by Robert fitzTheobald of
Epouville with the consent of Walter Giffard, c.1065-76 (Jean-Michel Bouvris,
App. No 28).
Father of three
sons, Robert (ancestor of the de Chesny family), Ralph (ancestor
of the de Peyton family), and Roger (ancestor of the de Huntingfield
family).
See C.P. Lewis, “The King and Eye”, EHR
(English Historical Review), 103 (1989), 577-8;
KSB Keats-Rohan,
‘Domesday Book and the Malets’, Nottingham Medieval Studies xli (1997), 13-151.
Etc.
The following is
the entire reference to Walter de Caen accompanying Robert Malet, found in the
Sibton Abbey Cartulary, concerning the foundation of the Abbey by his
descendants (it should be noted that it does not specify that they were at the
Battle of Hastings, just that they came at that time):
Translation
In the year of the Lord in the sixty-sixth William the leader of the Normans came to England to kill Harold at time of the conquest crowned king, at which time a certain Walter of Caen came with Robert Malet count of Cornwall (erroneously called Count of Cornwall- The honour of Eye was first attached to the Earldom of Cornwall in 1221, which probably accounts for the clerical error). (Brown, Philippa, ed. ‘Sibton Abbey Cartularies and Charters’. Vol. III. p.2, No. 470, Suffolk Charter Series [Vol. 9], Woodbridge: Boydell for Suffolk Records Society, 1985. 2004.)
Notably, Walter de Caen had died before Robert Malet’s foundation charter to Eye Priory c.1103-05. Walter’s two sons, Robertus filius Walteri and Rogerus filius Walteri de Huntingfield witnessed Malet’s charter and Roger donated tithes from his demesne of Huntingfield, Linstead and Byng to Eye Priory, and they were therefore adults (viz. born c.1070’s).
SONS of WALTER DE
CAEN
1.Robert fitzWalter -eldest son of Walter de Caen
Katherine Keats-Rohan, Domesday
People, A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066-1166’,
(Boydell Press 1999), p.449:
Robert
fitzWalter de Cadomo, son of Walter fitz Alberic of
Caen. He married Sibil, daughter (and heiress) of Ralph de Chesney, by whom he
had issue Margaret, wife of Haimo de St. Clair, Simon, Roger, John, and
William surnamed de Chesney. Founder with his wife of the priory of Horsham
St. Faith, a cell of the abbey of Conques.
He married
secondly Avelina, daughter and co-heiress of Ernulf I de Hesdin, by whom he had
further issue Peter and Helias.
Brown, Eye Priory Cartulary
(1992-94), no. 1; Brown, Sibton Abbey Cartularies and Charters (1987),
nos 470, 547; Cronne/Davis, RRAN III, nos 15,108, 152-56, 159, 289,
353-54, 418, 585, 752; Douglas, Feudal Documents from Bury St Edmunds,
nos 36, 39-41, 50-53, 61, 108, 109, 125; Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicorum,
III, p. 86, no. VII, p. 636, no. II, p. 637, no. III; Hart, Cartularium
Monasterii de Ramseia, no. LXXXI; Pipe Roll 31 Henry I, 52-sr, 90-nfsf,
97-sf; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. Hall (1897), p. 402; Stanton, English
Feudalism, App., no.12.
This son named Robert, known as Robert fitzWalter, founded Horsford Abbey and Horsham St Faith in Norfolk (both lands held in Domesday by Robert Malet and subsequently gifted by Robert Malet to de Caen and his descendants) “in the time of King Henry I, the sixth year of his raigne”, and Sibton Abbey (Sibton came from de Caen’s Domesday holdings; Sibton Abbey Cartularies and Charters V.3 p.2), was founded by Robert’s son William de Chesney in 1150.
Robert was also sheriff of
Norfolk and Suffolk until Michaelmas 1129- he remained liable in 1130 for 22
marks from the profits of the county and hundreds-courts (Pipe Roll, 31 Henry
I, pp.90,97 [Regesta Regum Anglo-Normann v.2, p.252]).
His youngest son, William, by
his first wife took her surname ‘de Chesney’.
His second wife Avelina was
married firstly to Alan fitzFlaad (their descendants were the Stewart Kings of
Scotland, and FitzAlan Earls of Arundel). Alan FitzFlaad died c.1123, and
Robert married his widow c.1126 (grant of their church at Chipping Norton to
Gloucester Abbey- Regesta Regum V.2, p.296)
Robert’s two sons, John
fitzRobert and William de Chesney succeeded him as sheriff of Norfolk and
Suffolk during the reign of King Stephen.
Note: The editor of the Sibton Cartularies and Charters, Phillipa Brown gives a different genealogy of Robert fitzWalter (to that of Katherine Keats-Rohan), in which she references her sources:
issue of Sibil: Roger dsp.;
John fitzRobert/John de Chesney sheriff of Norfolk/Suffolk, d.1146 dsp.;
William de Caisneto/Chesney Lord of Horsford, sheriff of
Norfolk/Suffolk, b.c.1115 Horsford, d.1174 Colne Engaine Essex; Elias; and
Peter
(NB. Colne Engaine, Essex,
held by Walter de Caen in Domesday from Robert Malet)
issue of Avelina: Margaret
and Simon
It would appear that Brown's genealogy came from an interesting article written by JH Round, "The Origin of the Stewarts and their Chesney Connection", published in The Genealogist, NS, Vol.18, 1 (1902) (website 'Foundation for Medieval Genealogy'/fmg), which discusses the issue of Robert fitzWalter and confirms the above-named issue of each wife. He also produced the following family tree of Walter de Caen:
Round wrote: Alan fitzFlaald (ancestor of the
Stewart kings) was survived by his widow Avelina, daughter of Ernulf de
Hesdin, who became the wife of Robert fitz Walter, who joined with her
in confirming to St. Peter’s Abbey, Gloucestershire in 1126, the church of
(Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire. Which had been given long before by her mother
Emmeline, wife of Ernulf de Hesdin. Robert fitzWalter, the husband of Alan’s widow
was a man of some consequence, who enjoyed the favour of Henry I. Robert
fitzWalter’s lands can be traced back to 1086, when they were held of Robert
Malet by his ancestor Walter de Caen (Cadomo) in the three eastern counties.
The cartularies of Castle Acre Priory and of St John’s Abbey, Colchester. The former contains a charter granted by William Bardulf* “pro anima Alani filio Flaaldi et pro anima (A) Roberti filii Walteri et (B) Johannis filii ejus et por anima (C) Willelmi de Chaineto” which is confirmed by “Willelmus filius Roberti filii Walteri. The Colchester cartulary contains mention of Robert Fitzwalter and Aveline, his wife.
Although William bore the name “de Chesney”, he
derived it not from his father, but from his mother Sybil. That Robert
fitzWalter had two wives, of whom Sybil (de Chesney) was the first and Avelina
(widow of Alan fitzFlaald) the second is proved by an extract from the Thetford
Register:
“Ego Robertus filius Walteri pro salute anime mee et uxor[um]
meorum Sibillie et Aveline et infantum meorum” (Lansdowne, MS 229, fo.146)
In a charter in the Colchester Cartulary, dealing with
the manor of Ling, to which William Bardulf* is the first witness, William “de
Chaineto”, as he there styles himself, mentions his brothers John, Roger,
Helyas (Elias) and William, as well as Margaret his sister. Again,
as William “vicecomes de Norwico,” he mentions all four in a charter relating
to his manor of “Hou” and among the witnesses to the charter is “Petrus
frater meus.” In a further charter by his sister Margaret (married to Hamon
de St Clare), the second witness was “Symon frater meus”, and as “Simon
de Caisneto” he testified to Archbishop Theobald and the Biship of Norwich that
his sister Margaret had given the manor in her last illness. Simon acquired “the
Honour of Mileham” which had been held by Alan fitzFlaald.
(*William Bardulf, Lord of Bardulf (d.1174), son of
Akaris fitzBardulf, of Ravensworth, brother of Hervey fitzAkaris and Walter
fitzAkaris, was joint sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk (1169-1174) with Bartholomew
de Glanville and Vinar Capellanus.)
The Sibton Abbey
Cartularies and Charters, part I, (ed. Philippa Brown, 1985, p.7+ [
Ancestry.com]) discusses the foundation of the abbey in 1150 by William de
Chesney, grandson of Walter de Caen, and the issue of Robert filius Walter de
Caen.
It is no easy
task to uncover the line of William de Chesney, the founder of Sibton. The
first recorded member of this family is Walter de Caen, Domesday under-tenant
and paternal grandfather of William de Chesney. Unfortunately, however, little
is known about him. According to Domesday Book, Walter de Caen, or Walter, was
an important under-tenant of Robert Malet in Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex. (In
Domesday, no tenant is recorded on Malet’s lands in Horsford and Horsham St
Faith both of which were certainly held by Walter’s son, Robert. The lands held
of the honour of Eye were afterwards called the barony of Horsford, where there
is a castle, and consisted of ten knight’s fees which descended to Walter’s
grandson William, and afterwards to William’s son-in-law Robert I son of Roger
(second husband of William’s daughter Margaret. Walter was also a tenant of the
honour of Clare at Helmingham in Suffolk, of which honour his grandson William
was also a tenant. Nothing is known of Waler before the Conquest. As to his
career afterwards, J.H. Round in an interesting footnote suggested
‘speculatively’ that the Walter at the Kentford gathering of the magnates of
the adjacent counties in 1080, who was acting as a deputy for sheriffs Roger
and Robert, might be none other than Walter de Caen. (Round, ‘The Early
Sheriffs’, p488)
The only known
child of Walter de Caen is Robert son of Walter, the founder’s father. Robert
succeeded Walter after 1087 and lived on into Stephen’s reign since two writs
of that king were addressed to him. In 1138 his son John witnessed a charter of
Stephen to Eye when it is likely that Robert was dead. Robert son of Walter is
the first member of his family to have certainly entered royal administrative
service when he was sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, establishing a precedent to
be followed by his descendants. He may have become sheriff as early as 1111 and
certainly not long after, and held the office until Michaelmas 1129. Afterwards
Robert may possibly have served as an itinerant justice. He married twice.
Sybil, his first wife, whom William de Chesney named as his mother in a charter
to Horsham St Faith priory, came from a family of similar status to Robert’s own.
She was the daughter of Ralph I de Chesney, Domesday under-tenant of William de
Warenne in the counties of Norfolk and Sussex. Ralph came from le Quesnai near
Sens, the fief from which the family took its name. This family were
benefactors of the Warenne Cluniac foundation of Lewes in Sussex, and one of
its members, William de Chesney, son of Ralph I de Chesney, founded an
Augustinian priory at Rudham, Norfolk in 1140. This priory, better known as
Coxford Priory, was moved to that place early in the reign of Henry III. The
foundation was made for the health of the souls of the founder’s father and
mother, his brother Ralph II and all his brothers and sisters.
Robert and Sybil were married in 1105 when jointly they founded the priory of Horsham St Faith in Norfolk. However, Sybil was dead by 1126 when Robert appears with his second wife Aveline confirming a grant to Gloucester abbey. Avelin was the daughter or Ernulph de Hesdin. Aveline was the widow of Alan fitzFlaald who had benefited from the favour of Henry I early in his reign and had risen suddenly as a result.
In association with his first wife Sybil, Robert made the first family foundation, the Benedictine priory of Horsham St Faith. According to the ‘Fundationis Historia’ of this house, Robert and Sybil went on pilgrimage to Rome in the 6th year of Henry I. On their way home they were set upon, robbed by thieves and finally imprisoned by brigands, until by a miracle, they were rescued from this fate by St Faith. Filled with gratitude they vowed to found a house on their manor of Horsford and dedicate it to the saint, as a cell to Conques, on their return home Presumably the first grant was made late in the year 1105.
A record
survives of a grant of Robert to the Cluniac priory of Thetford for the souls
of his two wives, Sybil and Aveline, and of his children. In the cartulary of
the Benedictine priory of Earl’s Colne there are two references of a gift
(presumably the same) by Robert of one acre in Colne Engaine, Essex.
From both marriages Robert had children. From his first marriage to Sybil de Chesney there were at least two other sons apart from William and possibly four. The first of these appears to have been Roger of whom little is known. The few references that there are of him speak as if he was the eldest son. The cartularies of Sibton mention him first and he is the only son actually named in the foundation charter of Horsham St Faith. He appears to have died without issue, and presumably before his father since there is no suggestion that he ever held the family lands. His brother William de Chesney made two grants to St John’s Colchester for his soul. Robert’s second son, John, is better documented. He first occurs before 1125 amongst those witnessing on behalf of his father in a charter of the abbot of St Benet’s of Hulme. He held the family lands from his father’s death until his own death which according to Thomas of Monmouth took place in 1146 or 1147. As his father had been, John was sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, and it seems that he held the office by 1140 when in a charter of Stephen to St Benet’s he was named as sheriff, and he was still sheriff at the time of his death which according to Thomas of Monmouth was ‘ a worthy punishment by God’ because of his protection of the Jews, the supposed murderers of the boy saint William, and his interference in the election of William de Turbe to the bishopric of Norwich. During his life John is said to have granted 60 acres of land at Horsford and Horsham to his parents’ foundation of Horsham St Faith and to have confirmed their grants. John is not known to have married and he died without issue.
Two other sons
of Robert, Peter and Elias, may also have been children of his first marriage.
The only mention of them occurs in charters of William de Chesney, their
brother, by which he made grants to St. John’s, Colchester, for their welfare.
A reference to
Margaret, daughter of Robert, is also to be found in a charter of William de
Chesney in the Colchester cartulary. In a grant to this house, Margaret named
her father as Robert, her mother as Aveline, her brothers as William and John,
as well as another brother Simon. Margaret married Hamon de St Clair, sheriff
of Essex in 1127, and bailiff of Colchester between 1128 and 1130 and quite
possibly later. Margaret was Hamon’s second wife. She died shortly after making
a grant to Colchester which was confirmed by her husband who also died c.1150.
The same grant was also confirmed by Margaret’s brother Simon de Chesney whom
Round showed to be the son of Robert son of Walter by his second wife Aveline
and to be identical with Simon of Norfolk who appears in the Castle Acre
cartulary holding the honour of Mileham in Stephen’s reign. In his charters to
St John’s Colchester, William de Chesney also mentioned one other brother,
another William, whose name implies that he was possibly another son of
Robert’s second marriage. William took the name of Chesney from his mother’s
family (as even more curiously did his half-brother, Simon son of Aveline, who
was only related by marriage to the Chesney family). William also occurs under
the guise of a variety of other names. He used his father’s name calling
himself William son of Robert son of Walter. On other occasions he called
himself William the sheriff or William of Norwich, which as Round pointed out
was ‘parallel with the cases in which the capital of a county was used as a
surname by the holders of more or less hereditary shrievalties. etc.
According to the
tradition of Sibton Abbey, the foundation of a Cistercian house was the
fulfilment of a vow William had made to his brother John as the latter lay on
his death-bed as the atonement for John’s sins during peace-time when he was
sheriff and during the war. William, the founder of Sibton Abbey, granted all his
demesne in Sibton, Wrabton, Peasenhall and Stickingland with land in Dunwich.
In Sibton, the founder’s grandfather (Walter) held a number of small manors at
the time of the Domesday survey and another in Strickland. The grant was explicitly
said to be free of all service, scutage and military service, castle -guard and
all aids.
(The following family tree is
then produced on p.8, Sibton Cartularies v.1)
Richard Mortimer in his
Leiston and Butley Cartularies, discusses donors to Leiston Abbey:
Roger de Cheney
or ‘Kedney’ granted Leiston some land in an unspecified village (Charter No.
