| |
Individual:
Richard de Reviers, Lord of Reviers, Vernon, and Nehou (all in Normandy). [Burke's Peerage. p. 832]
Richard; feudal Lord of Vernon and holder of many manors at the time of the Domesday Survey 1086; enjoyed a local prominence in the County Palatine of Chester as Baron of Shipbrooke (a subinfeudatory rank (but not a peerage title) conferred by Hugh d'Avranches or Lupus (ie. "Wolf", so-called from his ferocity and acquisitiveness), Earl of Chester with quasi-regal powers, so created 1071 in the reign of his great-uncle of the half blood William I ("The Conqueror"). [Burke's Peerage, p. 2884 on the Barony of Vernon]
Note: Burke's does not document that Richard was made an Earl of Devon.
RICHARD DE REVIERS, Seigneur de Reviers, Vernon, and NÈhou, in Normandy. His parentage is unknown, but he has been conjectured to have been son and heir of William DE VERNON (a). In Domesday he appears as the possessor of a single Manor Mosterton in Dorset. It has been erroneously considered that he was created Earl of Devon by Henry I. The authorities for this are the statements made in two monastic chronicles. There is, however, abundant charter evidence that he never styled himself an Earl, that his wife in her widowhood never styled herself a Countess, and that none of their children, nor their grandchildren, ever so styled them. He was the founder (in the technical sense of the word) of the Abbey of Montebourg.
He married Adelise, daughter of William PEVEREL of Nottingham, the elder, by Adeline, his wife. He died 8 September 1107, and was buried in the Abbey of Montebourg. His widow survived her eldest son, Baldwin, and died 27 May 1156 or later. [Complete Peerage IV:309-11, (transcribed by Dave Utzinger)]
(a) It appears from a charter of Henry I to the canons of Breamore that Richard's son, Baldwin had an uncle Hugh, who (if by 'Avunnculus' is meant 'patruus') may be the Hugh de Redveris mentioned in a memorandum of La Trinite at Caen, and also the Hugh mentioned as son of William de Vernon in a document (of date about 1067) in the cartulary of La Trinite at Rouen, signed by William Vernonensis and Emma his wife. In the register of Carisbrooke it is said that Richard de Reviers was 'nepos' of William Fitz Osborn, after whose death (his sons John & Richard having dvp.) the Isle of Wight was inherited by the said Richard, 'tunc Comes Exonie.' So that this Richard may have been son of William de Vernon, by Emma, sister of William fitz Osborn. The continuator of William of Jumieges states that a niece of Gunnor the wife of Duke Richard was married to Osmund de Centumvillis, Vicomte de Vernon, and was mother of the first Fulk de Aneio and of the mother of the first Baldwin de Reviers.
Richard de Abrincis, surnamed de Redvers, having s. to the honours and possession of his father, resigned the Barony of Okehampton, the sheriffalty of Devon, and the custody of the castle at Exeter, in favour of his nephew, Robert de Abrincis, and was created Earl of Devon by King Henry I with a grant of the Isle of Wight in fee. This nobleman (who, from residing chiefly at Exeter, was generally called Earl of Exeter) m. Adeliza, dau. and co-heiress of William FitzOsborne, Earl of Hereford, and had issue,
I. Baldwin de Redvers, his successor.
II. William de Redvers, surnamed de Vernon.
III. Robert de Redvers.
I. Hadwise, m. to William de Romare, Earl of Lincoln.
Richard de Redvers, 1st Earl of Devon, d. in 1137, and was s. by his eldest son, Baldwin de Redvers. [Sir Bernard Burke, Dormant and Extinct Peerages, Burke's Peerage, London, 1883, p. 140, Courtenay, Barons Courtenay, Earls of Devon]
Jim Weber posts the following from Curt Hofemann that contains some of the debate/speculation about the ancestry of Richard: Below is way more than you probably ever wanted on this subject. I apologize in advance for its length: Luke Potter posted to gen-medieval@rootsweb.com on 09 Jan 1998 Subject: Re: Baldwin de Reviers: Richard's parentage has long been shrouded in confusion. Dugdale said he was the son of Baldwin de Meules, but this was based on the misconception that Richard fitz Baldwin was the same person as Richard de Redvers. It has also been argued more recently that Richard was the son of a Baldwin de Redvers who is mentioned in the deathbed charter of his brother Richard in 1060. However, it is most likely that Richard was a son of William de Vernon, lord of Vernon, Normandy who died after 1077, and probably before 1089. A charter of Richard de Vernon (grandson or great grandson of Richard de Redvers) preserved by Thomas Stapleton and dated by him to 1186 states that confirmo donationem quam primus Willelmus de Vernone ANTECESSOR MEUS, cujus corpus in ecclesia de Vernone jacet... If this is taken in conjunction with the facts that WIlliam de Vernon had a son named Hugh, and that Richard's son Baldwin had an uncle named Hugh, it shows that William had two sons, Hugh and Richard.
