Aufrica Huntingdon

Family/Spouse: William de Say. William (son of William de Say and Beatrice de Mandeville) was born about 1126 in Kimbolton, Norfolk, England; died before 1 Aug 1177. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

1. Beatrix de Say was born about 1160 in Kimbolton, Norfolk, England; died before 19 Apr 1197.
2. Maud de Say was born about 1155 in Kimbolton, Norfolk, England.

Henry married Ada (Adelaide) de Warenne in 1139. Ada (daughter of 2nd Earl of Surrey William II de Warenne and Isabel (Elizabeth ) de Vermandois) was born about 1120 in Surrey, England; died in 1178 in Huntingdon, Huntingdonshire, England; was buried in Kelso, Roxburgh, Scotland. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Other Events and Attributes:

• Name: Ada De Huntingdon

David married Maud Huntingdon in 1113. Maud (daughter of Earl of Huntingdon and Northumberland Waltheof Siwardsson and of Lens Judith) was born about 1072 in Huntingdon, Northumberland, England; died on 23 Apr 1130 in Scone, Perthshire, Scotland. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Maud, m. 1st, to Simon de St. Liz, and 2ndly, to David, brother of Alexander, King of Scotland. [Sir Bernard Burke, Dormant, Abeyant, Forfeited, and Extinct Peerages, Burke's Peerage, Ltd., London, 1883, p. 467, St. Liz, Earls of Huntingdon]

William married Isabel (Elizabeth ) de Vermandois in 1118 in Pays du Valois, Bretagne, France. Isabel (daughter of Hugh "The Great" Capet, Duke of France and Burgundy and Adelaide de Vermandois) was born on 13 Feb 1081 in Vermandois, Normandy, Bretagne, France; died on 13 Feb 1131 in Sens, Saône-et-Loire, Bourgogne, France; was buried in St. Nicaise, Meulan, France-Sens, Saone-et-Loire, Bourgogne, France. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Died:
Alnwick Castle, Northumberland, England

Malcolm married Margaret "of Scotland" Ætheling in 1068 in Dunfermline Abbey, Fife, Scotland. Margaret (daughter of Edward "The Exile" Ætheling and Agatha Wladimirowwitsch) was born about 1045 in Castle Reka, Southern Hungary; died on 16 Nov 1093 in Edinburgh Castle, Scotland; was buried in Dunfermline Abbey, Fife, Scotland. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

BIOGRAPHY: http://www.dcs.hull.ac.uk/cgi-bin/gedlkup/n=royal?royal01512

Canonized 1250 and her feast day is 16th November. In 1057 she arrived at the English court of Edward the Confessor. Ten years later she was in exile after William defeated Harold at the Battle of Hastings. She fled to Scotland where she was married against her wishes to King Malcolm to whom she bore six sons and two daughters. Her unlearned and boorish husband grew daily more graceful and Christian under the queen's graceful influence. Her remains were removed to Escorial Spain and her head Douai, France.

http://www.talweb.com/redlimey/gene/saxonkings.htm#MARGARET
Queen Margaret, "a saintly and determined young woman," began to strip the old Scottish traditions and ways from society. She brought with her the modern culture of England and the current religious beliefs of the Catholic church. Amoung other things, she imposed all the English religious practices upon the Scottish clergy. She was successful in nearly completely erradicating what little was left of the ancient Celtic and Druidic practices. She also saw to the rebuilding of the Monastery of Iona.

St. Margaret died 16 Nov 1093, three days after her husband was killed in an ambush. Her last words are said to have been a prayer of thanks to God for the pain and sadness which purified her in her last days. Her burial is believed to be at the Monastery of Iona. Although I have found no exact mention of this, I have found referance that all kings (and presumably their queens) were buried here up until it was taken by King Magnus Barelegs of Norway in 1098.

For all her actions and benefactions, she was canonized by the Catholic Church in 1251 and became Saint Margaret.