59, before 1225), and agreed to rent land belonging to Middleton church in
Charter No. 13 (Roger received 3 acres of ‘free land’ of Middleton church in
Fordley for 12d annually c.1205-24). Perhaps he was related to the
distinguished family of Chesney, or ‘de Caisneto’; if so, his connection with
the Leiston area could stem from William de Kesneto/Chesney, alias William of
Norwich, who held Blythburgh for the service of one knight by gift of Henry II.
In 1211 Margaret of this family held Blythburgh; a Roger is found confirming to
Blythburgh Priory the gifts of his mother Emma in Cove, and confirming and
granting land in Darsham.
‘An Essay toward a topographical history of the co. of Norfolk’, V.10, by Francis Blomefield, (London 1808), pp.432-437 describes HORSFORD:
Robert Malet,
baron of Eye in Suffolk, had a grant of this town [Horsford], for his eminent
services to the Conqueror, on the deprivation of Edric (of Laxfield), lord of
it in King Edward’s reign, when there were 2 carucates and an half, etc.
Robert Lord
Malet, enfeoffed one of his knights, Walter de Cadomo who attended him into
England at the Conquest, of this lordship, which was called the barony of
Horsford, to be held of the honor of Eye; and here this Walter built a castle,
whose ruins, Camden says in his Britannia, were then overgrown with bushes and
briars, and laid a large park or chase around it, in some deeds called the
forest of Horsford. Robert son of Walter, married Sybilla, daughter and heiress
of Ralph de Chesney, and is often called Robert FitzWalter, and was founder of
Horsham priory, etc.
‘Monasticon Anglicanum’, Vol III, p635- Priory of St Faith at Horsham in Norfolk:
The priory of
St. Faith at Horsham was founded by Robert FitzWalter and Sibill de Caineto his
wife, A.D.1105. The continuator of Blomefield calls him Robert de Cadomo or
Caen, son of Walter de Cadomo lord of Horsford. An old English manuscript
copied by Dugdale states that Robert FitzWalter and his wife, returning through
France and Rome, where they had been in pilgrimage, were set upon by robbers
and imprisoned, till by their prayers to God and St Faith the virgin they were
miraculously delivered; after which, visiting the shrine of St Faith at the
abbey of Conches in France, and being there kindly entertained, they vowed on
their return into England to build a religious house. This vow they performed:
edifying a small monastery at Horsham, and annexing it as a cell to the abbey
of Conches. In 1163, this foundation was confirmed by a bull from Pope
Alexander the Third. Other confirmations are also recorded from descendants of
the founder. John son of Robert fitzWalter, by a deed, without date,
gave 60 acres of land in Horsford and Horsham to this priory, confirming at the
same time the grant of his father and mother. William, another of the founder’s
sons, also confirmed the donations of his father and mother, in the time of
King Stephen. William, the son of Robert and grandson of Walter, also gave them
certain land in Helgetun, with the advowson of the church, and the advowsons of
the churches of St Martin in the Bailey and St Michael in Iberstrete in
Norwich.
Eye Priory,
Charter No. 22- Precept of Stephen count of Boulogne and Mortain
to Robert son of Walter/Roberto filio Walteri, to allow the prior and
monks to hold their lands and property as they held them on the day when he
last crossed the sea.
Dated 1125-1129.
(Notes: Robert
son of Walter [de Caen] was sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk until Michaelmas
1129 [see Sibton Cart, i, p9]
Roberto filio
Walteri also witnessed Charter No. 16: Notification by
King Stephen confirming to the church of Eye all the holding of Benedict the
chaplain in Stoke Ash, signed at Cambridge 1136-c.1138. The editor noted that
Robert son of Walter was probably dead by 1138 when his son John witnesses
Charter No.15. (for Robert’s career, see Cartulary Sibton, 1, p.9)
Eye Priory
Charter No. 15- Robert’s son John, Johanne filio
Rotberti vicec(omitis), witnessed Stephen’s Confirmation Charter
No. 15 to the monks of Eye of all their possessions, dated after Nov
1137.
Interestingly,
in this charter, Hubert Walter’s tithe of Snapeshall in Fressingfield was not
mentioned, but “3s worth of land which John son of Robert holds” was
added to the donations (‘quas tenet Johannes filii Rotberti’), witnessed
by Johanne filio Rotberti vicec(ometis)- ie. sheriff; also
witnessed by William filio Rogeri (de Huntingfield), and Herv(eio)
de Glanvilla;
with Note: In
the witnessing of John son of Robert it is unclear whether the title sheriff
refers to his father or whether John had succeeded his father and become
sheriff by this date. He was certainly sheriff by 1140 (see Sibton Cart, I,
p.12)
Whether this
donation referred to the entry in the original charter to Eye, “his tithe at
Huntingfield by Robert Malus nepos”, and witnessed by Robertus filius
Walteri, is uncertain.
Robert
fitzWalter elder son of de Caen, was sheriff of Norfolk/Suffolk from c.1115
until 1129, and it would appear from the above charter, again in 1136 (No. 16),
as were his sons John and William who were successive sheriffs from 1137/38 and
1140, 1146 +
Refs: ‘Proceedings of the Battle Conference 1991’, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, p.99; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum 1066-1154, iii, Nos 288,289 and 399; Eye Priory Cartulary, pt 1, pp.28-29, 31-32, Nos 15, 16, 22)
The following
entry is in ‘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:
Roger Gulafre
renders account of 15 silver marks for breach of the peace. In pardon by the
king’s writ to the same Roger 15 silver marks for love of the count of Mortain.
(viz. future King Stephen). And he is quit.
And the same
sheriff renders account of £25.15s of the lawmen of the county and the
hundreds. In the treasury £4.8s.4d. And in pardon by the king’s writ to the
bishop of Ely 10 silver marks of his men.
And he owes £14.
13s. 4d. And Robert son of Walter ought to pay.
(Roger Gulafre,
son and heir of William Gulafre, of Okenhill in Badingham in Bishops Hundred,
co Suffolk; Roger was seneschal of Eye, and sheriff late in Stephen’s reign, in
the early 1150’s)
Brown (Eye
Cart.) also discusses the Honour of Eye and of Lancaster, p23-25:
King Henry I
held the honor of Eye for seven years and Stephen who first as count and
afterwards as king held the same honor for 22 years. Robert Malet’s heir in
Normandy was not allowed to succeed in England, giving a death of c.1106 for
the passing of the honor to the Crown. Henry gave the honor of Eye to count
Stephen in c.1113. He was in possession of the honor of Lancaster by 1115/16.
In this period, the Sackville family, (their father having held lands of
Eudo dapifer in various counties in 1186), possibly by gift of Henry I but
more likely of count Stephen, were given fees both of the honor of Eye and of
Lancaster. Similarly with the Blund family. The joint lordship of the lands
of Eye with those of Lancaster in East Anglia in the late 11th and
early 12th centuries resulted in a considerable body of fees,
particularly in Suffolk, which added to the fortunes of several families. Ernald
(Ruffus) the son of ‘Roger son of Ernald/Arnold’ the Domesday tenant of
Roger the Poitevin, was given the fee-farm of the manor of Stradbroke by
count Stephen. Roger of Huntingfield held one knight’s fee of
Lancaster in Mendham, and his father Walter fitzAubrey [deCaen] had been a
considerable tenant of Robert Malet.
Notes: though we
can be certain Roger held Mendham from a confirmation of king Stephen to
Roger’s son William, it is not possible to say whether the fee was given to the
family by Roger the Poitevin (or Robert Malet who also held part
of Mendham), Henry I or count Stephen. No tenant is recorded as holding of
Roger the Poitevin in 1086 in Mendham. (NB. Two other parts of Mendham were
held by Robert Malet in 1086, part held by Humphrey filius Robert as sub-tenant).
Notably, both of
de Caen’s sons were granted fees after Domesday- Robert fitzWalter, the
fee of Horsham St Faith and Horsford in Norfolk (held in Domesday by
Robert Malet, and later granted to de Caen by Malet), while Roger de
Huntingfield gained Mendham which was held in Domesday by Robert
Malet and Roger the Poitevin. Both families founded priories at Horsham St
Faith and Mendham.
‘The King and
Eye: a study in Anglo-Norman politics’, by C.P. Lewis,
(The English Historical Review No. CCCCXII- July 1989, Oxford Univ. Press)
pp.577-580, 588, concerning Robert fitzWalter and Roger fitzWalter:
Charter of Roger the Poitevin
and his wife Almodis, Count and Countess of La Marche, to the monastery of
Charroux: …. Decimam quoque de omni terra quam Robertus filius Galteri
habebat in Framilingaam et in Flemiorza, similiter decimam quam Rotgerius
filius Galterii habebat in terra que dicitur Benga.
What is known of the careers of Robert Malet and Roger the Poitevin after 1087 shows that their fortunes mirrored one another. Malet was out of favour with William Rufus and in with Henry I; Count Roger was close to William Rufus but did not retain his position for long under Henry. Rufus took the honor of Eye away from Robert and gave it to Roger, while Henry I deprived Roger of Eye in order to restore it to Robert. The primary evidence comes from the church of Saint-Sauveur, Charroux, one of the most important monasteries in Roger the Poitevin’s wife’s county of La Marche. Count Roger’s grant is thought to date c.1094. Henry I’s confirmation charter dates c.1102, however it was only a partial confirmation of Roger the Poitevin’s grants to Charroux. He did not confirm the grants made out of the honor of Eye, presumably because they had already been restored with the honor to Robert Malet or directly to the priory.
None of the
identified places, apart from one, had been Roger the Poitevin’s in 1086, but
several were part of or associated with the Malet family’s honor of Eye. The
churches of Barrowby and Segebrook (Lincs.) had been on demesne manors of
Robert Malet. Robert fitzWalter’s/ ‘Robertus
filius Galterii’ tithes of Framalingaham and Flemworth (1 ½ miles SE
of Eye, probably the 30 acres held by Walter de Caen in Eye, Suffolk) were
derived from estates held of the honor by Robert’s father Walter de Caen. Roger
fitzWalter’s/ ‘Rotgerius filius Galterii’ tithes at
Bing (Suffolk) were from another Eye manor which had belonged to his father
Walter de Caen. Finally, Count Roger and his Countess Almodis’s charter to
Charroux was issued at Stradbroke (Suffolk), one of Robert Malet’s
largest demesne manors in 1086.
The honor of Eye
was clearly back in Malet’s hands when he died, probably in 1106, and Roger the
Poitevin’s grants to Charroux out of the priory’s endowment were back in the
priory’s possession, probably under Henry I. Robert Malet was present at Henry
I’s coronation and attested Henry’s coronation charter (Regesta,ii, no.488)
within three days of William Rufus’ death in the New Forest in 1100, and was
one of his closet counsellors during the rest of his own life. (Hollister,
‘Henry I and Robert Malet’, pp.115-20)
Robert
fitzWalter, son of one of Malet’s barons (viz. Walter de
Caen) evidently witnessed a charter of Count Roger in favour of Shrewsbury
Abbey between 1093 and 1101 (Cartulary of Shrewsbury Abbey, ii, no.371 [1975])
Robert
fitzWalter afterwards gave the tithes of Flemworth to his own priory of Horsham
St Faith (Norfolk) usually said to have been founded in 1105, though the
foundation charter can be dated 1111-1119.
Robert fitzWalter also founded
the church of St Peter at Sibton in the time of William Rufus. The lands of Sibton
were held by his father Walter de Caen from Robert Malet in Domesday:
In Sibton, Walter de Caen
holds the manor with 25 acres, 1 bordar, half a plough in demesne. 1 acre of
meadow. Worth 4s. 1 church. In the same vill 1 carucate of land and 20 acres as
a manor, 4 villans, 10 bordars. 2 ploughs in demesne and 2 ploughs belonging to
the men. Woodland from 60 pigs 4 acres of meadow. 2 horses and 7 head of
cattle. 26 pigs. 50 sheep. Worth 40s. Walter de Caen holds this from Robert
Malet. In the same vill 25 acres as a manor. 3 bordars, half a plough 1 acre of
meadow, 1 horse. Worth 4s. Walter holds this from Malet. In the same vill,
Eadric held 16 acres of land 1 bordar woodland for 12 pigs. 2 acres of meadow.
Worth 3s. In the same vill, Aelfric held 60 acres TRE as a manor. 2 bordars. 2
ploughs in demesne 1 acre of meadow. 13 sheep 6 goats Worth 16s. Walter holds
this from Malet.
When Robert died, his son John
filius Robert (the sheriff) inherited the Barony of Horsford. After some time,
when he was stricken with a grave illness, he bethought himself to construct a
Cistercian abbey in atonement for his many evil deeds both in times pf peace
and war. Knowing that he could not live long, he made his brother and heir
William de Chesney (or de Cayneto) promise to perform what he had vowed, to
complete and construct the Cistercian abbey. Then after John died, William held
the barony, and after some time ruled the county as William vicecomes/sheriff.
He, mindful of the welfare of his brother’s soul, fulfilled his promise and
founded the abbey of St Mary of Sibton with the normal complement of 13 monks,
granting his lands at Sibton and his charter of confirmation dated 1149.
(Wikipedia, Monasticon
Anglicanum, V, p.560, ‘Houses of Cistercian monks: Abbey of Sibton
in W. Page (ed.) ‘A History of the County of Suffolk, V.2 (1975)
pp.89-91 (British History online)
2.Roger de Huntingfield (Roger
fitzWalter)- second son of Walter de Caen
In Domesday, Huntingfield and Linstead were held by ‘Walter fitzAubrey/Walterus filius Albrici’ from Robert Malet, while Bing was held by Walter de Caen/Walterus de cadam, again from Malet, and as all three manors were held by Walter’s son Roger de Huntingfield, it therefore appears to prove that Walter de Caen was also named Walter fitzAubrey.
Walter fitzAubrey de Caen’s
second son, Roger de Huntingfield was ancestor of the de Huntingfield
family of Suffolk, whose lands, specifically Huntingfield and Linstead and Byng/Bing,
were inherited from Walter de Caen’s/fitzAubrey’s Domesday holdings under
Robert Malet. These were substantial holdings which became the demesne manor of
the de Huntingfield family for generations. According to Katherine Keats Rohan,
Roger married Emma (?) daughter of Guy de Craon, a Breton, and his wife the
daughter of Hugh fitzBaldric.
De Huntingfield descendants
founded Mendham Priory and Bing/Byng/Bungay Priory in Suffolk.
As outlined above, Roger the Poitevin made a donation to the abbey of Charroux in 1091-1102 (c.1094), to which ‘Rotgerius filius Galterii’/ Roger fitzWalter donated the tithe of his land called Benga which is the tithe of the manor of Byng/Bing in Pettistree, recovered by Robert Malet from Roger de Poitevin after 1100. Roger fitzWalter’s brother ‘Robertus filius Galterii’/Robert fitzWalter also donated tithes in Framlingham and Flemworth (near Eye) to Charroux abbey.
In Robert Malet’s charter to Eye Priory c.1103, Roger de Huntingfield/ ‘Rogerus filius Walteri de Huntingfield’ donated two thirds of his tithe of the demesne of Huntingfield, Linstead and Byng.
While the original Charter of Robert Malet to Eye Priory listed “his tithe of the demesne of Huntingfield, Linstead and Byng (in Pettestree) by Roger de Huntingfield” who witnessed the charter as Rogerus filius Walteri de Huntingefeud, later confirmation charters to Eye by Popes Adrian and Alexander, list the tithe of Roger son of Walter in Huntingfield, Byng and Linstead/ “decimam Rogeri filii Walteri de Huntingfeldia, decimam dominio de Benges et de Linestede”.
In King Stephen’s confirmation
charter to Eye Priory c.1136 (Eye Cart. No. 15), he confirmed the
donation of ‘Decimam quoque (the tithe of) Rogeri filii Walteri de
Huntingefeld et de Benges’, and introduced the new donation of ‘iii
solidatas quas tenet Johnanes filii Rodberti’ (viz. 3
shillings that John son of Robert [fitzWalter de Caen] holds), which was then
witnessed by Johanne filio Rotberti vicecomitis (ie. Sheriff), and Willelmo
filio Rogeri (de Huntingfield). John had succeeded his father Robert filius
Walter as sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk.
