^{page 51 note 1} Ordericus Vitalis (ed. Le Prévost), III, 402.

^{page 51 note 2} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 271Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 1} He did, however, make another earl, by transferring the earldom of Lincoln, which he had given to William de Roumare, to de Gant, Gilbert, c. 1147–8Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 2} Richard of Hexham (ed. Howlett), p. 165.

^{page 52 note 3} L'Art de Vérifier les Dates, XI, 357. On the origin of the House of Blois, cf. Depoin, , Etudes préparatoires à l'Histoire des Familles Palatines, pp. 23–72Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 4} Ord. Vit., II, 221. Robert de Torigny, in his additions to William de Jumièges, calls her the uterine stepsister of William (Guil. de Jumièges, ed. Marx, p. 327), but that Orderic is right is shown by the fact that in 1095 the barons proposed to make her son king (Flor. Wig., ed. Thorpe, II, 38), as I have pointed out elsewhere (Genealogist, N.S., XXXVII, 129). For the 3 marriages of Alice, cf. Stapleton, , Mag. Rot. Scacc. Norm., II. xxxiGoogle Scholar.

^{page 52 note 5} Ord. Vit., V, 111–12.

^{page 52 note 6} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 146, 271Google Scholar.

^{page 52 note 7} Ord. Vit., III, 340. Guil. de Jumièges, p. 229 (R. de Torigny).

^{page 52 note 8} For the position of the Clares and Giffards, cf. Round, , Feudal England, p. 472Google Scholar.

^{page 53 note 1} Guil. de Jumièges, pp. 326–7 (R. de Torigny).

^{page 53 note 2} Ibid., p. 326.

^{page 53 note 3} Ibid. p. 324.

^{page 53 note 4} Ibid., p. 332. Ord. Vit., III, 480; IV, 169.

^{page 53 note 5} Ord. Vit., V, 58.

^{page 53 note 6} John of Worcester (ed. Weaver), p. 52.

^{page 53 note 7} Ord. Vit., V, 108–9.

^{page 53 note 8} Richard of Hexham, p. 165. Orderic notes the creation in 1138, without referring to the battle. Ord. Vit., V, 111–12.

^{page 53 note 9} Guil. de Jumièges, p. 116; also p. 155 (Orderic) and p. 260 (R. de Torigny). Cf. Ord. Vit., I, 180; II, 370.

^{page 53 note 10} Round, , Feudal England, pp. 186–7Google Scholar.

^{page 53 note 11} Ibid., p. 254.

^{page 53 note 12} Ord. Vit., II, 113. For proof of the identity of this Geroud with the Geroud whose son Roger married the famous Lucy, , cf. Complete Peerage (new edition), VII, 667Google Scholar.

^{page 54 note 1} Charles de l'Abbaye de Jumièges (ed. Vernier), No. LXI.

^{page 54 note 2} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 49, 50Google Scholar.

^{page 54 note 3} Ibid., pp. 37, 49.

^{page 54 note 4} Guil. de Jumièges, p. 172 (Orderic).

^{page 54 note 5} Harcourt, , His Grace the Steward, p. 23Google Scholar.

^{page 54 note 6} Ralf de Diceto (ed. Stubbs), I, 248.

^{page 54 note 7} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 324–5Google Scholar. Complete Peerage (new edition), VII, 666–7.

^{page 54 note 8} Round, , King's Serjeants, p. 141Google Scholar. On the favour shown by Henry I to men from the Côtentin, cf. Round, , Studies in Peerage and Family History, pp. 124–5, and Ancestor, No. 11, p. 157Google Scholar.

^{page 55 note 1} Robert de Torigny (ed. Howlett), p. 246.

^{page 55 note 2} Ord. Vit., IV, 164–5.

^{page 55 note 3} On the date when Robert became Count of Meulan, see my paper on “Robert de Beaumont and the Comté of Meulan,” Genealogist N.S., XXXVI, 173–8.

^{page 55 note 4} Ord. Vit., III, 480; IV, 169.

^{page 55 note 5} Ibid., IV, 191, 438–9. Waleran had also the land which his grandfather Roger de Beaumont had held in England in 1086. This explains the clause in the charter of Henry Duke of Normandy in 1153 confirming to the Earl of Leicester the lands which his father had held in England, “exceptis terrisi R. comitis de Mellent de Sturmenstre et cum pertinentiis.” Harcourt, , op. cit., p. 58Google Scholar.

^{page 56 note 1} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville p. 271Google Scholar.

^{page 56 note 2} Davis, Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, and Farrer, Outline Itinerary of Henry I, passim.

^{page 57 note 1} Malmesbury, Will., De Gestis Regum (ed. Stubbs, ), II, 473Google Scholar.