Notes:

Life and Times of Waltheof, Earl of Huntingdon and Northumberland By Geoff Boxell
STOLEN GLORY
Waltheof, Earl of Huntingdon and Northumberland

Unlike his contemporary and fellow resistance leader, Edric the Wild, the life of Waltheof is reasonably well documented. The youngest son of one of Canute's Danish jarls, Siward, and Aefled, the daughter of the English Earl of Northumberland, he appears to have been prepared as a child for a life in the Church. This all changed when Siward, with the encouragement of King Edward the Confessor and the Witan, led an expeditionary force in 1054 to Scotland in support of Malcolm, son of Dunstan, King of Scots, against King Thorfinn Macbeth. In the resultant campaign Siward's eldest son, Osbarn, was killed, thus leaving Waltheof at the likely age of 10, as Siward's heir. Siward died from natural causes in 1055. The earldom was given to Tostig Godwinson as Waltheof was obviously too young to control a vital marcher region.

For a variety of reasons, Northumberland revolted against Tostig in 1065 and the thegns demanded that the earldom be given to Morcar, brother of the Earl of Mercia, Edwin. The lower part of the earldom, what had been Middle Anglia, was passed to Waltheof and his title is now given sometimes as Earl of Huntingdon and sometimes that of Northampton. Given that the earldoms in England at that time were awarded on a combination of family mana and personal ability, this granting of a minor earldom to the young and inexperienced Waltheof can be seen as a wise and shrewd move.

The young Earl's involvement in the battles of 1066 is subject to much speculation. The reliable English sources are silent but various Icelandic sources contain garbled and, at times contradictory, story of him being involved in the battles of Fulford, Stamford Bridge and Hastings. Be that as it may, by late 1066 he had made his peace with William the Bastard and retained his earldom. This in itself suggests that he was not involved at Hastings, as William had proclaimed all who fought against him there traitors and their land confiscated. This presumptuous proclamation was made despite the fact that he had not being proclaimed King by the Witan until much later!

Waltheof was one of the hostages, including Edwin, Morcar and Archbishop of Canterbury Stigand, taken to Normandy in 1067 and kept there till mid 1068. The North of England at this time was still out of William's grasp, though he had appointed Copsi, a henchman of Tostig Godwinson, to rule in the absence of the hostage, Morcar. This may have been a very cunning move as the North then seethed with disputes between the various thegns appointed by King Harold, Earl Morcar and William the Bastard. Another unsettling element was the presence of Edgar Aetheling who had, after King Harold's death, been declared King by the Witan. Over this fermenting brew of self-interest there hovered the vinegar fly of Gospatric, a descendent of the old Northumbrian kings and a cousin of the King of Scots. At an opportune moment Gospatric bought the earldom of Northumberland from the money hungry William.

1068 saw the first uprising in Northumberland against the new Norman king, but the split leadership ensured it fizzled out before the flames of revolt could catch. 1069 and there were four uprisings in the area. Waltheof appears in the last and most important of them. The first uprising had been caused by the appointment of Robert of Comings as Earl of Northumberland to replace Gospatric, who had fled to Scotland when the previous year's risings had collapsed. The northerners had found it hard enough to accept a southerner such as Tostig as Earl, and they certainly didn't want a Frenchman. They killed Robert and his whole force of 500-900 men (accounts vary) at Durham, allowing only one to escape and tell the tale. Encouraged by this the City of York revolted, slaying the Norman governor, but failing to take the newly erected castle. Eastertide and the whole North erupted, but William soon brought up an army and broke the Northumbrian force that was besieging York castle. However, it was the arrival of the Danish fleet in September 1069 that caused the Normans to suffer their heaviest defeat in the North.

King Swegyn Astrithson of Denmark had a strong claim on the English throne. An appeal to him by the English to pursue that claim, and revenge his cousin, King Harold, had been made during William's absence in Normandy in 1067. Ever cautious, Swegyn did not make a move until two years later. Even then he sent his brother, Asbjorn, to lead the fleet. It was an act that, rather than uniting the English behind one war leader, as they might have behind Swegyn, just added yet another strand to the cloth of confused leadership.