Other witnesses included Henry
nephew of King Stephen (future Henry II), William Martel (Stephen’s
dapifer/steward), Robert fitzRichard (de Clare, of Little Dunmow, Essex-
d.1136), John the Marshall, Hubert II de Montecanisy, Hervey de Glanville and
Adam Belnaco.
According to Vivien Brown in the Eye Priory Cartulary and Charters II, p.72:
Huntingfield,
Linstead and Byng were lands which the father of Roger, Walter, held of Robert
Malet and which formed the bulk of the 7 knight’s fees held of the Honor of Eye
by the Huntingfield family (Eye Fees Roll- ESRO, MS HD 1538/216/1).
Domesday Book: A Complete Translation (ed. Dr. Ann Williams & Prof. G.H. Martin, 2003, pp.1208,1216) - Huntingfield, Linstead and Bing in Suffolk:
A Topographical and
Genealogical History of the County of Suffolk: Huntingfield, (by Augustine Page 1847
p.242):
Soon after the conquest, Roger,
lord of the manor of Huntingfield, assumed the name of his lordship, and
devised the same to William de Huntingfield, his son and successor;
founder of Mendham Priory, in King Stephen’s reign, about the year 1140, and
who deceased in 1155.
Roger II de Huntingfield, William’s son and heir,
flourished in the reign of Henry II; whose son William II [de Huntingfield],
was one of the Barons who signed Magna Carta, in the 17th of King
John, 1215. He was sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, and an accountant with Alberic
de Vere, Earl of Oxford, and others, for the customs of those counties. In the
14th of King Henry III, Roger III de Huntingfield, his son
and heir, purchased Huntingfield Hall in Norfolk, of John de Lacy. William
III de Huntingfield was his son and heir; and in the 7th Edward
I, an agreement was made between this William de Huntingfeld and John de Engaine,
and enrolled, that Roger, eldest son of William should marry Joan, the eldest
daughter of the said John. This William deceased about the 11th of
the said King. Roger IV de Huntingfield his son succeeded. In 31 King
Edward I, he held this manor of the King ‘in capite’ as of the honour of Eye,
by the service of one Knight’s fee, and the fourth part of a Knight’s fee, and
decease about that period. William IV de Huntingfield his son and heir
succeeded, and deceased in the 7th King Edward II, leaving Roger
V his son and heir about 8 years of age. When of age he was siezed of the manors of
Huntingfield, Benges and harham and deceased in the 11th of King
Edward III, leaving William V his son and heir aged 7 years. Whereupon,
in the inquisition in the 50th year of Edward III, the feoffees of
the said William Lord Huntingfield, long before his decease, became settled on
William de Ufford, Earl of Suffolk for life.
‘The History and Antiquities of the County of Suffolk’, Volume 2, by Rev. Alfred Suckling, published in 1848, p404-409, discusses the land of Huntingfield, a manor held by Eadric of Laxfield, 6 carucates plus a further 255 acres valued at £10 in 1086:
Given to Robert
Malet Lord of the Honour of Eye, whose under-tenant was Walter son of Albricus (de
Caen).
Roger de
Huntingfield (d.1301) son of William de Huntingfield (d.1283- descendants
of Roger de Huntingfield I) was seized of the manor of Huntingfield in
Suffolk, being held of the King, in capite as of the Honour of Eye, by the
service of one knight’s fee, and the fourth part of a fee (Harl. MSS 708).
William de
Huntingfield, his son and heir died 7th of Edward II and in the
following year it was returned that he held of the manor of Huntingfield of
the King, in capite, as of the Honour of Eye, by the service of 6 knight’s fees,
and 8s. and 4p. for castle- ward of the castle of Eye. He was also seized of
the manor of Mendham in Suffolk.
Roger de Huntingfield,
his son and heir, aged 7 years, being then seized, inter alia, of the manors of
Huntingfield, Benges and Horham, made proof of his age in 25th
of Edward III (1242), had livery of his lands.
(meaning of ‘in
capite’: an ancient tenure whereby a man held lands of the King immediately
as of his Crown, whether by Knight’s Service, or socage.)
This is a
significant and important example of lands held by successive generations of
one family, held ‘in capite, as of the Honor of Eye, by the service of Knight’s
fees’, probably granted by Stephen who held the Honor of Eye, yet of lands
originally held by their ancestor Walter de Caen in Domesday.
Phillipa Brown
in Sibton Cartularies (p.64), discusses contributors to Sibton:
‘Roger of Huntingfield’
who granted free drovage and transit in Huntingfield and Linstead. It is most
likely he is Roger III, son and heir of William II of Huntingfield who in 1221
gave 100m for livery of his inheritance. He died in or before 10 July 1257
holding 2 ¾ fees in Lincolnshire of Petronilla de Vaux, another manor in that
county, 1 fee in Mendham of the honour of Lancaster, and the manors of Byng and
Huntingfield of the honour of Eye. His great grandfather William I of
Huntingfield and founded Mendham priory. He is unusual in that, unlike other
benefactors of Sibton, he had demonstrable interests in another Cistercian
house since he was also a benefactor of Kirkstead Abbey, where his family had
had interests since the early part of the reign of Henry II when his ancestor,
a William son of Roger of Huntingfield, had also granted land in Lincolnshire
to that house. Roger II was also a benefactor of Bungay nunnery.
(Notably, Brown
does not indicate that the de Huntingfields were closely related to the Lords
of Horsford, nor does she note that Huntingfield, Linstead and Byng were lands
held by Walter de Caen in Domesday.)
Roger de Huntingfield (I)’s grandson, also named Roger de Huntingfield II (son of William de Huntingfield I), was a close associate of Peter Walter, a witness to three charters, Byng, Mendham, and Eye Priories (Cartulary Charter No. 31, ie. witness in 1199 with Wm de Huntingfield to a grant in free arms by Henry duke of Lotharingia, margrave of the roman empire and lord of the honor of Eye to the monks, of the land of Dosolf in Eye).
The following de Huntingfield
family tree is given in Monasticon Anglicanum, v.5 p.56- Charter to Mendham,
beginning with Roger’s son William de Huntingfield who founded Mendham Priory
c.1140:
The fitzRocelin
family of Linstead and Hollesley
In Robert Malet’s Charter to Eye, ‘Jocelin of Hollesley’ donated ‘the tithe of 100 acres in Huntingfield’. In a later confirmation of this Charter (No. 3 c.1123, Henry I), it states: ‘the tithe of Rocelin in Huntingfield’, while Roger de Huntingfield gave two-thirds of his tithe of the demesne of Huntingfield, Linstead and Byng (in Pettistree) to Eye.
A Confirmation
Charter by the bishop of Norwich in 1155 specified ‘the tithe of the demesne
of Rocelin of Linstead (in Huntingfield)’.
Henry I’s
confirmation charter (c.1125-35) states, “the tithe of Rocelin of
Huntingfield”.
William Turbe
bishop of Norwich’s confirmation charter of c.1155-65 stated: “the tithe of
the demesne of Rocelin of Linstead”. And Pope Adrian IV (1155) also stated:
“the tithe of Rocelin of Huntingfield”.
Both Huntingfield and Linstead, listed together in the Domesday Book as they are adjacent, were Walter de Caen holdings from Robert Malet, while Hollesley was held by Robert de Glanville from Malet in Domesday, but was held by Rocelin in Malet’s Eye Charters.
In later Charters associated with the de Huntingfields, witnesses include William and Robert, sons of Rocelin (Mendham Priory Ch. II & IV) along with Peter Walter.
Whether Jocelin/Rocelin was another son of Walter de Caen, or a close relation of the de Huntingfields, is undetermined, but the fact that he had received part of the large Huntingfield estate which was wholly held by Walter de Caen from Malet, would suggest it is so.
V. Browne in the Eye Priory Cartulary, p55: Sutton- almost certainly Sutton near Hollesley, held of Robert Malet in 1086 by Walter de Caen and his descendants. The manor was held of the family by the fitzRocelins who gave the fee farm of it to the Hollesley family (see Leiston Cartulary No 73.)
Philippa Brown in Sibton Cartularies (Pt I,p.90+):
William II son
of William son of Roscelin, who adopted
the surname fitzRocelin, held one knight’s fee in Hainford, Norfolk, of William
Blund of the honour of Lancaster, and land in east Anglia of Robert I son of Roger,
second husband of Margaret de Cressy. A suit of 1207 between William and his
lord, William Blund shows that they were also related since Alice, mother of the benefactor, had first married Gilbert
Blund, brother of William Blund’s grandfather, another William. The paternal
grandfather of William II was a Roscelin of Linstead from whom his descendants
took their name.
Brown’s fitzRoscelin tree:
William fitzRoscelin’s sister, Margaret married firstly Hubert de Ria who died in 1188 leaving two daughters, minors, as his heirs. Margaret married secondly Osbert son of Hervey [ie. Osbert fitzHervey of Dagworth- see first blog chapter] who, in 1198 answered for and paid £20 for taking her as his wife. Margaret and Osbert occur together in 1204. Osbert son of Hervey had a prominent career as judge from the last years of the 12th century, and he last occurs as such on 20 January 1206. Osbert was dead by 10 April 1206 when his lands, in Norfolk, Sussex and Essex, and his heir, were taken into custody. In the same year William II of Huntingfield answered from having the lands and heir of Osbert son of Hervey, and Osbert presumably had held 1 fee of Bury St Edmunds also in the custody of William of Huntingfield at this time. It seems that Margaret’s son, Richard of Dagworth, was her son by her second marriage. Richard, who was active by 1227-28 when he was party to a final concord concerning Dagworth (in Old Newton), was dead in 1234, when Isabel his widow held two parts of the manor of Doddinghurst, Essex, as her dower which her husband had held in socage tenure. In 1242-43 as Osbert (II) of Dagworth held 1 fee in Thrandeston of the abbot of Bury St Edmunds, and a ¼ fee in Dagworth of the fee of Henry of Essex. The probability that Osbert II was holding the same fee which Osbert son of Hervey and Richard of Dagworth had held before him, is confirmed by the findings of an inquisition following his death. This inquisition found that Osbert II had held the manors of Bradwell and Dagworth of the Filiol fee; in the time of King John, Osbert son of Hervey of Dagworth had held the manor of Dagworth from whom it descended to his son and heir Richard, a minor; the king gave the marriage and wardship to William of Huntingfield who married his daughter, Isabel, to Richard; Isabel held the manor of Dagworth in dower after Richard’s death, and died in September 1262; Osbert II, Richard’s son, was a minor when Richard died. Osbert II, not his grandfather, was a benefactor of Mendham Priory*.
From 1100,
William II son of William son of Roscelin can be shown to have had close links
with William de Chesney’s daughter Margaret, and her family. In this
year, Robert I son of Roger, Margaret’s second husband, gave 300m for having
the younger daughter of Hubert de Ria and marrying her to his nephew, Geoffrey
of Chester.
William was
living in 1230 but died in the same year when litigation began over his wife’s
dower. He was succeeded by his son John. William and his family were associated
with a number of local houses, and he confirmed to Blythburgh grants of rents
made by his uncle Roger son of Roscelin, his mother Alice, and his sister
Margaret. He also granted a rent of his own to Leiston Abbey (founded by Ranulf
de Glanville c.1186), and a man in Wingfield to Bungay nunnery (founded by
Countess Gundreda and her second husband Roger de Glanville, after 1177- Roger
de Huntingfield also donated to Bungay/Byng nunnery, witnessed by Peter Walter
and son Hubert, and William II de Huntingfield).
*Mendham Priory was founded by
William I de Huntingfield. The foundation charter of William de Huntingfield to
Mendham was witnessed by Willielmus filius Rocelini and Robertus frater eius.
A confirmation charter of William’s son and heir
Roger II de Huntingfield to Mendham was witnessed by Willielmo filio Rocelini
et Roberto filio Rocelini. Roger II de Huntingfield who died 1204, materially
increased the endowments of Mendham in a second charter, by which he gave the
monks the church of St Margaret Linstead, a moiety of the church of St Peter
Linstead, and all his right in the church of Mendham, witnessed by Peter
Walter, and Robert filio Rocelini.
(Monasticon Anglicanum, v.5. p.58)
All of the above, confirms the close
relationship between the fitzRoscelin family of Linstead, and the de
Huntingfield family (from Roger fitzWalter de Caen), and it would appear also
the de Chesney family (from Robert fitzWalter de Caen).
This fitzRoscelin family also appear to be close to the de Glanville and the Walter family, as shown in the witness lists of various monastic charters, including Hervey Walter’s charter to Butley Priory in which Roberto filio Rocelin was a prominent witness:
Similarly, Roberto
filio Rocelin also witnessed Rannulf de Glanville’s charter to Butley Priory
c.1171.
And William filius William
filii Rocelini made a charter before 1221 (No.73) donating tithes from his land
at Sutton (another Walter de Caen manor) to Leiston Abbey (founded by Rannulf
de Glanville c.1186) and mentioned Roger of Holesley and his heirs.
‘Malus Nepos’
A third entry that only occurs in the original foundation charter by Malet, had “his tithe at Huntingfield by Robert Malus Nepos”. It should be pointed out again, that the whole estate of Huntingfield was held by Walter fitz Aubrey (de Caen) from Robert Malet. This tithe held by Robert Malus Nepos has not been explained, but maybe a reference to Walter de Caen’s son Robert’s inherited part of Huntingfield- the ‘Malus’ could be a corruption of Malets/Maletus, and ‘nepos’ possibly referring to a close relationship with Malet such as ‘nephew’. A signatory to the Charter to Eye was Robertus filius Walteri as was his brother Rogeris filius Walteri de Huntingefeud, yet, of Walter de Caen’s two elder sons, only the donated tithes of Roger’s lands in Huntingfield and of this Robert Malus Nepos of Huntingfield, are recorded in the charter.
However, in King Stephen’s
charter of confirmation to the monks of Eye of all their possessions as they
held in the time of Robert Malet and of Stephen before he became king, dated c.
Dec 1137 (Charter No. 15, Eye Cartulary, I), Robert Malus Nepos of Huntingfield
is not mentioned, but instead, included in the list:
3s. worth of
land which John son of Robert holds (“iii solidatas quas tenet
Johannes filii Rotberti”), also witnessed by Johanne filio Rotberti
vicec(omitis)/sheriff (viz. John fitzRobert fitzWalter de Caen), as
well as repeating the “tithe of Roger son of Walter (de Huntingfield) in
Huntingfield and Byng”.
By this time, Robert
fitzWalter, sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, was based at Horsford in Norfolk,
as were his sons who in turn became sheriff, so it would be interesting to know
from which lands he donated the 3s.
Another charter signatory was Hubertus
Malus Nepos, as well as Hubertus de Monte Kenesi/Canisy- whether related is
also unknown. Hubert of Rickinghall gave two thirds of his tithe of Rickinghall
Superior to Malet’s charter, and Rickinghall was held by Hubert de Montecanisy
in Domesday. Hubert de Montecanisy also donated his hospice at Yaxley, and was
the first signatory to Malet’s charter. In King Stephen’s confirmation charter,
it just has “the tithe of Rickenhall (Superior)” and “the land of
Godemann in Yaxley”.