A dissenting argument on Richard's ancestry: Diana Trenchard posted privately to me on 9 Jan 1998 Subject: Re: Baldwin de Reviers . . . As you will see, my quote from Bearman (1994) comes down on the other side of the possible ancestry of the first Richard Redvers. I'll leave you to judge the evidence. . . Richard de Redvers (died 1107) was the founder of the family in England as a consequence of his support for Henry prior to his becoming King Henry I. His son Balwin was created Earl of Devon in 1141 by Matilda as a reward for his vigorous support of her against Stephen. The following is a quote from the Introduction in "Charters of the Redvers Family and the Earldom of Devon 1090-1217 by Robert Bearman, pub 1994 by Devon and Cornwall Record Society, New Series, Vol 37. "The origins of the Redvers family are obscure. For many years genealogists thought otherwise, due to their reliance on William Dugdale's 'Baronage of England' (1675-6), which had mistakenly equated Richard de Redvers with Richard the son of Baldwin de Meules, William I's sheriff of Devon. [footnote: His mistake was still being repeated more than 200 years later: eg DNB, iii, 34; Notes and Queries, 12th series, vii,(4 Dec 1920), p445.] The editors of 'The Complete Peerage' were aware of Dugdale's error but further compounded matters by proposing as Richard's father William de Vernon, prominent in Normandy in the eleventh century.['Complete Peerage',iv,310; 'William the Conqueror, D.C.Douglas, London, 1964,pp87-8.] The evidence on which they relied, however, does not bear this out, [footnote: their argument hinged on the relationship between Hugh and William de Vernon in a charter quoted in Round, 'Calendar', p23, no 82. The calendar makes William the father of Hugh, but in fact the relationship was the other way round ('Chartularium de Mont Rothomagi, p430, no 16).] A more plausible theory had already been advanced by Thomas Stapleton in the 1840s but in such a confused manner that later genealogists were unable to follow his arguments, [footnote: 'Magni Rotuli Scaccarii Normanniae', 2 vols, Royal Historical Society, London, 1840-4, ii, pp cclxix-cclxxx; and see JR Planche, 'The Conqueror and his Companions', 2 vols, London, 1874, ii, 46, and GH White in 'The Genealogist', NS xxxvii (1921), p131.]. It was based on a charter of 1060, now available in modern edition, which mentions three Redvers brothers: Richard (who died in that year), William and Baldwin, [footnote: 'Recueil des Actes des Ducs de Normandie', ed M. Faroux, Caen, 1961, p328, no 147. The brothers' surname occurs only in the rubric.]. It was Stapleton's belief that this Baldwin was Richard's father, mainly on the grounds that Richard in turn named his eldest son Baldwin. This may seem inconclusive but the argument is given some support by Robert de Torigni in one of his interpolations in the Chronicle of William de Jumieges [pp 328-9]. Clearly the matter must be left in some doubt, but Stapleton's argument, unlike the others, is at least not based on errors and should therefore be preferred.
Research note: CP Shows that Baldwin de Redvers (II), Earl of Devon, had an uncle Hugh. Assuming correct use of latin this would mean that his father Richard had a brother of this name. It is then hypothesized that this Hugh was the same as the Hugh, son of William de Vernon and his wife Emma, which would provide the same parentage for Richard. The Genealogy of the founders of Carisbrook show this same Richard to be nephew of William Fitz Osbern, and thus it was hypothesized that Richard, the first English Redvers/Vernon, was son of William de Vernon and Emma Fitz Osbern, who in turn was daughter of Osbern de Bolbec (in a 2nd msg TAF corrected name to de Crepon) and Emma d'Ivry. However this parentage for Richard was disproven. This is reported in van Houtz article, Robert de Torigni as Genealogist, in Studies in Medieval History presented to R Allen Brown, and I have not had the time to track down her reference for the disproof.
In a more complete discussion of the family in the article Aspects of Robert de Torigny's Genealogies Revisited (in Nottingham Medieval Studies 27:21-7). This shows that in the generation prior to Richard, there is a Baldwin, a Richard who d.s.p., and their (presumed) brother William, son of Hugh (the author hypothesizes that William was either the youngest child of Hugh, or the only child, making Richard and Baldwin half-brothers). This last William appears identical to the William who married Emma, and had Hugh. The author calls her Emma Fitz Osbern, but this forgets that her identity as a Fitz Osbern depends on her identity as mother of Richard, which has been rejected (if he has other reasons, he does not give them). The author then hypothesizes that Richard (father of Earl Baldwin) and his brother Hugh are sons of Baldwin, and that this Baldwin is the same as the Baldwin de Redvers that Robert names as son of a daughter of Osmund de Centumuilliers, vicomte de Vernon (otherwise difficult to identify) by a niece of Duchess Gunnor.
Now for my own speculation (entirely unsupported!). Either the first Baldwin de Redvers, in marrying a sister of William Fitz Osbern was within the prohibited degree (of which the Normans tended to be rather scrupulous) since his wife would be granddaughter of Gunnor's brother, and his mother was granddaughter of one of Gunnor's siblings, or else Robert has erred here. Could it be that there was only one relationship with Gunnor, that Richard was great-nephew of William Fitz Osbern, and that Baldwin's mother, was daughter of a nephew (Osbern de Crepon, son of Herfast, her brother) and not of a niece (the unnamed wife of Osmund)? One could even go a step more (if William, son of Hugh was in fact a half-brother), and suggest that Robert, in confusing Osmund with Osbert shuffled generations somewhat, and that Osmund de Centumuilliers married a great-niece of Gunnor, daughter of her nephew Osbert, and by him was mother of Baldwin (rather than him being maternal grandson).
It could even be (I am speculating on the fly, without my references, but I suspect this version would stretch chronology too much, making William Fitz Osbern too much older than Richard) that Baldwin was maternal grandson of Osmund, and he in turn married the daughter of Osbert (Robert did have a tendancy to drop generations, as appears to have been the case in the Montgomery and Warenne connections to Gunnor). [Ref: TAF 15 Nov 1996]
Richard de Reviers. "Redvers" is a later spelling. The Lordship of the Island was valued for its rents, not its "very high honour" ~ a concept of later times. Richard did not adopt the style of Earl, and he died on 8 September 1107, not in 1140.
|
| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
|
| |