Raiding the East Coast on their way North, the fleet of Danes and other elements met little success until they entered the River Humber. Here Waltheof and those who had fled earlier to Scotland, including Edgar Aetheling and Gospatric met them. The Anglo Danish force moved on York, which by this time now had two castles to keep it subservient to Norman wishes. On the arrival of the allies the Normans fired houses near the castles to clear their view and destroy any material that may have been used to fill the defensive ditches surrounding the castles. This act was done with the normal Norman delicacy, with the result that almost the entire city was burnt down! In the resultant fight the Norman garrisons left their castles to attack and then die at the hands of the allies. Waltheof's exploits of beheading many of the Normans with his long axe as they came through the gates was recorded in sagas and remembered for years after.

William's reaction was immediate and he personally hastened North with a large army. With York having been burnt and unable to provide sustenance, the allied army broke up; the Danes to the Humber where they wintered over and the English to more northern parts of the earldom. This revolt and its tying down of William and so many of his military resources led to an explosion of uprisings elsewhere. William took what was left of York and began pursuing the scattered elements of English and Danes but very quickly he was obliged to turn his attention elsewhere, leaving lieutenants to meanwhile contain the northern revolt. But they were not up to the job.

As a result of his men's failure, William then had to move back North from his base at Nottingham, only to be blocked by the flooded River Aire. Despite this and constant harassment from the locals and the Danes, he continued to move North after one of his knights found a usable ford. York was still a devastation so, given his normal priorities, the first thing William did was rebuilt the castles. He then commenced to teach the Northumbrians what it meant to upset a Norman King by starting the harrowing of the North, killing anything animate and destroying anything not. Those who could fled. The wealthy fled to the North of the Earldom or Scotland, the rest to the Camp of Refuge at the Isle of Ely, where Hereward the Wake was defying the Normans. Few made it through the winter weather and their unburied corpses littered the countryside. Having lost their Northumbrian allies, the Danes allowed themselves to be bought off. Only Waltheof and a small number of followers fought on, holding out near Coatham on the coast. However, even they eventually saw the hopelessness of their situation and submitted to King William.

It was after this that William, possibly trying to buy loyalty, married Waltheof to his own niece, Judith, in 1070. After behaving himself for 2 years, Waltheof was granted the Earldom of Northumberland as a replacement for the disgraced Gospatric. He also retained those lands he had held as Earl of Huntingdon, though it would appear he transferred the ownership of his personal holdings in the area to Judith, in the English manner of providing a wife with land of her own.

A blot on Waltheof's character now appeared in his renewing an old family feud that had its origins in 1016. Waltheof sent some of his huscarls to kill the brothers Carlson and their kin. He did this despite the fact that they, and Waltheof and his kin had earlier been fighting side by side against the Normans. Balancing this dark side of Waltheof's character is his support of the Church, including the financing of several new foundations. He also played a part in the Church's attempt to restore the northern lands that William had harrowed. Aldwin, Prior of Winchcombe, recruited two monks from Evesham, Elfwi and a former Norman knight, Reinfrid, to join him in establishing the Church's presence in the harrowed land. They based themselves at Jarrow, and it was here that Waltheof granted them the Church at Tynemouth and all its lands. He also gave them his nephew Morcar, to be educated.

From his being made Earl of Northampton in 1072 to 1075 Waltheof spen this time ruling his earldom, giving to the Church, begetting children and serving on a royal commission looking into the losses suffered by the Church at Ely.

It was in 1075 that the half English - half Breton Ralf, Earl of East Anglia, married the sister of Roger Earl of Herefordshire and, at the wedding feast, began weaving the sticky web of intrigue that was to ensnare and prove fatal to Waltheof. Just what his involvement was will never be known. Some sources, such as the Anglo Saxon Chronicle and the Book of Hyde, indicate that he was intimately involved. Others, such as Orderic Vitalis and William of Malmesbury, claim that he refused to take part but had to swear an oath not to betray the plot.