Vivien Brown in the Eye
Cartulary, p72, explains her view of the close relationship between the de
Huntingfield and fitzRocelin families and ‘Malus Nepos’:
The foundation
charter lists the gifts by Robert Malus Nepos of his tithe in Huntingfield and
by Jocelin of Hollesley of the tithe of 100 acres in Huntingfield. Nothing is
known of either donor, but below the entries of Walter fitzAubrey’s (de Caen)
holdings in Huntingfield and Linstead in Domesday refers to 200 acres and 40
acres which pertain to the manor of Huntingfield. The other general
confirmations, in addition to the tithe of Roger of Huntingfield, list the
tithe of Rocelin of Huntingfield or Linstead as he was variously called. While
the exact link between Rocelin and Jocelin of Hollesley cannot be established
it seems certain that the tithe is the same. Conceivably Jocelin was a mistake
for Rocelin. Rocelin’s grandson, William II, granted 10s a year to the abbey of
Leiston and 30s a year to Sibton from the farm of Sutton which was held of him by
Roger of Hollesley. Sutton is next to Hollesley and land here was held by the
Huntingfield family. Rocelin’s dates are unknown, but his son and heir William
I, together with another son Robert, witnessed William of Huntingfield’s
foundation charter of his priory at Mendham before 1155. William was dead by
1185 when his wife Alice of Hainford was a widow, William being her second
husband. In the later 12th century the tithes of the manors of
Huntingfield and Byng, of the land of Rocelin and of Alice the wife of William
fitzRocelin were leased to the priory of Mendham for 2m a year.
Note 202: a Hubert
Malus Nepos witnessed the foundation charter of Eye, and a William
Malus-nepos also witnessed the foundation charter of Mendham Priory of
William son of Roger de Huntingfield before 1155 (in King Stephen’s reign). (this would seem
to indicate that the ‘Malus-nepos’ referred to a separate family, close to the
de Huntingfields; or, William took the ‘surname’ from his father).
This reference to Robert and Hubert
Malus Nepos remains unresolved.
Peter Walter- As recounted previously,
Peter Walter appears to have had a close relationship to Roger de Huntingfield
II, possibly due to the close proximity of their estates and that they were
both knights of the county of Suffolk. Peter and his son Hubert were witnesses,
along with Roger de Huntingfield and Robert son of Rocelini to a charter of the
priory of Mendham acknowledging payment to Eye. And also, a second charter to
Mendham of a donation by Roger de Huntingfield was witnessed by Peter Walter
and Robert son of Rocelin of Linstead. Peter and his son Hubert were also witnesses
to Roger de Huntingfield II’s confirmation of a grant to Byng Convent, along
with Roger’s sons William and Robert de Huntingfield. And Peter Walter also
witnessed a notification of enfeoffment to Roger son of William de
Huntingfield.
Curiously, in the Leiston and Butley Cartularies (ed. Richard Mortimer), Charter No. 148, dated before 1212, is discussed on p.11 by Mortimer:
Richard de Caen
(de Cadomo) granted to Butley an acre of his fee at Instead,
between Weybread and Wingfield which William Cubald was holding, over which he
had sued the canons. In addition, he granted half an acre in Instead by
a bridge called ‘Anhand’; if the amount cannot be made on one side of the
bridge, he will complete it on the other, which seems to imply that Richard did
not know how much meadow he held there. The de Caen family appear as Malet
tenants in Domesday Book. Richard first occurs in 1184 and last in 1203 (Pipe
Roll 30 Henry II, 12; PR 5 John, 239). In all probability he was dead by 1216,
when Walter de Caen junior gave Richard his brother, both of whom occur in the
charter witness list, as a hostage.
The identity of this Richard
de Caen is unknown, but the link with Instead is an interesting coincidence.
3.? Ralph or Reginald fitzWalter de Peyton- third son of Walter de Caen (?)
Katherine Keats-Rohan in her ‘Domesday People’ names a third son of Walter de Caen as ‘Ralph de Peyton’ whereas the early historian and antiquarian Peter le Neve (1661-1729), names the son of Walter de Caen as ‘Reginald de Peyton’ of Suffolk. (Recounted in ‘The English Baronetage’- see below)
Little is known about Reginald de Peyton except he was
dapifer to Hugh Bigod.
(It should be noted that the name ‘Reginald’ was variously
spelt ‘Reynold’ and ‘Reinald’.)
However, this theory of a third son is questionable, as there is no irrefutable evidence to corroborate this theory.
The first of the family by the name of Peyton
upon record, was Reginald de Peyton a great benefactor to Thetford priory which
was founded by Roger Bigod in 1104 and completed in 1114.
Monasticon Anglicanum, v.5, ed. William Dugdale, p.141-144- Priory of Thetford in Norfolk
Introduction: “Blomfield and Martin have
investigated the history of Thetford Priory closely. Martin gives the following
list of benefactors to the priory from the manuscript in the Cottonian collection
formerly marked Vitellius F.iv. but which was burnt in the fire of 1731.”
p.143
And on p.144
According to historian Peter le Neve, this was
quickly followed by his death, for ‘in 1136*’
King Stephen addressed a writ from Eye to the Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk,
commanding that John, son of Reginald de Peyton, have his whole land of
Peyton ([Peter] le Neve’s Mss, National Archives UK):
Translation: Stephen King of England Justice. Sheriffs of Norfolk and Suffolk greeting. I order that John the son of Reginald hold his land from Peyton so well and in peace with his soco and sace and human liberties, as his predecessors held &c. Witness: Adam de Belnaco, at Eye. (undated)
The difficulty is establishing where le Neve found this document, as it is not included in King Stephen’s charters in the ‘Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum 1066-1154- v.3, Regesta Regis Stephani…. 1135-1154’ (ed. H.A. Cronne and R.H.C. David, 1913), a most comprehensive collection of Stephen’s writs.
*The given dates of 1135 and 1136 are problematic. The
Mon. Angl. section on Thetford Abbey quotes the historian ‘Martin’ for
chronicling the date of ‘1135’ that Reginald de Peyton was a benefactor.
Le Neve specifically dates King Stephen’s charter to
John fitzReginald as ‘1136’, yet Cronne, the editor of the Regesta, in
his Preface, noted that “Anglo Norman charters cannot usually be dated with
precision. For Stephen’s reign, a chronological arrangement of the charters
proved quite impossible because of the number of charters with wide limits of
date.”
The term ‘charter’ represents official documents,
often written or issued by a religious, lay or royal institution which
typically provides evidence of the transfer of landed or movable property (ie.
grants, leases and agreements) and the rights which govern them. It was very
rare to find dated charters, and historians date these documents within a
certain time frame using information gathered on the witnesses eg. from the
monarch’s years of reign and known itinerary; the period the witnesses were
active in office as bishop, justice, sheriff etc.; reference to a datable
event; contextual clues; Latin language patterns and the usage of particular
phrases and vocabulary which changed over time etc.
Between the time of the Conquest in 1066 and about the
start of the reign of Edward I in 1307, of the estimated one million charters
that have survived over that 240 year period, over 90% of charters do not bear
dates, and very few charters survive before 1160. William I introduced into the
royal chancery the then-current Norman custom of issuing charters without dates
or other chronological markers. This custom continued until the reign of King
Richard I, when, for the first time, documents issued from the royal chancery
began regularly to include a date, probably during Hubert Walter’s term as
justiciar.
Some survived as originals, but most as copies in
cartularies, which were produced periodically during the 11th to 15th
centuries, and which would occasionally introduce transcriptional or other
changes and inaccuracies, and sometimes forgeries ‘to alter past
intent’. Another difficulty is that multiple and legitimate rewritings of
documents have been made by scribes who may have modernized or slightly altered
the language and punctuation of the documents being transcribed which can
completely alter the meaning and intent of the document.
(ref: Dating Medieval English Charters, by
G.Tilahun, A. Feuerverger & M. Gervers, The Annals of Applied Statistics,
Dec 2012, v.6, No.4, pp.1615-1640- JSTOR)
As these charters were written well before the reign
of Richard, and particularly before 1160, one can assume that any specific year
date attached to any of these documents, is highly suspect.
This charter of King Stephen to John fitzReginald of
Peyton appears to be genuine, although now probably lost, and the witness, Adam
de Belnaco, an itinerant justice, was a frequent witness to Stephen’s charters
in the late 1130’s and throughout the 1140’s. In the Regesta, the dates given
for charters witnessed by Belnaco are given as ‘1136-1147’, therefore,
the precise date of ‘1136’ in which year Le Neve stated that John received his
father Reginald’s land, is not supportable, but would be between 1136 and the
late 1140’s.
The second and most important charter to identifying this
family, involves William de Chesney, third son of Robert filius Walter de Caen.
William adopted the surname of his mother’s father Ralph de Chesney. This
charter, which links the family of de Peyton with the family of Robert filius
Walter de Caen, appears in Le Neve’s Mss and is quoted in the following.
However, Le Neve’s identification of this William is not as clear as it would
appear:
The English Baronetage: Containing a Genealogical and Historical Account of all the English Baronets now Existing, etc. V.1, by Arthur Collins [1741], pp23-24, quotes Le Neve:
“Mr Le Neve says
thus (in his Mss of the Baronets, v.1. p52):
The first of
whom we find by the name of Peyton was Reignold de Peyton, second son to
Walter lord of Sibton, in Suffolk, younger brother to Mallet, sheriff of
Yorkshire, and lord of the honour of Eye in Suffolk. This Reignold held the lordships
of Peyton-Hall in Ramshold and Boxford in Suffolk, of Hugh de Bigod; he was
sewer (ie. steward of the household, als. dapifer) to
Roger* Bigod (? d.1107), Earl
of Norfolk (*Hugh was cr.1st earl of Norfolk, not his
father Roger- a mistake?), and gave much lands to the monks of Thetford to
pray for the soul of Hugh Bigod, and had two sons, William and John. William
who held certain lands in Boxford, of the fee of the abbey of St
Edmundsbury, as appears by charter of his nephew John.
The other son,
John de Peyton, to whom King Stephen, and his cousin german William de
Cassineto, baron of Horsford, granted all his lands in Peyton, well, peaceably,
and rightly, with soc and sac, with all liberties and apurtenances to hold as
his ancestors before held the same, and that he should have warren &c. (as above). The
baron of Horsford’s charter begins thus:
‘Willielmus, filius
Roberti filii Walteri, Dapifer suo & omnibus amicis & hominibus,
&c.
granting to John son
of Reginald (John filius Reginald) his cousin, the service
of Robert de Rameshot, in fee and inheritance &c.’
This John
fitzReginald had 4 sons- John de Peyton knt who served in the parliament held
at Westminster 29th Edward I as one of the knights of the shore for
Suffolk soon after which he died. Robert who was lord justice of Ireland temp.
Henry III and Edward I- he was Lord of Ufford in Suffolk and assumed the
surname of Ufford therefrom; Peter, lord of Peyton Hall, who held lands in
Ramsholt and Peyton, in the time of King John; John the younger who sold to
John his eldest brother all the lands which he had in Boxford of the fee of the
abbey of St Edmund’s and Stoke Neyland which their father John de Peyton and William
their uncle, formerly possessed. As we learn from Mr Weever who has transmitted
to us their memorial in the parish church in Stoke-Neyland in these words: ‘At
the upper end, in the north side of this church next to the chancel, John de
Peyton, the son of Reginald, lieth interr’d under the marble stone; about the
verge whereof these few French words following are only remaining; __ Jena de
Peytona___ Mercye___ l’ame Crifr___’.”
Much of this
information is repeated in John and Sir Bernard Burke’s ‘A Genealogical and
Heraldic History of the Extinct and Dormant Baronetcies’ (1844- p.408), including
the unsupportable statements that ‘the de Peytons have a progenitor in
William Mallet, a Norman baron who was sheriff of Yorkshire in the 3rd
of William I and obtained grants of sundry lordships and manors from the Crown’,
and that ‘Reginald de Peyton, second son of Walter Lord of Sibton, younger
brother of Mallet sheriff of Yorkshire’, so presumably the Burkes used Le
Neve’s original Mss as their source of information.
Unfortunately, le Neve appears to have mixed up the wording of the two separate writs to John fitzReginald, writing: “John de Peyton, to whom King Stephen, and his cousin german William de Cassineto, baron of Horsford, granted all his lands in Peyton”- there are two separate charters described in the same sentence, one from the king confirming John’s inheritance of Peyton, and the second by his cousin William granting the service of ‘Robert de Rameshot’.
He also did not give us the full wording of the writ including the address, so we do not know what preceded the words, ‘Willielmus filius Robert’, except that he says it was a charter of King Stephen.
In comparison, another writ to
Eye Priory dated 1136-54 (Regesta No.289) begins:
‘Stephanus rex
Angliorum episcopo Norwicensi et justicie et omnibu baronibus de Norfolch et Suffolch
salutem, which is the usual address of most of Stephen’s
charters.
In this particular case, the words ‘his dapifer’/ ‘dapifer suo’ in the address would probably refer to William Martel, Stephen’s steward and one of his closest advisors, but that is not made clear.
Another of Stephen’s unrelated
writs confirms a gift made by a father to his son William, and the wording is:
Noveritis me
concessisse et confimrasse Willelmo … donationem quam pater suus illi fecit, et
omnia tenementa sua etc. = ‘You will know that I have granted and
confirmed to William … the gift which his father made to him, and all his
tenements’, etc, so the above writ would have been similarly written.
The Latin wording of the writ, only names him as Willielmus, filius Roberti filii Walteri, not as ‘de Chesney’ or as ‘Lord of Horsford’, which appear to have been added by le Neve who assumed it referred to the Norfolk de Chesney family descended from Walter de Caen’s eldest son Robert, thereby concluding that Reginald was brother to Robert.
There were at least two candidates that held this same name at that time;
1). William de Chesney d.1174- third son
of Robert fitzWalter, son of Walter de Caen; after the death of his brother
John filius Robert sheriff who took over c.1129 from his father Robert filius
Walter vicomte/sheriff, William inherited the position of sheriff of Norfolk
and Suffolk in the late 1140’s to 1150’s and again from 1156 until 1163;
sometimes known as William of Norwich, and William fitzRobert.
He is the person Le Neve has chosen as the grantor
in this charter. William was known as a loyal supporter of King Stephen.
In the first
two charters in the Regesta Reges Stephani, he was named as Willelmo
de Caisneto (Chesney), the name he also used when witnessing several of Stephen’s
charters:
And in the following writ,
confirming his grant of his demesne of Sibton in Suffolk, he was addressed as Willelmus
filius Roberti fillii Walteri, the same as in the writ quoted by Le Neve.
This grant must have occurred after the death of his elder brother John filius
Robert c.1146-47 d.s.p. (according to Thomas of Monmouth) who was sheriff of
Norfolk/Suffolk in the 1140’s, succeeded by his brother William de Chesney in
the 1150’s and 60’s.
The following charter of a
grant in 1157-58 by William de Chesney to Blythburgh Priory (Blythburgh Priory
Cartulary Pt 1, p.46 No 42, addresses his name as ‘Willelmus de Chineto
filius Roberti filii Walteri’, indicating that the usage of his name
was fluid.
And the second candidate:
2). William filius
Robert filius Walter [fitz Other], also known as ‘William
fitzRobert de Windsor, lord of Little Easton in Essex’ (d.1162), as in one of
Stephen’s charters (Regista regis Stephani… p.355)
According to historian Katherine
Keats-Rohan, Walter fitzOther, constable of Windsor from 1078 and Keeper of the
Forest, who held 21 lands in Berkshire, Buckinghampshire, Surrey and Hampshire
in Domesday as tenant-in-chief, married the daughter (Beatrice?) of Walter the
Deacon (diaconus) who held 18 lands in Suffolk (including 5 houses in Ipswich)
as well as nine in Essex (including Great and Little Easton in Dunmow hundred
in Essex) and a couple in Gloucestershire and Dorset, as tenant-in-chief in the
Domesday Book, and held several from the Queen’s fief.
Both men (viz. named
Walter) were of a much higher social status than William de Chesney of Horsford
and his grandfather Walter de Caen.