^{page 57 note 2} Paris, Matt., Chron. Majora (ed. Luard, ), II, 113Google Scholar.

^{page 57 note 3} Ord. Vit., IV, 169.

^{page 57 note 4} Round, Ancient Charters, No. 69.

^{page 57 note 5} Houth, Recueil des Chartes de St. Nicaise de Meulan, No. 3.

^{page 57 note 6} It is possible that he used the style on his seal. A mutilated impression, engraved by Nichols, gives the legend on the counterseal as … ERT … LEIC … But the missing word may have been Domini and not Comitis. The seal was attached to a charter in favour of the abbey of Bee, the first three witnesses being: “Roberto, Waleranno & Hugone, filiis meis” (Nichols, , Leicestershire Vol. I, Appendix, p. 48, plate XIVGoogle Scholar). The fact that Robert precedes Waleran may seem suspicious, and the design of the counterseal is unusual.

^{page 58 note 1} Ord. Vit., III, 402.

^{page 58 note 2} Simon de Senlis I was son of Randulf le Riche, who probably belonged to the family of Le Riche of Paris (Depoin, , Cartulaire de St. Martin de Pontoise, p. 279Google Scholar).

^{page 58 note 3} Fowler, , The Shire of Bedford and the Earldom of Huntingdon (Beds Hist. Record Socy., IX, 23–34), No. 5Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 1} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 418–19Google Scholar. But I venture to differ from Dr. Round regarding the charter by which Henry II granted “Comiti Alberico” (i.e. to Aubrey de Vere) “tertium denariutn de placitis Oxenfordscyre ut sit inde Comes” (ibid., p. 239). Dr. Round holds that the King styled Aubrey “comes” as being Count of Guisnes, just as his mother had done in her charter of 1142 granting him the earldom of Cambridge, or, if that should be vested in the King of Scots, giving him the choice of the earldoms of Oxford, Berkshire, Wiltshire and Dorset (ibid., pp. 180–3). But this theory seems untenable, for Aubrey had lost the comté of Guisnes when his first wife divorced him, not later than 1146 (Stapleton, , Archaeologia, XXXI, 232–4Google Scholar). Therefore I suggest that Henry II recognised his mother's charter creating Aubrey an English earl, and that his own charter was really a confirmation of Aubrey's choice of the earldom of Oxford: a title which he had assumed in or before 1147 (Geoffrey de Mandeville p. 194).

^{page 59 note 2} Robert de Torigny, p. 183.

^{page 59 note 3} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 275–7Google Scholar.

^{page 60 note 1} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandevitte, p. 277Google Scholar.

^{page 60 note 2} William attested two charters of Stephen in 1136 as William “de Albamarla,” which proves “that he did not, as is supposed, enjoy comital rank at the time.” (Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 264Google Scholar.) But in a later passage Round writes: “William of Aumâle (sic) sometimes, but rarely, styled himself, under Stephen, Earl of York; he did not, however, under Henry II, lose his comital rank,” and adds the note: “Aumâle (Albemarle) is notoriously a difficult title, as one of those of which the bearer enjoyed comital rank, though whether as a Norman count or as an English earl it is, at first, difficult to decide” (ibid., pp. 276–7). But if William did not enjoy comital rank in 1136, it is difficult to see how he could retain comital rank if he lost his English earldom.

^{page 60 note 3} William of Newburgh (ed. Howlett), I, 103–4.

^{page 61 note 1} Henry of Huntingdon (ed. Arnold), pp. 282–3.

^{page 61 note 2} Depoin, , Cartulaire de St. Martin de Pontoise, p. 322Google Scholar.

^{page 61 note 3} Robert de Torigny, p. 209.

^{page 62 note 1} Houth, op. cit., No. 13.

^{page 62 note 2} de Grandmaison, Millin, Antiquiés Nationales, IV, Art. XLIX, pp. 17, 19Google Scholar.

^{page 62 note 3} Réaux, , Histoire du Comté de Meulan, p. 204Google Scholar.

^{page 62 note 4} Millin de Grandmaison, op. cit., Art. XLIX, pl. 2. Waleran is shown in hauberk, coif, surcoat, conical helmet without nasal; checkered convex shield with central spike; horse to sinister, checkered saddlecloth. In the seal, Waleran's head is turned to show full face, he carries a sword, his horse is galloping. In the counterseal, he looks straight before him, he carries a lance with checkered flag (with three streamers), his horse is walking.

^{page 62 note 5} This system of different legends on the seal and counterseal was introduced by the Conqueror, as King of the English and Duke of the Normans, and his example was followed in France by Louis VI in 1113. Poole, , Seals and Documents, p. 18Google Scholar.