The desirability of their wishing to involve Waltheof, in what became known as the Revolt of the Earls, is easy to see. His lands in the Midlands would provide a corridor between those of Roger in the West and Ralf in the East, effectively cutting England in half. Waltheof must have quickly had second thoughts about being involved as, the day after the Bridal Ale, he rushed to London and confessed his share of guilt to Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury. Lanfranc absolved him and advised him to go to Normandy and throw himself on William's mercy. This Waltheof did, together with presenting some expensive gifts that he knew would appeal to William's avarice.

William made light of the matter, but had his agents in England move against the other two Earls. An Anglo-Norman force crushed Roger who then spent his remaining years a prisoner. Another Anglo-Norman force defeated Ralf and then penned him up in Norwich. From here Ralf went to Denmark, to gather reinforcements, whilst his new bride held the city. After three months Norwich was compelled to surrender, just before the arrival of the Danish fleet. After sporadic raiding, the Danes returned home, leaving Ralf to join his wife in Brittany and thenceforth continue his war against William.

With the revolt now broken, William placed Waltheof under close arrest. The reason for this action is unknown, though some sources say that Waltheof was betrayed by his wife, Judith, William's niece, who passed on information that she had been privy to. Waltheof was kept in close confinement for several months before he was sentenced by the King to be beheaded for treason.

The execution took place on 31 May 1076 on St. Giles Hill, Winchester. After giving away his clothes to the poor, Waltheof's last moments were spent in prayer. Feeling he was taking too long, the executioner drew his sword and struck just as Waltheof got to: "Lead us not into temptation." According to witnesses, the severed head was then heard in a clear voice to complete the prayer with: "but deliver us from evil. Amen"

After lying in unconsecrated ground for a fortnight, Abbot Ulfkettle of Crowland, a foundation that Waltheof had been a patron of, asked for and was granted permission to take the body away for reburying. To his dying day, Archbishop Lanfranc insisted Waltheof was guiltless of the crime he had been accused of. It is also recorded that the English and Normans alike at William's court were horrified at the King's actions.

One fate of traitors was the confiscation of all their possessions to the crown. In this case it didn't happen. All of Waltheof's personal holdings passed to his wife, Judith, who also continued to oversee the Earldom of Huntingdon. A consideration for a beloved niece? Or a reward for providing information on her husband that allowed William the Bastard to remove the last of the native English nobility from the scene?

It was not long before the English began to treat Waltheof as a martyr in the ilk of St Edmund King and Martyr and miracles were soon being reported at his tomb. Waltheof may only have been a pseudo-Saint, more a symbol of a people's suffering and longing, but his grandson, also Waltheof, was later canonized.

Waltheof was a man who, in more peaceful times, would have been a national figure, and if needed, a powerful warrior. But he did not have the personality needed to lead the English resistance to the Norman Conquest. Often he failed to see the woods for the trees, and allowed his opportunities to be stolen from him.

Geoff Boxell is author of the novel: "Woden's Wolf" that deals with the English resistance to the Norman Conquest.

Waltheof married of Lens Judith in 1070 in Artois, France. Judith (daughter of Count of Lens Lambert II von Boulogne and of Normandy Countess of Aumale Adeliza) was born in 1054 in Lens, Artois, France; died after 1086. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Other Events and Attributes:

• Birth: 1055, Varenne near Bellencombre, Seine-Inferieure, Normandy, France

Notes:

[From "The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families"]

For this identification see Mr. Loyd's paper 'The Origin of the Family of Warenne' in Yorkshire Arch. Journal, vol. xxxi, pp. 97-113. The hamlet of Varenne lies on the river Varenne c. 2 miles S of Arques and c. 13 miles N of Bellencombre. The latter place, arr. Dieppe, cant. Bellencombre, where there was a castle, became the caput of the Warenne honour in Normandy.

WILLIAM DE WARREN

The Conqueror and His Companions
by J. R. Planché, Somerset Herald. London: Tinsley Brothers, 1874..

"De Garenes i vint Willeme" is all we learn from Wace about his appearance at Hastings, except that his helmet fitted him admirably, "Mult li sist bien et chief li helme;" for the mention of which interesting circumstance I suspect the gallant knight is more indebted to rhyme than to record — to the art of poetry rather than to the skill of his armourer. Fortunately we have made his acquaintance some time previous to the Conquest, and there are circumstances of much more importance and interest connected with him than the well-fitting of his helmet. His parentage has been variously represented, and that of his wife the subject of the keenest controversy.