As Le Neve made the unsupportable assumption that Walter de Caen was brother to “Mallett sheriff of Yorkshire”, he may have also have made a second unsupportable assumption that ‘Willielmus, filius Roberti filii Walteri’ was ‘William de Cassineto, baron of Horsford’, and ‘cousin’ to John de Peyton.
The William fitzRobert
fitzWalter in the document could have equally been either of the two that held
that name.
According to J. Horace Round (The Origin of the Fitzgeralds II in The Ancestor, No. II July 1902 [archive.org] pp.91-98), Walter fitzOther had several sons, William fitzWalter Constable of Windsor; Walter de Windsor; Robert fitzWalter de Windsor who inherited the Domesday fief of Walter the Deacon including Little Easton in Essex; Maurice de Windsor dapifer of St Edmund’s under Henry I, living in 1136, Ob.s.p.; Reinald [Reginald] de Windsor dapifer, living in 1136; and Gerald de Windsor married Nesta of Wales, ancestor of the fitzGeralds.
Of Reinald, Round wrote:
“We are indebted to Mr Rokewode’s preface to ‘Jocelyn de Brakelond’ for the
text of some important charters relating to the great abbey of Bury St
Edmund’s. Among them is one (p.118) of Abbot Albold, belonging to the years
1115-9, in which he grants to Maurice ‘de Windleshore’ [ie. Windsor] the
stewardship of the abbey with its curious privileges, together with the land of
the previous steward Ralph (ie.dapifer- ‘totam terram quam Radulfus Dapifer
predecessor suus tenuit de Sancto Edmundo et totam dapiferatum de tota terra
Sancti Edmundi… Cum vero Mauricius prenominatus ierit longe aut proprie in
servicium meum ad custum meum ire debet honorifice sicut dapifer’.), amounting
to three knight’s fees, which were increased by the addition of two others to
five. Among the witnesses to this charter are ‘Robertus de Wyndeleshore and Reinaldus
de Wyndeleshore’
Another of these
charters (p.119) contains King Stephen’s confirmation to Maurice of all his
land and his office etc, as he held them in the time of Henry I. Maurice is
mentioned in several charters relating to the abbey; a writ of Henry I issued
during a vacancy is addressed to ‘Eadnoth the monk and Maurice the steward
(dapifer)… and all the barons of St Edmund’s Honour’. etc. Maurice was clearly
in office or in favour with Henry I, for we find him excused his Danegeld on
the Pipe Roll of 1130, and thus learnt that he held land in no fewer than eight
counties: Dorset, Exxex, Northants, Norfolk, Suffolk, Beds, Berks, and Middlesex.
The fact that Maurice de Windsor died without issue is proved by the succession
of his nephew Ralf (de Hastings viz. Maurice’s wife’s nephew)
as his heir in land and office.
We saw above that among the witnesses to Abbot Albold’s charter to Maurice was a Reinald de ‘Wyndeleshore’ [Windsor].
Mr H.J. Ellis
(of the British Museum) has kindly drawn my attention to the Reading Abbey
Charters in which he occurs as a witness. Queen Adeliza (widow of Henry I)
granted a rentcharge at Stanton, Oxon, to the abbey (1136), her
charter having as a witness ‘Reginaldo de Wind’r (Archaeological
Journal, xx, 287-8);
She issued a
writ relating to Stanton, ‘teste Reinaldo de Wind’r, apud Arondelle (in 1139-40);
and her husband William earl of Arundel (or of Lincoln) confirmed her gift of a
Hertfordshire manor, his charter including as a witness ‘Reginaldo de
Windleshores’ (Ibid, xxii, 153).
Queen Adeliza
was 2nd wife to Henry I who died in 1135 (no issue). Three years
later, she remarried to William d’Aubigney 1st Earl of Arundel and
had seven issue. She died in 1151.
While Round and Ellis came to the conclusion that Reginald de Windsor may have been dapifer to Queen Adeliza, they may have missed that he could also have been dapifer to Hugh Bigod who was a close advisor to King Henry and Queen Adeliza, and, who himself inherited his brother’s office of royal steward/dapifer following his elder brother’s death in the ‘White Ship’ disaster in 1120 in which Henry I’s son and heir also drowned. As queen dowager, Adeliza spent three years based in a convent before marrying William d’Aubigny, the son of William d ‘Aubigny and Maud Bigod, sister to Hugh Bigod. She and her husband supported Empress Matilda in her struggle against Stephen for the throne, briefly hosting the Empress when she landed in England in 1139, beginning a civil war. It is unlikely that Reginald de Windsor would have been dapifer to Adeliza during this period of civil unrest, so the documents witnessed above must have occurred in the period between 1136 and 1140.
Meanwhile Hugh was a supporter of Stephen at first, even claiming that Henry had intended for Stephen to become king at the expense of his daughter Matilda. Hugh Bigod was created Earl of Norfolk/Suffolk in 1141. Hugh’s loyalties to Stephen vacillated over the following years, and he assumed a position of armed neutrality during the period of ‘General Anarchy’. In 1153, when Matilda’s son Henry of Anjou (soon to be King Henry II) landed in England to assert his claim to the throne, Bigod vested his interests with Henry and held out against Stephen’s forces. Negotiations began between the two parties, and on Henry’s accession in December 1154, Bigod at once received confirmation of the possession of his earldom and stewardship by charter the following month.
Although Martin (Monasticon Anglicanum) claimed ‘Reginald de Peyton’ was dapifer to Hugh Bigod by 1135, the date remains questionable as monastic charters were very rarely dated, unless the donation was linked with the datable event of the king’s death in December 1135. As time passed and he was granted lands of his own, Reginald de Windsor would no longer be known by that name, as the younger sons of Walter fitz Other were no longer castellans of Windsor Castle (the position inherited by the eldest son William fitz Walter de Windsor who died in 1130), just as his brother Robert de Windsor would become known as Robert Lord of Little Easton and his son William fitz Robert Lord of Little Easton, and therefore it is feasible that Reginald de Windsor dapifer became known as Reginald de Peyton dapifer. There are no further records of ‘Reginald de Windsor’ after c.1139, nor of a marriage or issue, unlike his brothers.
Similarly, William de Caisneto was variously known in the records as William de Chesney vicomte (sheriff), William fitzRobert Lord of Horsford and Sibton, William of Norwich, and in at least one charter, William fitz Robert fitz Walter.
Notably, Reinald/Reginald was the brother of Robert fitzWalter Lord of Little Easton, as well as to Maurice dapifer to Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk.
Robert fitz Walter [fitz Other] of Windsor died by 1128 when Henry I notified his men that he had rendered the lands of Robertus filio Walteri de Wyndesora/Windsor to his son Willelmo filio Roberti [filio Walteri], dated Christmas 1128 at Archentan, France, a witness Mauricio de Windesora.
(Calendar
Charter Rolls, ii, p.137; An Outline Itinerary of King Henry the First,
by Wm Farrer, 1919, p.124, No.579) This was ratified by Queen Matilda (as
above).
If Reginald de Windsor,
dapifer, was also known as Reginald de Peyton, dapifer, that
would make Reginald’s son John fitz Reginald de Peyton cousin german to
William fitz Robert fitz Walter (fitz Other).
The fact that Reginald de Windsor’s brother Maurice was dapifer to Bury St Edmunds who was granted the privileges and lands of the previous dapifer ‘Ralph/Ranulfus’ whose relict Edith, Maurice married, could explain how he gained the land of Ramsholt which was held by ‘Ralph’ from Robert Malet in Domesday.
The key property in this mystery is ‘Peyton Hall in Ramsholt in Wilford’, held by Reginald de Peyton, ‘the first of this family of de Peyton’. He also held Boxford and Stoke by Nayland which were inherited by eldest son William.
According to le Neve, all four properties were held by Reginald from Hugh Bigod 1st Earl of Norfolk, son of Roger Bigod who travelled to England in the Conquest and held great power in East Anglia, holding 6 lordships in Essex, 117 in Suffolk and 187 in Norfolk. However, he did not explain how Hugh Bigod held these lands which were not held by Roger Bigod in Domesday.
In Domesday, Ramsholt was held by ‘Ralph’ (possibly dapifer to Bury St Edmunds) from Robert Malet tenant-in-chief (also partly held by Ralph de Beaufour as a tenant-in-chief).
Peyton was wholly held by Swein of Essex High Sheriff of Essex (held by Godric of Peyton and Earl Harold pre-Conquest).
Swein of Essex also wholly held Stoke by Nayland, held pre-Conquest by Swein’s father Robert fitz Wimarch sheriff of Essex, a kinsman of both Edward the Confessor and William of Normandy, and one of four councilors at the death bed of Edward; also called Robert the staller of the royal palace (‘regalis palatii stabilitor’- ie. holding a permanent office in the king’s hall without specific duties).
Notably, Robert son of
Swein of Essex married Gunnor Bigod, sister of Hugh Bigod (children of Roger
Bigod), -issue Henry de Essex, sheriff of Essex. Gunnor married secondly
Hamon St Clair.
Whether the land was acquired
by Hugh Bigod through this marriage of Gunnor Bigod to Robert fitzSwein is
unknown.
Boxford was not listed in Domesday, but there is a reference to it in the Domesday Book via an entry for the Manor of Coddenham which lay in what is now the Parish of Boxford- “Coddenham [in Boxford]” Hundred of Babergh held by Ralph de Limesy (NB. A second place named Coddenham in Bosmere Hundred).
However, several lands
surrounding Boxford, viz. Aveley, Nayland, Stoke by Nayland, Polstead
and Withermarsh were also held by Swein and his father Robert fitzWimarch
before him, who also held Groton pre-Conquest.
So, the common denominator appears to be Swein of Essex, but how Reginald held these lands in unknown.
The following Peyton Pedigree
is from the’ Genealogical Memoirs of the Extinct Family of Chester of
Chicheley’, by Robert E. C. Waters, v.1 1878, p.244 (NB. dates are
questionable; also, “Peyton Hall in Boxford”):
Although there are several
documentary links between the first two sons of Walter de Caen, namely Robert
of Sibton and Horsford and Roger de Huntingfield, there are no such documentary
links between the two brothers and Reginald de Peyton.
Katherine Keats-Rohan, in
her ‘Domesday People, A Prosopography of Persons Occurring
in English Documents 1066-1166’, (Boydell Press 1999), p.449,
wrote about Walter de Cadomo (de Caen):
Walter
fitzAlberic de Cadomo [Caen], a Norman from Caen (in Calvados). Important
Domesday tenant of Robert Malet…..
Father of three
sons, Robert (ancestor of the de Chesny family), Ralph (ancestor
of the de Peyton family), and Roger (ancestor of the de Huntingfield
family).
She did not
elaborate on her claim of a third son named Ralph, except he was ancestor of
the Peyton family, nor did she give any references for such a claim. Notably
she is the only one who claims the ancestor as ‘Ralph’, not Reginald- she may
have thought that Reginald was the son of ‘Ralph’ who held Ramsholt from Robert
Malet in Domesday, but as a son of Walter de Caen, he would not have held lands
at the same time as his father, so that theory is unlikely.
So, in my
opinion, based on this one ambiguous document linking William fitz Robert fitz Walter
with ‘his cousin’ John fitz Reginald de Peyton, there is equal unconfirmed
evidence for the descent of the de Peyton family from either the Walter de Caen
family or the Walter fitz Other family.
Conclusion
about Walter de Caen as ancestor of the Walter family
Prior to the Conquest, Walter de Caen held a very close relationship with Robert Malet and his mother, as evidenced by the large number of holdings (viz. 35) Walter held from Robert Malet in Suffolk and Norfolk. Robert Malet’s father William Malet fought at the Battle of Hastings, and was handsomely rewarded. There has been much speculation about how close this relationship was, with many websites describing them as brothers, but there is no actual evidence for this assertion. Whether there were marital ties between them is also pure speculation, but quite possible.
Whether Walter de Caen is the ‘Walter who held from this manor’, can only be speculated upon, however, it is a likely possibility, given the close relationship with Malet, and the location of the lands in question.
If so, how this
connects with the Walter family is also speculation.
One possibility that should be kept in mind is that Hervey may have married a daughter of Walter de Caen, and the lands of Snapeshall in Fressingfield, Wingfield, ‘Sikibro’ and Instead/Weybread were possibly granted to Hervey and his wife as a marriage portion, which in turn were inherited by their sons Hervey Walter and Hubert Walter, as Theobald Blake Butler suggested, and the family took the surname of ‘Walter’ in honour of this marital association. That theory also depends on whether the original patriarch Hervey was actually named ‘Hervey Walter grandfather of Theobald’ (as in Theobald’s concord with William Hervey in 1195), in which case the link would be with the generation before Hervey.
If Hervey had been a younger son of Walter de Caen, considering the number of lands and manors held by Walter de Caen from Malet in Domesday, one would think that the Hervey would have been granted more than the few relatively small manors in Bishops’ Hundred. But, as pointed out, the fact that there are no records (such as witnesses in monastic records) linking Hervey Walter and his family with the known sons and grandsons of Walter de Caen, in contrast to Hervey and his family’s close relationship with marital relations, the Valoine and Glanville extended families, does seem to discount this theory. The indirect links with the de Huntingfields and the fitzRocelins could be explained by the close proximity of their manors, as well as being knights of the county of Suffolk.
So, in my opinion, one of the first two Walters discussed (ie. ‘Walter’ who held the relevant lands in Bishops Hundred, and Walter the crossbowman) is far more likely to be the Norman ancestor of the Walter family, and the source of their family surname.
4.WALTER FITZGRIP
The fourth Walter who held lands in Bishops Hundred including some of the lands later held by the Walter family was Walter fillius Grip [Walter fitzGrip], however, as he was not known to have had any issue, and his estates held from Robert Malet were inherited by his nephew, William Martel (butler to King Henry I and steward to King Stephen), he is an unlikely candidate as an ancestor. However, Walter should be explored due to the lands he held, particularly a large part of the lands of Fressingfield of which, a manor was later held by Hubert Walter (the elder) and his heir Peter Walter. Fressingfield was subject to several ownership disputes with the monks of Eye Priory.
Walter fitzGrip was closely related to many of the aristocratic families of France/Normandy, and also closely associated with the Malets through the wife of his brother Hugh fitzGrip sheriff of Dorset who was granted a large landholding as tenant-in-chief by William I in Dorset after the Conquest. They were brothers to Geoffrey Martel who held several lands in Essex under Geoffrey de Mandeville, and one in Hertfordshire under Robert d’Oilly in 1086.
Walter is not
known to have actually participated in the Conquest, but followed soon after.
Hugh fitzGrip was married to Hawise, daughter of Nicholas de Bacqueville in Normandy, thought to have been related to the Dukes of Normandy and the de Clares. Bacqueville is in the Norman Vexin, the home of the Crispin family (of William Malet’s wife, Esilia). In the Dorset Domesday survey, the abbey of Montivilliers holds the manor of Waddon as the gift of Hugh fitzGrip. Hawise’s Montivilliers charter, printed in Gallia Christiana’, shows that Hadwidis, daughter of Nicholas de Baschelvilla, wife of Hugh de Varham (Wareham), son of Gripon, gave the manor of Waldune (the adjoining manor of Waddon), with the advice and consent of her husband, to the church of the Monastery of Saint Mary Villarensis for the health of her own soul and that of her husband and of her friends, the great King William assenting, before his barons, including Jeffrey Martel, brother of Hugh fitzGrip.
According to
Orderic Vitalis, Nicholas de Bacqueville was one of the six sons of Baudri/Baldric
the German by a niece of Gilbert of Brionne (de Clares). Among Baudrey’s other
sons were Fulk of Aunou and Robert of Courcy. The Miraculum gives the wife of
Gilbert I Crispin as Gunnor, sister of Fulk senior of Aunou. Robert of Torigny
says in his interpolations of William of Jumieges that Nicholas de Bacqueville
married a niece of the duchess Gunnor (wife of Duke Richard I of Normandy).