^{page 62 note 6} Henry of Huntingdon, p. 282.

^{page 62 note 7} John of Worcester, p. 57.

^{page 62 note 8} Ord. Vit, V, 58.

^{page 63 note 1} Réaux, although purporting to derive his information about this seal from Millin de Grandmaison, describes and draws the lance-flag as checkered only on one half, the other showing a lion with a forked tail, whilst he depicts the shield with a white border round the checkered field.

^{page 63 note 2} Birch, , Catalogue of Seals II, 245Google Scholar: Equestrian, Nos. 5666, 5668; cf. my paper on “The Beaumont Seals in the B.M. Catalogue,” Notes and Queries, cli, 111–14.

^{page 63 note 3} Additional Charters, 20419. Printed by Dugdale, , Monasticon, V, 410Google Scholar.

^{page 63 note 4} Harleian Charters, 45, I, 30. Printed by Nichols, , History of Leicestershire, I, App., p. 37Google Scholar.

^{page 63 note 5} Seal engraved by Nichols, op. cit., I, pi. XI, No. I; a much better reproduction is in Transactions of the Devonshire Association, XXXV, plate opp. p. 37; drawing in Lansdown MSS. 203, fol. 16b, reproduced in Archæological Journal, LI, plate opp. p. 47, with notes by Round, p. 47. Probably the counterseal engraved by Watson, Earls of Warren and Surrey, I. Plate II, No. 35, is from this impression.

^{page 63 note 6} Seal described by d'Arcq, Douët, Collection de Sceaux, I, 377, No. 715Google Scholar; reproduced by de Broussillon, Bertrand, La Maison de Craon, I, figs. 18–19, with description, pp. 74–6Google Scholar.

^{page 63 note 7} Waleran is shown in profile on seal as well as on counterseal. The checkers can now be traced only on the saddle-cloth (s. and c.s.) and lance-flag (c.s.); but the drawing in the Lansdown MSS. shows them also on the shield and helm (s.) and shield and surcoat (c.s.)

^{page 63 note 8} The drawing in the Lansdown MSS. reads “Gualerani” both on s. and c.s. and omits the nasal of the helmet on both. Round does not notice these errors.

^{page 64 note 1} Archæological Journal, LI, 47.

^{page 64 note 2} Dugdale, , Monasticon, V, 407Google Scholar.

^{page 64 note 3} Ann. Mon. (ed. Luard, ), I, 186Google Scholar.

^{page 64 note 4} Robert de Torigny, p. 142.

^{page 64 note 5} Monasticon, V., 409; Birch, Fasciculus of the Charters of Mathildis, No. 14.

^{page 64 note 6} Davis, Some Documents of the Anarchy, (Essays presented to Dr. R. L. Poole), p. 189Google Scholar. But Davis thinks it more probable that Maud's charter was issued before the end of July 1141, because another charter issued at Devizes in favour of Bordesley, also attested by Waleran, has as first witness William Cumin, who fled north after the rout at Winchester. As both charters are witnessed by Miles Earl of Hereford, so created at Oxford on the 25 July 1141 (Birch, Fasciculus, No. 8), Davis suggests that the Empress, instead of marching direct from Oxford to Winchester, proceeded via Devizes and issued the Bordesley charters there. But this theory is inadmissible, because in a charter in favour of William de Beauchamp, also attested by Miles as Earl of Hereford, the Count of Meulan is referred to as an enemy (Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 314–15Google Scholar). It may be noted that the original charter attested by William Cumin (Addl. Ch. 20420, printed by Birch, Fasciculus, No. 15), has the names of the witnesses out of order, the Earl of Hereford following William de Pont de l'Arche and William de Beauchamp. The seal is much defaced and there is no counterseal.

^{page 65 note 1} “Iturus ad Sanctum Jacobum.” Delisle, , Recueil des Actes de Henri II, Introduction, p. 466Google Scholar.

^{page 65 note 2} Porée, , Histoire du Bec, I, 341Google Scholar. Réaux, , op. cit., p. 206Google Scholar. The pilgrimage is assigned to ante 1144 in L'Art de Vérifier les Dates, XII, 160–1.

^{page 65 note 3} Deville, Cartulaire de la Ste-Trinié de Beaumont, No. VI.

^{page 65 note 4} Delisle places the legends in the reverse order, but the later title should be on the counterseal. Porée, on the authority of D. Jouvelin, gives the legends as: “Sigillum Gualeranni comitis Wigorniensis” and “Sig. G. com. Mellenti,” and states that the seal and counterseal are reproduced by Millin, thus confusing this seal with A supra.