To begin with the beginning. Without bewildering the reader with the conflicting accounts of the early contemporary chroniclers, and the unsatisfactory conclusions of more recent writers, I will at once refer to the earliest mention of William de Warren in history that I am aware of, which occurs in Orderic Vital's account of the battle of Mortemer and its results in 1054. "Duke William," he tells us, "being enraged by the shelter and safe conduct granted by Roger de Mortemer, who commanded the Norman forces on that occasion, to the Comte de Montdidier, who had fought on the side of the French and taken refuge in the Castle of Mortemer, banished Roger from Normandy and confiscated all his possessions;" but being afterwards reconciled to him he restored them to him, with the exception of the Castle of Mortemer, which the Duke gave to William de Warren, "one of his loyal young vassals," whom Orderic makes the Conqueror describe as a cousin or kinsman of De Mortemer, acknowledging no consanguinity to himself.

The probabilities are that he was the son of a Ralph de Warren, a benefactor to the abbey of La Trinité du Mont about the middle of thee 11th century, who, as well as Roger de Mortemer, Nicholas de Basqueville, Walter de St. Martin, and many others, were the issue of some of the numerous nieces of the Duchess Gonnor ("Nepotes plures predicta Gunnora"), who have been inaccurately set down as kinsmen instead of distant connections of her great-grandson the Conqueror.

William de Warren, to whom the Duke of Normandy gave the Castle of Mortemer, was a young man, we are told, at that period, and would, therefore, scarcely have attained the prime of life in 1066. He is named amongst the principal persons summoned to attend the Council at Lillebonne, when the invasion of England was decided upon, and was no doubt present in the great battle, for his services in which he received as his share of the spoil some three hundred manors, nearly half that number being in the county of Norfolk.

In 1067, on the King's departure for Normandy, William de Warren was joined with Hugh de Grentmesnil, Hugh de Montfort, and other valiant men in the government of England, under the superior jurisdiction of the Earl-bishop Odo and William Fitz 0sbern.

In 1074, on the breaking out of the rebellion of Roger, Earl of Hereford, and Ralph, Earl of Norfolk, we find him associated with Richard de Bienfaite as Chief Justiciaries of England, and summoning the rebels to appear before the King's High Court; and on their refusal, William de Warren with Robert, son of William Malet, marched against Earl Ralph, and routing the rebels at Fagadune, pursued them to Norwich, taking many prisoners, whom, according to the barbarous practice of the age, they mutilated by chopping off the right foot—an unmistakable proof that the sufferers had taken a step in the wrong direction.

Of his personal prowess no special anecdote has been preserved, and it is as the husband of the mysterious Gundred, or Gundrada, that his name has descended to the present day with any special interest attached to it.

Whether the hand of this lady was bestowed upon him previously to his services at Senlac, or as a part of his reward for them, does not appear, and our ignorance of the date of their marriage has been the principal obstacle in the way of those who have so hotly disputed her relationship to William the Conqueror, for could we even arrive at an approximate date it might enable us to calculate her probable age at that period, and whether she was born before or after 1053, on which fact depends the whole question.

That they were married before 1078 is certain, as in that year they founded the Priory of Lewes in Sussex, and we have the charters of King William, which he granted to that establishment for the health of the souls of his lord and ancestor, King Edward, of his father Count-Robert, of his own soul and that of his wife, Queen Matilda, and of all their children and successors, and for the souls of William de Warren and his wife Gundrada, his (William's) daughter and their heirs.

The words "my daughter" — "filiæ meæ" — would be decisive of her being the acknowledged child of the King; but independently of their being scarcely legible, it is contended that they are in a different and later hand; and there is this to be observed, which I do not remember having seen noticed, that the King has just previously used the expression "our children and successors" (filiorum atque successorum nostrorum"), so that his particularising Gundrada as "my daughter" would imply that she was not by his wife Matilda.