‘Geoffrey Martel was the brother of Hugh fitzGrip, Hawise of Bacqueville’s first husband. The Martels are known to have held the fee of Bacqueville-en-Caux. A confirmation for Jumieges issued by William the Conqueror between 1060 and 1066 ends with the gifts of two parts of a tithe in Vuinemeruilla by Ralph and Geoffrey sons of Grip, with the consent of ‘Roberti militis as quem pertinent’. The place can be identified as Vinnemerville, a commune near Angerville-la-Martel; the knight may have been Robert Malet. In Geoffrey fitzGrip we have Geoffrey Martel, brother of Hugh fitzGrip.
The family of
Hugh fitzGrip of Wareham, former sheriff of Dorset, and dead by 1085-6, can be
associated with Robert Malet, through the latter’s tenant Walter fitzGrip,
Hugh’s brother.’
(Domesday
Book and the Malets, by Katherine Keats-Rohan, 1996, Nottingham Medieval
Studies)
Hugh fitzGrip was dead by 1086, but at the Domesday survey, the Commissioners returned Hawise as holding 47 manors or parcels of land, plus she held other lands as subtenant.
Researchers
suggest that Hugh’s widow Hawise de Bacqueville or their daughter, married
Alfred of Lincoln, closely related to the wife of Ivo de Tailibois, Lucy
Countess of Chester, daughter of Turold and his wife who was daughter of
William Malet. The lands held by Hugh FitzGrip’s widow in Dorset were
transferred to Alfred following her death.
Hugh and Walter fitzGrip’s brother was named Geoffrey Martel of the Martels of Bacqueville. Geoffrey Martel is thought to have taken part in the Conquest, and held some lands as sub-tenant in Essex and one in Hertfordshire. His son and heir, William Martel, began as butler to Henry I and then steward to King Stephen, and claimed that he was ‘nephew to Walter fitzGrip’ (Eye Priory Cartulary, No. 24), and inherited some of the Suffolk lands of Walter fitzGrip which he subsequently granted to his foundation of Snape Priory in Suffolk. William Martel was lord of Bacqueville-en-Caux in the early twelfth century. In the year 1133, William Martel, Lord of Bacqueville, granted to the Abbey de Tyron, by and with the consent of Albreda his wife, Eudo his brother, and Geoffrey and Roger his sons, all his right and title to the Priory of St Mary de Bacqueville. (The Gentleman’s Magazine, and Historical Chronicle, Volume 94, Part 2). Having been a loyal supporter and close advisor of King Stephen, after the death of the king and the succession of Henry II, William returned to Normandy and died after 1162 in Bacqueville-en-Caux, Normandy.
Walter fitzGrip held nine lands in Suffolk under Robert Malet, including Chippenhall (Fressingfield), Chickering, Horham, and Stradbroke/ Wingfield in Bishops Hundred, and Aldeburgh, Snape and Sternfield in Hundred of Plomesgate, and Boyton in Risbidge, with the Fressingfield and Wingfield lands being of particular relevance.
In Robert Malet’s Charter (No.1) to Eye Priory in c.1103, one of the specific donations, states:
xvi. with
the assent of Walter fitzGrip, all the land which he had in Fressingfield with
the mill
Confirmation Charter No. 24, in the Eye Priory Cartulary:
Grant by William
Martel steward of king Stephen to the monks c.1141-1154 (and nephew of Walter
fitzGrip):
“Quin etiam concede et confirm donationem quam walterus fitzGrip
avunculus meus eidem monasterio de Fresingef, ita ut a modo ego vel
nullus heredum meorum versus monachos quicquam in ea reclamabimus.”
Translation… In addition, he confirms the gift of Fressingfield which Walter son of Grip, his uncle, made them.
The translation
of the last part appears to say “so as
a way, I or none of the heirs of my line can reclaim it from the monks.”
Charter No. 9: Precept
by Henry I to Herbert bishop of Norwich, Robert Malet and Ralph de
Belfou that the monks shall hold their land at Fressingfield and
Thornham Magna (in Domesday, held by Malet’s mother, as did part of
Fressingfield) as they did on the day when the king’s father (William I) was
alive and dead (ie.1086) Dated: c.1101-1106. This implies that some lands
of Malet’s mother were promised to the monks of Eye as early as 1086.
Charter No. 11 by Henry
I, c.1113-1123, probably 1120-23, specifies ‘Fressingfield’ which seems to
suggest a property dispute:
Precept of Henry
I to [Stephen] count of Mortain and all his ministers, that the prior and monks
shall have all their lands, churches and property specifically at Fressingfield,
as they held them on the days when William I and Robert Malet were alive and
dead.
A further
confirmation Charter (No.3) by Henry I, c.1123-35, specifies the tithe
of Hubert Walter in a list of the Bishops Hundred land tithes originally
donated by Robert Malet.
Confirmation
Charters further specify this as Snapeshall in Fressingfield, which is
listed separately to the tithes of Fressingfield donated by Walter fitzGrip.
Later charters indicate that Snapeshall (later Launceshall) is a small
holding within the Parish of Fressingfield, just north of the village of
Fressingfield, and therefore may have been held separately to the rest of
Fressingfield.
The previous two
Charters would appear to indicate that Walter fitzGrip gifted his Fressingfield
land to the Eye Priory on or just prior to his death, before Robert’s Charter
but which was confirmed in his Charter, and that there was some dispute over
ownership.
In Vivien
Brown’s Eye Priory Cartulary Part II, p24-27, she discusses William
Martel’s Charter No.24:
Snape Priory was
founded by William Martel as a cell of the abbey of St Johns Colchester in
1155. The Charter of Snape gave the manors of Snape and Aldeburgh which
William gave to found the priory and formed part of the fees he and his family
held of the honour of Eye. He confirms the gift made by his uncle Walter
fitzGrip of land in Fressingfield to Eye Priory. It is clear that
William’s branch of the Martel family succeeded Walter fitzGrip in some or all
of the fees he held of Robert Malet in 1086, their holding being, in c.1210, 7
½ fees. In this part of the charter William may be said to be acting as the
heir of the former tenant of the honour.
It should be
noted that in Domesday, Fressingfield was not specifically listed but was part
of Chippenhall in Bishops Hundred, which was variously held by tenants-in
chief, Hervey de Bourges; and Robert Malet (whose sub-tenants were Malet’s
mother; Walter; Walter fitzGrip; and Humphrey); and Bury St Edmunds Abbey.
Domesday Book: A
Complete Translation (p.1211)
Lands of Robert Malet
Hundred of Plumesgate, co. Suffolk:
“Walter holds Snape
from Robert Malet which Edric of Laxfield held as a manor with 4 carucates
of land before the Conquest. Then as now 8 villans and 16 bordars. Then in
demesne 5 ploughs now none but there could be. Then 8 ploughs belonging to the
men, now 4. Woodland for 6 pigs. 6 acres of meadow. I mill. Then 2 horses. Then
6 head of cattle, now 2. Then 24 pigs. Then 160 sheep. Then as now £6. It is 3
leagues long and 4 furlongs broad. 40d in geld. Robert Malet has the soke. Also
in the same vill 25 free men commended to Edric of Laxfield with 108 acres.
Then between them 6 ploughs, now 4. Then it was worth 23s., now 20s.
In Aldeburgh, Wulfric, a
sokeman of Eadric held TRE 80 acres as a manor and 3 bordars… In the same place
1 free man Arnketil commended to Eadric with 30 acres…In Sternfield 1 sokeman with 30 acres and 1 acre of meadow. In Boyton 1 freeman commended to Eadric
with 24 acres... In the same place 30 acres of demesne and half a plough worth
5. Walter fitzGrip held all this”.
The Priory of
Snape
About the year 1155, William
Martel, in conjunction with Albreda his wife, and Geoffrey their son, gave
the manors of Snape and Aldeburgh to
the abbot and convent of the Benedictine house of St. John, Colchester. The
founders intended that a prior and monks should be established at Snape subject
to St. John's, Colchester, and this was speedily accomplished. The priory, by
the foundation charter, was to pay the abbey annually half a mark of silver as
an acknowledgement of its submission. The monks of Snape were to say two masses
every week, one of the Holy Spirit and the other of our Lady, for the weal of
William and Albreda, and after their death masses for the departed. The abbot
of Colchester was to visit the cell twice a year, with twelve horses, and to
tarry for four days.
('Houses of Benedictine monks: Priory of
Snape', in A History
of the County of Suffolk: Volume 2, ed. William Page [London, 1975],
pp. 79-80.)
Charter to
Colchester (Suffolk Institute): “Grant by
William Martel, Albreda his wife and Geoffrey Martel their son and heir, in
frank almoin, to the abbot and Monastery of Colchester of their manors of Snape
and Aldeburc (Suffolk), the abbot and Chapter of Colchester placing there a
prior and monks according to the possibility of the place under their
obedience, who shall pay them half a mare yearly, and say two masses weekly for
the grantors. The abbot of Colchester shall visit the priory twice yearly with
twelve horses, and others. Witnesses etc. (National Archives UK, E 40/3262)
Therefore, the lands of Walter fitzGrip in the Hundred of Plomesgate,
were inherited by his nephew William Martel and donated to Colchester Abbey,
and as Walter’s nephew, he confirmed his uncle’s donation of Fressingfield to
Eye priory.
There are no records of Martel holding Walter fitzGrip’s lands in
Wingfield/Stradbroke, Horham or Chickering, so these may have reverted back to
the Crown upon his death, and as he did not witness Malet’s Charter of c.1103,
it is likely that he was deceased, or had returned to Normandy. His promised
donation of Fressingfield (‘with the assent of Walter fitzGrip, all the land
which he had in Fressingfield with the mill’) was probably granted in Malet’s
original foundation of the priory in the time of William I, before the
succession of William II in 1187 when Malet temporarily lost his lands to Roger
de Poitou, until the succession of Henry I in 1100 when his lands were
reinstated.
Conclusion
The fact that Martel inherited some of fitzGrip’s lands would indicate
that Walter fitzGrip did not leave any male heirs. Whether he had a daughter
who was granted lands in Bishops Hundred as her marriage portion before his
death, is unknown.
The
FitzGrip/Martel family were of a much higher social status than the Walter
family whose rise in status was entirely due to their uncle Rannulf de
Glanville, and Hubert Walter’s promotion to Chief Justiciar and Archbishop of
Canterbury by King Richard I.
Although Walter fitzGrip held lands in Fressingfield (not specifically Snapeshall) and parts of Stradbroke/Wingfield, and could also possibly be the ‘Walter’ who held part of Weybread with Humphrey, as he shared some of these lands with another man named ‘Walter’, the possibility of him being the ancestor of the Walter family is unlikely and can be discounted.
5.Others
named ‘Walter’ who held lands in East Anglia in Domesday:
(A)Walter the Deacon/Diaconi, held 29 lands in Suffolk and Essex as tenant-in-chief and 21 as sub-tenant, including Bacton in Hartismere and ‘Caldecota’ and ‘Cotton’ in Hartismere, and Dagworth in Stowmarket (later held by Osbert fitzHervey of Dagworth), Suffolk, and Little Easton in Essex.
According to historian Katherine Keats-Rohan, Walter fitzOther, constable of Windsor from 1078 and Keeper of the Forest, who held 21 lands in Berkshire, Buckinghampshire, Surrey and Hampshire in Domesday as tenant-in-chief, married the daughter (Beatrice?) of Walter the Deacon (diaconus). They had several sons including Robert de Windsor, Lord of Little Easton in Essex.
Walter’s brother Theoderic de Bacton married Muriel de Valognes, daughter of Peter de Valognes (unrelated to the Valoines of Parham). She married secondly Hubert de Montecanisy. Theoderic or Tedric was described in Domesday sometimes as both Walter’s ‘predecessor’ and as ‘his brother’. There are several references to Walter holding land in ‘Tedric’s fee’, including Babergh said to be ‘his brother Tedric’s fee’.
There is no
known link with the Walter family, and none of his lands were inherited by the
Walter family. And, he held a close relationship to Queen Matilda and held
several lands from ‘the Queen’s fee’, and was of a higher social status than
the Walter family.
(B)Walter de
Risbou/Risboil, held 3 lands as subtenant of Robert Malet: Brutge in
Parham, Clachestorp and [Earl] Soham both in Loose, Suffolk. Nothing more is
known about him. None of the three lands he held were later held by the Walter
family.
(C)Walter de Dol- Theobald Blake Butler discussed this theory in his ‘Origins of the Family of Butler (The Irish Genealogist): Another ancestry which has come under my notice is that which claims for the house of Ormond a descent from one, Hervey Butelarius, who witnessed three or four charters of Alan, the Seneschall, at Dol, in Brittany, about 1086. This origin is suggested by Mr. A. S. Ellis in " Notes and Queries," ninth series, Vol. 6, p. 161, and Mr. J. H. Round in his " Origin of the Stuarts " in his Peerage and Family History, 1901, when dealing with a small group of Dol families who settled in England at the end of the reign of William the Conqueror, has the following footnote : " It would no doubt be rash to conjecture that the Hervey Butelarius of these charters was the ancestor of those Herveys from whom the Butlers of Ireland descended. But, if it should eventually prove to be no mere coincidence, the Butlership of Ireland would have an origin curiously parallel with the Stuartship of Scotland." In support of the above, I may mention that Walter of Dol, who was of this family, forfeited some time before Domesday, eight manors in Suffolk, and that three of these (?*) are held in the Survey by that Walter (de Caen) who is the undoubted ancestor of our Butlers. On the other hand, as I will show later, this Walter held lands in Norfolk certainly in the year 1071, and probably before. So that if a descent is to be proved from one of the Dol families, it will be necessary to show that the individual in question, who is claimed as an ancestor, came into England considerably before the end of the reign of William the Conqueror.
In Lord Dunboyne’s “Happy Families" file Q.2 (Butler
Journal 1#1), he attempts to answer the question “Who is the earliest known
forefather of the Butlers of Ireland?”:
He was named
Hervey and must have lived in the first half of the 12th century. We need to know
more about him…. Our Hervey may be the Hervey, son of Hubert, who with his
father attested a charter of Baderon to the nunnery of St. Georges at Rennes c.
1080/90 (Genealogist, N.S. xviii, 1). Again, he or his ancestor may have been
the 'Herveus pincerna' or 'Herveus botellarius' who, with other officers and tenants
of the castle of Dol in Brittany, attested two charters to the abbey of St. Florent,
one bearing the date 1086 (Calendar of Documents, France, 416)…. Etc.
This theory needs further explanation, as it could
relate to Walter de Dol who held lands in East Anglia prior to the Domesday
Book.
J.H. Round’s reference to Hervius Pincerna, and the 'Herveus son of Hubert' occurs in
his article “Origin of the Stewarts and their Chesney Connection”, in The
Genealogist, NS, v.18, 1:
“Since the publication in my last book of the paper on
“The Origin of the Stewarts”, certain additional facts have come or been
brought to my notice. The chief novelty produced in my paper was the appearance
of a “Float filius Alani dapiferi”, as a “baron” of William fitzBaderon, the
Breton Lord of Monmouth, together with the explanation that I offered for their
appearing in conjunction. I showed that the Lords of Monmouth came from the two
adjoining ‘communes’ of Epiniae and La Boussac, close to Dol, while the family
of Alan fitzFlaald were ‘dapiferi’ of Dol, and that the two families are found,
in England, as beneficiaries to the Abbey of St Florent de Saumur, which had enlisted
the sympathies of the Lords of Dol. It was at the dedication of Monmouth Priory
as a cell of that abbey that William fitz Baderon and “Float filius Alani
dapiferi” appear in conjunction.
It will be observed that William fitzBaderon, the
Domesday Baron, gives his consent to his father’s donation, and that those in
whose presence it is made are the Lords of Dol, and of (Pleine) Fougères in the
north-east corner of Brittany.
Further, among the charters I selected, when in France, as throwing light on the origin of the Stewarts, we have one, which I date circa 1080, concerning tithes at Pleine Fougères, which has among its witnesses “Badero; Guillelmo (sic) filius ejus; …. Herveus pincerna, while another, which is actually dated 23 December 1086, is witnessed by “Radulphus de Filgeriis; Alanus dapifer; Herveus botellarius. Yet another, which I also date circa 1080, has for its first two witnesses “Alanus siniscallus; Badero”.
(NB. Herveus pincerna/botellarius witnesses both
charters)
(Ref: Calendar of Documents Preserved in France,
pp.408,416, Nos. 1136, 1153, 1154 )
Now a charter relating to the nunnery of St
George of Rennes, which was granted by William’s father Baderon, has “Alanus
filius Flaaldi” for its first witness. Here then we have not only the two
families brought into conjunction in Brittany as in England, but, it would
seem, the respective fathers of the men named in the Monmouth charter.
(ref: Société Archéologique d’Ille et Vilaine,
vol. xi, pp.251-2)
NB. The charter of William filii Baderon is witnessed
by Alanus filius Flaaldi; Herveus pincerna; Hubertus; Herveus filius Huberti
Although the editor of the above charter gave its date
as 1040, he did not mention from what source this date was derived, and putting
together the evidence I have given, we shall be strongly disposed to date it as
c. 1080-1090. But the all-important question is- Who was its “Alanus filius
Flaaldi?” I am forced to the conclusion that he must have been the man whom I
placed at the head of the pedigree as ‘Alan dapifer (Dolensis). If I am right
in this conjecture, he was the grandfather and namesake of the well-known Alan fitzFlaald
temp. Henry I, and the name of his father carries the pedigree a generation further
back.
Alan fitzFlaald (ancestor of the Stewart kings) was survived by his widow Avelina, daughter of Ernulf de Hesdin, who became the wife of Robert fitz Walter, who joined with her in confirming to St. Peter’s Abbey, Gloucestershire in 1126, the church of (Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire. Which had been given long before by her mother Emmeline, wife of Ernulf de Hesdin. Robert fitzWalter, the husband of Alan’s widow was a man of some consequence, who enjoyed the favour of Henry I. Robert fitzWalter’s lands can be traced back to 1086, when they were held of Robert Malet by his ancestor Walter de Caen (Cadomo) in the three eastern counties.
*The lands mentioned by Blake Butler, as being forfeited by Walter de Dol, were listed in “Domesday Book and The Law” by Robin Fleming, (Cambridge Uni. Press 1998- Nos. 2268-70, 2809, 2850-1, 2942, 2962, 3053):
Shropham,
Seething, Fundenhall in Norfolk, and,
Middleton,
“Caldecota” near Bacton (possible Cotton), Thornham Magna, Stoke Ash, Ashfield,
and Rushmere (near Lowestoft) in Suffolk.
Suffolk
No. 2809- Middleton:
80 acres of land “Cyneric and Grim were the men of Eadric son of Ingeld,
and were commended to Robert Malet’s antecessor Eadric (of Laxfield). He
(Robert) loaned them to Walter de Caen after Walter de Dol forfeited.
Now Roger Bigot holds them from Earl Hugh’s fee.” Middleton was later
held by Roger de Glanville.
No. 2850-‘Caldecota’: TRE
6 freemen commended to Leofwine of Bacton held 74 ac. Of land in Caldecota. On
the day he forfeited, Walter de Dol was seised of 2- Wulfgifa and her son. Now
Robert Malet holds this.
No. 2852-
Thornham Magna: When he forfeited, Walter de Dol was seised of half
of Brunagar one of 4 freemen with 108 acres of land. Now Robert Malet holds all
of this.
No. 2942- Stoke
Ash: land from the King’s manor of Mendlesham. Walter de
Dol held it when he forfeited. Now held by Bury St Edmunds.
No. 2962-
Ashfield: TRE Swaerling the Priest a freeman in the soke and
commendation of the abbot, held 30 acres of land in Ashfield. Walter de Dol had
been seised of this priest when Walter forfeited his land.
No. 3053-Rushmere
(near Lowestoft): Walter de Dol was seised of 4 freemen on the day he forfeited
and later Earl Hugh was. Hugh de Montfort’s men say that Walter himself held
them from Hugh.
Norfolk:
Shropham and Seething: lands of Earl Hugh (of Chester)- Richard holds Shropham. The soke was the king's in Buckenham (near Attleborough) TRE and always until Walter de Dol had it of the gift of Ralph*, as Godric says. In Seething, were 9 freemen and 4 halves belonging to Stigand TRE and Walter de Dol removed them and added them to Hedenham.
Fundenhall: Lands of Earl Hugh- To this manor Walter de Dol added 2 freemen who are in Hapton etc. In Hapton there is a church with 15 acres. Of the whole of this Walter de Dol made 1 manor and the whole together is worth £9. Roger Bigod holds of the earl.
*Walter de Dol was a supporter of Ralph de Gael, Earl of East Anglia, (also Ralph the Staller) who was the leading figure in the 'Revolt of the Earls'. In 1075, the king's refusal to sanction a marriage between two powerful families caused a revolt in his absence. The leaders were Ralph, his brother-in-law Roger de Breteuil 2nd Earl of Hereford, and Waltheof 1st Earl of Northumberland. Waltheof was later executed. The Archbishop of Canterbury urged Earl Roger to return to his allegiance. Ralph sailed to Denmark and returned to England with a fleet of 200 ships under Cnut and Hakon which failed to do anything effective. Ralph and his wife, who had held out at Norwich until she obtained terms for herself and her followers, including Walter de Dol, who were deprived of their lands and allowed 40 days to leave the realm, retired to her estate in Brittany. Ralph was deprived of all his lands and of his earldom, with his lands handed mostly to Earl Hugh of Chester, and some to Robert Malet. In 1076, having plotted against Hoel II Duke of Brittany, Ralph was besieged at Dol, and King William came to Hoel's aid.
Again, none of the lands named as held by Walter de Dol were later held by the Walter family. And only one of the above was held, briefly, by Walter de Caen through Robert Malet.
There is no evidence of a connection of the Walter family with the Breton Lords of Monmouth.
And most importantly, as Walter de Dol returned to Brittany in 1075 after ‘The Revolt of the Earls’, and was deprived of his lands, there is no explanation for the birth of Hervey c.1080-90, unless Hervey arrived in East Anglia in the early 12th century as an adult, but that does not explain the Walter family holding lands in Bishops Hundred in the Honour of Eye.
THE MALET FAMILY
NB. Highly recommended article written by Dr. Katherine S. B. Keats-Rohan, ‘Domesday Book and the Malets: patrimony and the private histories of public lives’, (Printed Nottingham Medieval Studies 41, 1997 pp.13-56- online) for an understanding of the complex personal and regional relationships between the Malets, William the Conqueror and his close associates and family connections in Normandy, pre and post conquest.
Also highly
recommended ‘The King and Eye: A Study in Anglo-Norman Politics’, by
C.P. Lewis (The English Historical Review, Vol. 104, No. 412 [Jul 1989], pp.569-589,
Oxford Uni. Press- online at JSTOR)
Most of these Norman lords and knights in Suffolk were linked with the most powerful lord in Norfolk and Suffolk with huge land holdings in Domesday Book, named Robert Malet who accompanied the Conqueror with his father William Malet. Legend has it that William Malet was charged with burying the body of King Harold on the beach after the Battle of Hastings (account described by William Poitiers, chaplain of Duke William of Normandy when chronicling the Norman Conquest of England). He was also nearly killed at Hastings when his horse was killed beneath him, but was saved by Sire de Montfort and lord William de Vez-Pont, and remounted on a fresh horse.
The original Battle Roll of names of the Conqueror’s companions at the Battle of Hastings, compiled on the orders of William, was hung up by the monks in Battle Abbey built in the years after the Conquest. Of the history of the Roll subsequently to the dissolution of the monastery, nothing certain is known but presumed to have perished by fire in 1793. A number of historians claimed to have copied the names on the Roll before its disappearance, but they vary widely in the names included in the lists.
The 16th century work by Protestant English historian John Foxe, ‘Acts and Monuments’ covers the period of history from the beginning of Christianity to the reign of Queen Elizbeth I, and Volume 2 covers the period of the Conquest of England by William Duke of Normandy, and gives a list of William’s officers at the Conquest and other great Norman lords who supported him. The following are the pages from Foxe’s Battle Roll in his ‘Acts and Monuments’, v.2.
‘The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe’, v.II, [written 16th century], edited by the Rev. George Townsend, [London, 1849] p.136-138
NB. William
Malet’s son Robert Malet is listed in several of the Battle Roll lists compiled
by various historians.
Walter de Caen
accompanied Robert Malet as indicated in the Sibton Abbey Charters:
Anno Domini
millesimo sexagesimo sexto Willelmus dux Normannorum venit in Angliam et occiso
Haroldo tempore conquestus coronatus in regem, quo tempore quidam Walterus de
Cadomo vnit cum Roberto Malet comite Cornubie
Translation
In the year of
the Lord in the sixty-sixth William the leader of the Normans came to England
to kill Harold at time of the conquest crowned king, at which time a certain
Walter of Caen came with Robert Malet count of Cornwall (? erroneously
called Count of Cornwall- the honour of Eye was first attached to the Earldom
of Cornwall in 1221, so presumably the statement in the charter was written
after 1221. Sibton Abbey was founded by William de Chesney, grandson of Walter
de Caen, in 1150).
(Brown, Philippa, ed. ‘Sibton Abbey Cartularies and
Charters’. Vol. III. p.2, No. 470, Suffolk Charter Series [Vol. 9],
Woodbridge: Boydell for Suffolk Records Society, 1985. 2004.)
William Malet’s mother was an Englishwoman (Guy of Amiens described Malet as half Norman and half English), and it has been conjectured that his grandfather was probably one of the men who accompanied Emma of Normandy to England in 1002 for her marriage with Aetherlred. Emma of Normandy, daughter of Duke Richard I, became queen of England by marrying Ǣtheread the Unready in 1002, by whom she had sons Alfred Aetheling and Edward (the Confessor). After her husband’s death she married Cnut the Great in 1017 and had a son Hardecnut.
William Malet was lord of Graville-Ste-Honorine, near Le Havre in the Norman Pays-de Caux. The Malets also held land near the ducal centre at Caen in the department of Calvados which stretched eastwards to join the Pays-de Caux.
Map of area between Caen and Le Havre in Normandy
*The Malets were lords of Graville-Ste-Honorine; Walter
(fitzAlbrici) de Caen of Caen; the de Glanvilles of Glanville; Hubert de
MonteCanisy of Deauville, and William of Beaufour Bishop of Thetford.
The Malets were
the only Norman family of any significance to have had associations with both
Normandy and England throughout the 11th century. William Malet
attested a gift made c.1050-66 by one Adeloya of Beaumont to the abbey of
Montivilliers, north of Graville. Sometime between 1060 and 1070, William Malet
and his son Robert attested a ducal confirmation (ie. William Duke of Normandy)
for the abbey of Jumièges. This places Robert Malet’s birth in the 1040’s.
Note- while the
charter is dated ‘before 1079’, the date must predate 1070 when William
Malet was killed in the Fenland revolt.
(Chartes de
l'Abbaye de Jumièges, ed J.J. Vernier, 1916, pp.86-89- archive.org):
Viz. Signatories:
‘William Mallet, Robert his son’.
William was
married to Esilia/Hesilia, the daughter of Gilbert I Crispin de Tillières and
Gunnora d’Aunou, and had issue Robert, Gilbert and Beatrice, and possibly
Durand Malet(?). Lanfranc incorrectly states that Hesilia, sister of the two
Crispans who fought at Hastings, was the ‘mother’ (a clerical mistake)
of William Malet.
It is thought that the family’s lands in Lincolnshire, held by William and son Robert, and Durand Malet (William’s brother or son), may have been inherited from his mother’s family.
William Malet
was appointed high sheriff of Yorkshire in the 3rd year of William’s
reign. He and his wife and younger children were captured by the invading Danes
who slew 3000 Normans when they captured York, but were ransomed. This was
followed by the infamous ‘harrying of the north’ resulting in the huge scale
destruction and widespread famine. William was released and he was then appointed
sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk. William Malet died c.1171 during the Fenland
revolt and his extensive land-holdings in Suffolk and Norfolk, and Lincolnshire
and elsewhere, were inherited by his eldest son Robert who was granted the
Honor of Eye. In the Domesday survey of 1086, Robert held, as tenant-in-chief,
32 lordships in Yorkshire, 3 in Essex, 1 in Hampshire, 2 in Nottinghamshire, 8
in Lincolnshire and 221 in Suffolk/Norfolk whereof Eye was the chief. Most of
Malet’s estates, particularly in East Anglia, had been granted as successor to
the pre-1086 lord, Eadric of Laxfield, falconer to King Edward the Confessor.
(Tenant-in-chief: all
land was ultimately owned by the Crown, but held by lords who provided military
resources, or tax in return. The main landholders listed in Domesday Book in
1086 were the ‘tenants-in-chief’, either King William himself or one of around
1400 people who held land directly from the Crown, mostly Norman knights. In
turn, the tenants-in-chief sometimes granted these lands to a second lord or
tenant, usually Norman, in return for tax, and they were the immediate lord
over the peasants and freemen working the farms. They were often connected to
the tenant-in-chief through familial connections or from the same region in
Normandy.)
Robert appears to have lost his land-holdings during the reign of William Rufus, most likely after the rebellion of 1088. His lands, and those of Durand Malet in Lincolnshire were granted to royal favourite, Roger the Poitevin, son of lord Roger of Montgomery earl of Shrewsbury, one of the Conqueror’s closest companions. Following King William II’s death in 1100, and the succession of his brother, Henry I, several magnates in control of substantial lordships became involved in the opposition, supporting his elder brother Robert Curthose Duke of Normandy, and suffered the confiscation of their estates for their trouble, including the Montgomery brothers. However, Robert Malet reappeared in the public record three days after the death of William as a witness to Henry I’s coronation charter, and became Henry’s chamberlain and one of his closest counsellors. He regained those lands of the Honor of Eye in Suffolk (held by Roger the Poitevin under Rufus), as an intimate of Henry I, before his death c.1105-6, with some historians suggesting he died at the Battle of Tinchebray on 28 September 1106 as part of King Henry’s invading force against his brother Robert Curthose. Robert Malet’s heir, William Malet II, returned to his estates in Normandy after being banished from England in 1109, with the Malet lands in England going back to the Crown. However, it is notable that those lords who held lands from Robert Malet, such as the sons of Walter de Caen and Hubert de MonteCanisy and William Gulafre, were not disinherited from those inherited lands, and continued to hold them from the Crown as tenants-in-chief.
Professor Robin Fleming in her “Kings and Lords in Conquest England” (1991), Ch 5, explained the settlement of these lands: The estates of William Malet the sheriff of Yorkshire, who was dead by 1071, had been granted his estates by ‘antecessor’. In the first seven years of the Conqueror’s reign, the lands of individual or small groups of Anglo-Scandinavian lords which became available through death or disgrace were bestowed in their entirely upon Norman lords, designated as ‘successors’. By c.1073, the supply of great Anglo-Scandinavian antecessors had been exhausted, which led to granting of lands by ‘Hundred’ to his most powerful and trusted magnates. All the estates within hundreds, nor already incorporated within the demesne, belonging to the church, or acquired by secular lords from antecessors, were bestowed in their entirety upon individual Norman tenants-in-chief, thus creating a series of compact lordships made up of the estates, or portions of estates of several pre-conquest landlords.