Exactly in opposition to this is the declaration of William de Warren himself, in whose charter to the priory, granted after the death of Gundred in childbirth (6 kalends of June, 1085), he states his donations to be for the salvation of the souls, amongst others, of his lady Queen Matilda, mother of his wife ("matris uxoris meæ"), excluding in turn King William from any share in her parentage. Was she then the sister of Gherbod the Fleming, Earl of Chester, as Orderic Vital distinctly describes her, without the slightest allusion to her parents? And, if so, was Queen Matilda the mother of both by a previous marriage, which has been utterly ignored by contemporary writers, and never yet established by recent investigators? Mr. Freeman accepts that interpretation, and I can advance no argument in dispute of it. It is much more likely, as he observes, that a stepfather should call the daughter of his wife his daughter, than that a husband should speak of the mother of his wife in anything but a strictly literal sense.

Then how are we to account for the universal silence of the chroniclers, native and foreign, on the subject? Mr. Freeman quotes the instance of their apparent ignorance of the marriage of Robert the Devil with the widow of UIf; but this is a much more important case. We have the unequivocal declaration of William de Warren, that Queen Matilda was the mother of his wife, and unless that charter is spurious, of which there is not the slightest suspicion, the evidence to that extent is conclusive.

But we have not yet done with riddles. Amongst the benefactors of Bermondsey, I find one Richard Guett, recorded as brother of the Countess of Warren, and the donor of the manor of Cowyke to the monks of that abbey, 11th of Rufus, A.D. 1098.

Gundred at that period had been dead thirteen years; but that she is the person alluded to there can be no doubt, as she is styled only "Comtesse Warenne;" whereas Isabelle de Vermandois, wife of her son, the second William, was Countess of Warren and Surrey.

Then who was this Richard Guett? Was he another child of Matilda of Flanders, a brother or halfbrother of Gherbod and Gundred, or a brother-in-law, for the old writers pay little attention to these nice distinctions, as we have seen in the case of Odo of Champagne? Had Matilda of Flanders as many husbands as Adelaide, Countess of Ponthieu, and, like her, issue by each? What was the real cause of the inhibition of her marriage with William, Duke of Normandy, — its delay for six years? What truth is there in the story of her unreturned affection for the Angio-Saxon Brihtric Meaw, and of her vindictive conduct to him after she became Queen of England? I have hesitated to believe in the popular tradition that Duke William grossly assaulted the daughter of Baldwin in the street or in her own chamber, not that I have any doubt about his being capable of such an outrage, but because he was too politic to commit it, and she was not the woman to have forgiven it, assuming that the offence was the simple refusal of his hand on the ground of his illegitimacy. It is obvious, however, that the early life of Matilda is involved in mystery, and it is highly probable that a clearer insight into it would enable us to account for much which we now reject as legend, or fail to reconcile with acknowledged facts. If there be any foundation for the story of William's brutality, the outburst of ungovernable fury might have been due to a much greater provocation than has been assigned for it. Brihtric, the son of Algar or Alfar, sumamed Meaw (Snow), from the extreme fairness of his complexion, an Anglo-Saxon Thegn, possessor of large domains in England, had been sent on an embassy from King Edward the Confessor to the Connt of Flanders. Matilda, we are told, fell desperately in love with him, and offered herself to him in marriage! Either disgusted by her forwardness, or preferring another, he declined the flattering proposal. "Hell hath no fury like a woman foiled," and she kept her wrath warm till she was in a position to ruin the man she had so passionately loved. She had no sooner become the Queen of England than she induced William to confiscate, on some pretence, all Brihtric's estates, and obtained the greater proportion for herself. The unfortunate Thegn was arrested at his house at Hanley, in Worcestershire, on the very day Saint Wulfstan had consecrated a chapel of his building, dragged to Winchester, and died in a dungeon! The truth of this story is supported by the impartial evidence of Domesday, in which Hanley and the principal manors held by Brihtric in the time of King Edward are recorded as the possessions of Queen Matilda, and the remainder passed to Fitz Hamon.

After her hand had been rejected by the noble Saxon, it is presumed she became the wife of a Fleming, named Gherbod, who appears to have held the hereditary office of Advocate of the Abbey of Saint Bertin, in St. Omers, and by whom she had at least two children, viz., Gherbod, to whom William gave the earldom of Chester, and Gundred, "the sister of Gherbod," and wife of William de Warren. Was this a clandestine or an informal marriage, which, as it has never been acknowledged by any chronicler, contemporary or other, might have been unknown to the Duke of Normandy, when he proposed to one whom he believed to be the maiden daughter of the Count of Flanders, and the corporal chastisement inflicted, however unworthy of a man, passed over, sub silentio, for prudential reasons, by the parties wlio had been guilty of a disgraceful suppression of facts? The subsequent marriage under such circumstances will awaken no surprise in any one who has studied the character of William. Utterly unscrupulous, destitute of every generous, noble, or delicate feeling, every action of his life was dictated by POLICY alone. An alliance with the Count of Flanders might be considered by the crafty schemer sufficiently advantageous to warrant his overlooking any objectionable antecedents in the conduct of a granddaughter of a king of France, his first discovery of which had provoked his savage nature into a momentary ebullition of fury. Her being the mother of two children was a point in her favour with a man whose sole motive for marrying was the perpetuation of a dynasty, and the fair prospect of legitimate issue, in whose veins the blood of the Capets should enrich that of the Furrier of Falaise, would overcome any hesitation at espousing the widow of an Advocate of St. Bertin. On the other hand, Count Baldwin would be too happy to embrace the opportunity of reinstating his daughter in a position befitting her birth, and, as well as the lady herself, gladly condone past insults for future advantages and the hope of smothering, in the splendour of a ducal wedding, the awkward whispers of scandal.

I have said thus much simply to show the view that may be taken of these mysterious circumstances, in opposition to the rose-coloured representations of some modern historians, who, upon no stronger evidence, elevate the Conqueror into a model husband, and describe Matilda as the perfection of womankind. To return to Gundred: her mother, Matilda, the third child of parents who were married in 1027, could not well have been born before 1030, and would therefore be some three years younger than the Conqueror.

In 1047, the time named as that of the Duke's first proposal, she would have been seventeen, and at that age either passionately in love with Brihtric, or already the youthful bride of the Advocate of St. Bertin.

In either case her rejection of William — and in the latter the Papal inhibition — is perfectly understandable. Assuming the marriage, she could scarcely have been the mother of the younger Gherbod and his sister Gundred before 1050; and the Countess of Warren, who died in childbed in 1085, would, according to this calculation, have then been in her thirty-fifth year. These dates are fairly presumable, and are uncontradicted by any circumstances that I am aware of.

No date has ever been assigned to the marriage of Gundred, but it is probable that it took place subsequent to the invasion, and about the same time that the earldom of Chester was bestowed on her brother Gherbod, with whom she may have come to England in the train of their mother, Matilda, on her visit in 1068, for there is not the slightest trace of Gherbod's presence at Hastings; and the magnificent gift of the County Palatine of Chester to a foreigner unknown to fame must have been owing to private family influence, as no service of any description is recorded for which it could be considered a merited reward.

In the foundation charter to Lewes, William de Warren himself tells us that he set out with his wife, Gundred, on a journey to Rome, but was unable to pass the German frontier in consequence of the war raging between the Emperor and the Pope. They therefore visited the Abbey of Cluni, where they were most hospitably entertained by the Prior and the community in the absence of Hugh, the Abbot. No date is mentioned, but the circumstances to which he alludes enable us to arrive at an approximate one.

in the Council of Worms, 23rd of January in that year, sentence of excommunication was passed upon the contumacious Kaiser, and his subjects absolved from their oath of fidelity; and in the following year, Henry, accompanied by his wife and infant son, Conrad, presented himself as a penitent before the walls of the Castle of Canossa, in Lombardy, where the Pontiff was then residing; and after remaining for three days, with naked feet and without food, in token of his contrition, was admitted, on the fourth, to the presence of the triumphant Pontiff, in consequence of the mediation of his cousin, the Countess Matilda, the Count of Savoy, and the Abbot of Cluni, who were at that period at Canossa with his Holiness.