Few
tenants-in-chief could hope to govern all their estates directly. The
establishment of Norman tenants on the ground was therefore an essential
element in the imposition of Norman authority. By 1135, the Normans had largely
succeeded in establishing the structure of tenant settlement that was to endure
for the next 200 years.
(Fleming’s
article recounted in thesis of Paul Dalton, 1990, ‘Feudal Politics in
Yorkshire 1066-1154’-ethesis.whiterose.ac.uk/1870/1/DX182025.pdf- p36, 80+)
(Prof. Robin
Fleming also wrote “Domesday Book and the Law: Society and legal custom in
early medieval England”, 1998, a valuable resource for researchers of the
Domesday Book)
Dr. Katherine Keats-Rohan in her article on the Malets: Domesday Book and the Malets: patrimony and the private histories of public lives” (1996, printed Nottingham Medieval Studies), p.4:
It is likely
that William Malet held a small estate in Lincolnshire before 1066, and his
Lincolnshire estates were the lands regarded by his descendants as ancestral
lands, which they held for at least the next two centuries, in stark
contrast to the Suffolk lands which they held only until 1110 at the latest.
Durand Malet, who
also held lands in Lincolnshire was clearly a relative of William and Robert,
probably a younger brother of Robert.
Robert Malet made a charter to Eye Priory which was founded in the period 1080’s-1102 by Robert, as a cell of the abbey of Bernay in Normandy, and was the first house of Benedicine monks to be established in Suffolk after the Norman conquest in the centre of a feudal lordship or ‘honor’, with the fief of Eye having been given by William the Conqueror to Robert’s father William Malet with permission to found a priory.
But the date at
which it was built and endowed is likely to have been between 1100 and 1105
after Henry I succeeded William Rufus under whose reign Robert Malet was
banished to Normandy. Robert’s preamble mentions the intended spiritual
benefits for the king (William I, d.1086), the queen (Matilda d.1083), his
parents William and Esilia, and all his relatives living and dead. Notably, no
mention is made of his wife. According to Prof. Katherine Keats
Rohan, there is some evidence that, before 1086, Robert had a wife named
Matilda who was probably a close relative of his tenant Hubert de Montecanisy.
The marriage probably occurred sometime before the death, in 1071, of his
father. His second marriage to Emmelina, if she was indeed the daughter of Hugh
de Montfort, had occurred before the Domesday survey. We may suppose that by
1100 Robert Malet had, by two wives, at least three legitimate sons, one of
whom was old enough to attest the king’s charters from c.1100/01 onwards. His heir
was named William II. Robert’s intended foundation of Eye priory received a
charter of assent from his sister Beatrice (wife of Robert’s Suffolk tenant
William of Arques, also lord of Folkestone in Kent, d.1090) who mentioned also
their brother Gilbert.
The fee of Herve Bituricensis is noted for the high level of association of its lands and men with William Malet of his predecessor Eadric. Parts of 23 of the 33 manors held by Herve were held by Robert Malet in 1086. In 16 of them William Malet or Eadric of Laxfield were named as Herve’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 Herve. Very many of Herve’s manors were also mentioned in connection with the past or present jurisdiction of Ely Abbey. Much of Herve’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 Herve’s fief is that his wife was another of Robert’s sisters, whose name occurs in a Bury St Edmund’s charter as Ieuita, doubtless a corrupt form of Judith, comparable with the hypocoristic form Jueta.
(Domesday
Book and the Malets: patrimony and the private histories of public lives,
1996, by Katherine Keats-Rohan, Nottingham Medieval Studies)
Eye Priory Cartulary
and Charters II (ed. Vivien Brown), p.10:
As to Robert Malet’s
immediate family, there is only one certain reference to his wife. A charter in
the secular Goldingham cartulary, grant of Robert to Hugh of Goldingham of
lands in Bulmer and Little Belstead, names Robert’s wife as Mathilda and says
that it is at her request that he receives Hugh’s homage (Hugh is referred to
as Robert’s ‘good knight’ who does homage in Robert’s ‘court’ at Eye, and the
charter is sealed at Robert’s request with his great seal. The charter is entered twice in an early 14th
century hand and in an early 15th century hand. The whole language
of the charter mitigates against it as a genuine document in its extant form.)
Robert held a manor in Belstead and Goldingham Hall in Bulmer in 1086. The
association of Robert’s wife with the gift may imply relationship to the
Goldingham family or possibly to the Montchensy/MonteCanisy family. The two
manors were held of Robert in 1086 by Hubert de Montecanisy/de Montchensy who
became seneschal of Eye after Robert’s death, and the Montchensy’s held these
fees in the 13th century.
The Eye Priory Cartulary and Charters show the struggle of the priory to keep intact the gifts made by Robert Malet and his tenants after Robert died shortly after his foundation.
Malet’s Charter to Eye Priory did not survive in its original form. The text of the charter, probably written in its present form as late as 1120, some ten years after the disgrace and banishment of Robert’s successor William Malet II, and is a summary of gifts made to the priory by Robert and others between the date of its foundation and 1106 the year that Robert either died or left England for the last time.
A long document listing numerous donors, the Charter has been summarized and translated from Latin, in the “Eye Priory Cartulary and Charters”, Part One, edited by Vivien Brown (Boydell Press, Suffolk Records Society, 1992)
Translation in
the Eye Cartulary of the Key Points of Charter One:
Foundation
charter of Robert Malet whereby he announces that, with
the assent of his lord King William (I), for his soul and that of his wife,
queen Mathilda, for his own soul and for the souls of his father William
Malet, of his mother Helsilia, and of his ancestors and kin, he is
constructing a monastery at Eye, and installing a community of monks therein.
For their maintenance he confers upon them and confirms to them from his own
lands, churches and tithes of the following:
i. the church of
Eye, founded in honour of St Peter with all its lands and tithes.
ii. part of his
burgage in Eye with one fishpond
iii. the tithe
of the market of Eye
iv. all the
churches of Dunwich built or to be built etc.
v. the church of
Laxfield with all its lands and tithes
vi. the church
of Badingham with its lands and tithes and one carucate of land in that vill.
vii. the church
of Bawdsey (Norf) with all its lands, tithes and other possessions
vii. the church
of Benhall with lands, tithes and appurtenances
ix. the church
of Barrowby (Lincs) with its chapels, lands, tithes and other possessions
x. the church
of Sedgebrook/Seckebroc (Lincs) with its chapels, lands and tithes.
xi. the church
of Welbourn (Lincs) with its chapel and tithes
xii. from
Robert’s own lands the vill of Stoke Ash as a whole ie. the church with its
lands and tithes and other possessions, together with the entire tenement which
Benedict, Robert’s chaplain, held of him
xiii. at the
request of Osbert de Conteville, all the land which he held in Occold
xiv. the church
of Thorndon with all its lands and tithes
xv. the vill
called Bedfield with its church
xvi. with the
assent of Walter fitzGrip, all the land which he had in Fressingfield with the
mill
xvii. the tithe
of Playford with the church of that vill with its lands and tithes, and
Alfric de Fen with all his land (later confirmed by the
two sons of Humphrey filius Robert who held Playford in Domesday)
xviii. the tithe
of Oyn Compayn of Instead (Weybread)
xix. the grant
of Walter the arblaster (crossbowman), namely two-thirds of his tithe of
Halegestowe and of Gosewolde (in Thrandeston) and the church of St Margaret
(Shottisham) with its land
xx. the church
of Hollesley with its land, tithe and other possessions
xxi. the church
of Dennington with its lands and tithes
xxii. the
churches of Brundish and Tannington with their lands, tithes and possessions
xxiii. the
church of Sutton with appurtenances
xxiv. the
churches of Stradbroke and Wingfield with their lands and tithes
xxv. all the
fisheries of Welles and in Elyn and the whole tithe of pannage of his woodes
both of money and pigs, of sheaves and lambs or calves, and the tithes of all
his forests and assarts, of cheeses and fleeces, and all other tithes
xxvi. all the tithe of the following manors of his
demesne: Eye, Stradbroke, Redlingfield, Dennington, Tannington, Badingham,
Kelton, Hollesley, Leiston, Laxfield, Barrowby (Lincs), Sedgebrook
(Lincs-‘Seckebroc’), Welbourn (Lincs), Wakes Colne (Essex), and South Cave (Yorks.)
(NB.
this section of relevance to Hubert Walter the elder, in later confirmation
charters)
xxvii. they are
to hold all their possessions free and quit of all exaction and to have soke
and sake and toll and team and infangenetheof in Eye, in Dunwich, and in all
places where they have lands, and have all the liberties ‘which my lord William
king of England granted me when he gave me my honour’.
Robert Malet
also gives them:
xxviii. the
church of Thornham Magna (Pelecoch) with its lands and appurtenances.
xxix. the church
of Thornham Parva and Mellis with their lands and tithes.
In addition, he
grants and confirms the gifts which his barons and knights made to them with
his consent namely:
xxx. two
thirds of his tithe of the demesne of Huntingfield, Linstead and Byng (in
Pettestree) by Roger de Huntingfield
xxxi. two thirds
of his tithe in Wyverstone by Richard Hovel
xxxii. two
thirds of his tithe of Okenhill (in Badingham) by William Gulafre
xxxiii. two
thirds of his tithe in Bedingfield and of his land in Framlingham by Oger (de
Pucher of Bedingfield)
xxxiv. two
thirds of his tithe of Whittingham (in Fressingfield) and Hasketon by Ernald
son of Roger
xxxv. two thirds
of his tithe of Creeting St Peter by Ralph Grossus
xxxvi. the
church of St Botulph’s, Iken, with its appurtenances; two thirds of his tithe
of Clakestorp (in Eyke) and Glemham, and a certain sokeman in Pettaugh by
William de Roville
xxxvii. two
thirds of his tithe of Brome and Shelfanger (Norf), and of that which Alwin the
priest held of him in Beria (Bourn Hall in Wherstead) and the church of that
vill with its lands and tithes by Hugh de Avilers
xxxix. the tithe
of 30 acres of the fee of the count of Brittany (in Glemham)
xl. two thirds
of his tithe of Gislingham and Roydon (Norf) by Odo de Charun’
xli. half the
church of Gislingham with the land and all else pertaining to that half by
Godard (le Kayli) of Gislingham and his wife
xlii. two thirds
of his tithe of Rickenhall (Superior) by Hubert of Rickenhall (probably Hubert MonteCanisy who held Rickinghall
Superior in Domesday, from Malet)
xliii. his
hospice in Yaxley by Hubert de Montchensy/MonteCanisy
xliv. his
hospice at Yaxley by Randulf de Glanville (ie. Randulf the elder- possible brother of Robert de Glanville, and father
(?) of Hervey de Glanville and grandfather of Rannulf de Glanville chief
justiciar)
xlv. his tithe
at Huntingfield by Robert Malus Nepos
xlvi. his tithe
of 100 acres in Huntingfield by Jocelin of Hollesley (?Rocelin of Linstead and Hollesley?)
xlvii. the
church of Braiseworth with its free land, together with the tithe pertaining to
his own house by Geoffrey of Braiseworth
xlviii. two
thirds of his tithe (in Peasenhall) by Fulcred of Peasenhall
xlix. the tithe
of Humphrey son of Unuey
l. Robert Malet
gives the church of Yaxley with all its appurtenances
lii. two thirds
of his tithe in Wilby and the church of that vill with its lands and tithes by
Jordan (possibly related to Loernic who held Wilby
in Domesday)
lii. Robert
Mallet gives all the churches and all the tithes of his own manors pertaining
to the castle of Eye, and to the other men, knights and sokemen of his
jurisdiction he grants and commands that they shall make gifts to his monastery
of eye according to their resources.
liii. he
commands that the fair which he has granted to the monks shall be held for 4
days from 1 August, and that those going and returning during those 4 days
shall have his peace and the protection of his lord king William and no one
shall harm them under penalty of £10.
All these things
with the consent of witnesses (listed) Robert Malet has offered to the church
of his monks upon the alter of St Peter’s of Eye and has confirmed for ever by
this charter.
Witnesses:
Hubertus de
MonteCanisy, Rogerus filius Walter de Huntingefeud,
Willemus de Rovillis, William Gulafre’, Robertus filius Walteri,
Robertus filius Erefridi, Odo de Charun’, Herveus de Glanvill’, Osbertus
de Cunteville’, Benedictus capellanus, Judikellus capellanus, Galfridus filius
Urselli, Arnulphus de Wydrevill’, Walterus de Conovill’, Egg’ prepositus,
Fulcredus de Pesenhal’, Hubertus Malus Nepos, Robertus Rocator,
Godebertus de Witsand, Walterus Arbalestarius (crossbowman).
NB. The
signatories included de Caen’s sons Robert filius Walter, and Roger filius
Walter de Huntingfield, and Hervey de Glanville, Hubert de MonteCanisy, and
Walter the crossbowman.
The curious names in the charter are Robert Malus nepos of Huntingfield, and Hubert Malus nepos.
‘Nepos’
has various
meanings, undefined close relationships including nephew, grandson, close
relation. And considering that the
charter lists ‘the tithe at Huntingfield of Robert Malus nepos’ associating
him with Huntingfield which was de Caen’s land, it is difficult to make sense
of.
In Domesday, Robert Malet held the lands of EYE, and his subtenants in Eye were:
Herbert
(Hubert, 1st Prior of Eye Priory?), Robert Malet, Robert Malet’s mother (Esilia), Walter
de Caen, ‘Walter’ (possibly de Caen?), and Walter the bowman (Arbalestarius).
It is thought that Robert Malet died at the Battle of Tinchebray, Normandy, on 28 September 1106, between an invading force led by Henry I and the Norman army of his brother, Robert Curthose Duke of Normandy, resulting in a decisive victory for Henry’s knights and the capture of Robert Curthose, although evidence is lacking. In 1110, the Anglo Saxon Chronicle records that William Malet (II), thought to be Robert’s eldest son, was deprived of his lands in England by King Henry I, and returned to his estates in Normandy. William was one of Duke Robert of Normandy’s companions on the First Crusade in 1096, where he is rated among the Knight’s Banneret.
Three entries in “An Outline Itinerary of King Henry the First” by William Farrer, 1919:
p.10- 1101A.D.-
ordination of monks at Norwich confirmed by Henry and his queen- signatories,
included Robert Malet and son William Malet (spelt Maleth):
p.45- 1107A.D.-
William Malet signatory to a charter of Roger Bigod to Thetford (also Mon. Ang.
v.5, p148)
p. 56- 1110A.D.-
William Malet expelled by Henry
©
Email contact: butler1802 @ hotmail. com (no spaces)
Links to other chapters in this blog:
Part I: Ancestral origins of Theobald Walter, ancestor of the Butlers of Ireland:
Part 2: Ancestral origins of Theobald Walter: possible candidates for the Walter surname named ‘Walter’ in the Domesday Book
Part 3: Ancestral origins of Theobald Butler: Analysis of the various theories of the origins of the Walter family:
Part 4: Ancestral origins of Theobald Butler: the lands held by the Walter family
Chapters of a blog on the:
History of the Butlers, Earls of Ormond and Chief Butlers of Ireland (Chapter 1):
http://butlergenealogyireland.blogspot.com/2013/03/history-of-butlers-earls-of-ormond-and.html
Butler Pedigree (Chapter 2):
http://butlergenealogyireland.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-butler-pedigree.html
History of Irish Butlers- various Butler Branches (Chapter 3):
http://butlergenealogyireland.blogspot.com/2013/03/genealogical-history-of-irish-butlers.html
History of the MacRichard Line (Chapter 4):
http://butlergenealogyireland.blogspot.com/2013/03/history-of-butlers-macrichard-line.html
Blog on Richard, 1st Viscount Mountgarrett and the Butlers of Co Wexford