This latter event occurred on the 26th of January, 1077, and we therefore know that Abbot Hugh was then in Lombardy. How long he was absent from Cluni on that occasion I cannot say, but we may fairly conjecture that William and Gundred were the guests of the Prior towards the close of the year 1076, or in the early part of 1077, in which latter year, they having long before resolved to found some religious house for the welfare of their souls, determined that, in gratitude for their reception at the Abbey of Cluni, it should rather be of the Cluniac order than any other. Having obtained the licence of King William, Abbot Hugh, at their request, sent over four of his monks, the principal of whom, named Lanzo, became the first Prior of St. Pancras at Lewes, which was founded and endowed by the Earl accordingly.

The Countess died, as before stated, in 1085, and was buried in the chapter-house at Lewes.

On the breaking out of Bishop Odo's rebellion, in the first year of the reign of Rufus, William, Earl of Warren, stood fast by the King, and served him most loyally both in the field and the council-chamber, for which good service he was created Earl of Surrey.

He enjoyed his new dignity but for a brief period, dying in 1089, 8 kalends of July (where, or of what disorder, is not stated), and was buried near his wife in the chapter-house of Lewes.

The discovery of their coffins a few years ago raised the controversy respecting the parentage of Gundred, which can scarcely even now be considered absolutely decided.

As in the case of Adelaide, Countess of Ponthieu, some charter or trustworthy document may yet be discovered which will clear up, by a simple fact, the mystery surrounding the early life of the Queen of the Conqueror, and not only enable us correctly to affiliate Gherbod and Gundred, but also to identify the hitherto unnoticed claimant to the honour of being one of their nearest relations, Richard Guett, the benefactor of Bermondsey, "brother of the Countess of Warren." From the register of Ely, in the Bodleian Library, Dugdale quotes the following tale of wonder: — " It is reported that this Earl William did violently detain certain lands from the monks of Ely, for which, being after admonished by the Abbot, and not making restitution, he died miserably; and though his death happened very far off the Isle of Ely, the same night he died, the Abbot, lying quietly in his bed, and meditating on heavenly things, heard the soul of the Earl in its carriage away by the Devil, cry out loudly and with a known and distinct voice, 'Lord have mercy upon me! Lord have mercy upon me!' and moreover that the next day the Abbot acquainted all the monks in Chapter therewith; and, likewise, that about four days after there came a messenger to them from the wife of the Earl with one hundred shillings for the good of his soul, who told them that he died the very hour the Abbot heard that outcry; but that neither the Abbot nor any of the monks would receive it, not thinking it safe for them to take the money of a damned person."

"If the first part of this story," adds honest old Norroy, " as the Abbot's hearing that noise, be no truer than the last, viz., that his lady sent them one hundred shillings, I shall deem it to be a mere fiction in regard the lady was certainly dead about three years before."

What appears more incredible to me is that there was not one monk to be found in the convent who would pocket the money "for the good of the soul" of the departed delinquent, who had "died miserably," — a statement which, taken in conjunction with the preternatural communication of the event to the holy Abbot, conveys to my mind an ugly idea of a guilty foreknowledge of it.

Died:
Age: 33

William married Princess of England Gundred before 1077 in Normandy, France. Gundred was born about 1050 in Normandy, France; died on 27 May 1085 in Castle Acre, Norfolk, England; was buried in Priory of Lewes, Sussex, England. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Other Events and Attributes:

• Birth: 1063, Normandy, France

Notes:

Said to be the daughter of William the Conqueror and Queen Maud, but this has been disproven.

Died:
childbirth

Hugh married Adelaide de Vermandois in 1064 in France. Adelaide (daughter of Count of Vermandois Herbert IV de Vermandois and Adela de Valois) was born about 1048 in Valois, Isle de France, France; died on 23 Sep 1120 in Meulan, Yvelines, Ile-de-France, France. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]