^{page 65 note 5} Deville, op. cit., No. XXIII.

^{page 66 note 1} Deville, op. cit., No. V.

^{page 66 note 2} L.F.C., xxii, 1. Printed by Nichols, , op. cit., I. App., p. 37Google Scholar.

^{page 66 note 3} Seal engraved by Nichols, , op. cit., pl. XI, No. 2Google Scholar, but the inscription being partly defaced, he reads “Bellu (mutis).”Described by Birch, , Catalogue of Seals, II, 246, No. 5672Google Scholar, where Robert is confused with his cousin Robert, Earl of Leicester.

^{page 66 note 4} de Grandmaison, Millin, op. cit., IV, 21–3, Art. XLIX, pl. 4Google Scholar. Probably the fragmentary seal and counterseal listed by Douët d'Arcq (op. cit., No. 719) are impressions of the same. A fragmentary seal and counterseal of Robert from which the legends have disappeared are reproduced by Somménil (L'Abbaye du Valasse, plate opp. p. 38).

^{page 66 note 5} Lot, St. Wandrille, No. 96.

^{page 66 note 6} Reproduced by de Broussillon, Bertrand, op. cit., I, 74, fig. 17Google Scholar; described by d'Arcq, Douët, op. cit., I, 377, No. 716Google Scholar.

^{page 66 note 7} Bertrand de Broussillon, u.s.

^{page 66 note 8} Like the French specimen of B, this seal is so much worn that no trace of the Meulan checkers can be traced, if they were shown.

^{page 67 note 1} Nichols, , op. cit., I, pi. XI, No. 5Google Scholar. The word “comes“ in the printed text of the charter to which it was appended (ibid., App., p. 37) is probably due to a slip in copying.

^{page 67 note 2} Chronicon Valassense (ed. Sommenil, ), p. 8Google Scholar.

^{page 67 note 3} Ibid., pp. 8–9.

^{page 68 note 1} John of Worcester, p. 57.

^{page 68 note 2} Ibid., p. 60. The MS. followed by Thorpe reads “veniunt” (Cont. Flor. Wig., II, 124).

^{page 68 note 3} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 319–21Google Scholar.

^{page 68 note 4} Prof. Davis, however, considered that the difference between the two descriptions of Waleran shows that John of Worcester “is not quite clear about Waleran's office,” and suggested that Waleran “was the castellan of the city.” Davis, , Poole Essays p. 169Google Scholar.

^{page 69 note 1} Monasticon, IV, 56.

^{page 69 note 2} Gesta Stephani, p. xl.

^{page 69 note 3} Notes and Queries, cl, 326–8.

^{page 69 note 4} Hist. et Cart. S. Petri de Gloucestria (ed. Hart, ), II, 71 (No. DXLII)Google Scholar. The heading “De eodem“ is wrong, but the document is repeated, without the names of witnesses, under No. DCXXXI with the more correct heading: “Quietantia thelonei de Wichio“ (II, 129).

^{page 70 note 1} Paris, Matt., Chronica Majora, II, 174Google Scholar. In 1140 according to Ralf de Coggeshall (ed. Stevenson), p. 11, where he is wrongly styled “comes.”

^{page 70 note 2} Stapleton, , Archaeologia XXXI, 230–1Google Scholar.

^{page 70 note 3} Hist, et Cart. S. Petri de Gloucestria, I, 119.

^{page 70 note 4} Ibid., I, 17.

^{page 70 note 5} For this emendation I am indebted to my friend Mr. L. C. Loyd, who suggests that the transcriber, finding the word illegible, guessed “filio,” relying on the phrase: “Quare rogo vos ut filium carissimum,” which occurs farther on in the document.

^{page 70 note 6} Davis, , Poole Essays, pp. 170–1Google Scholar, where the document is assigned to 1145. If the Count's reference to his coming “peregrinacio” is an allusion to his pilgrimage to Compostella, the date would presumably be 1144; if it alludes to the crusade, the date would presumably be 1146 or 1147.

^{page 71 note 1} Robert the Dispenser was dead in 1100, when his estates had passed to Urse d'Abetot (Round, Ancient Charters, No. 1). After the forfeiture of Urse's son Roger, the latter's brother-in-law, Walter de Beauchamp, obtained the lands and shrievalty (Farrer, op. cit., Nos. 319, 335) and dispensership (Davis, , Poole Essays, p. 169Google Scholar), whilst the Dispenser lands seem to have been divided between Beauchamp and Marmion (Round, , Feudal England, p. 195Google Scholar). The royal Constableship was apparently granted to de Gloucester, Walter, as I have shown in the Genealogist, N.S., XXXVIII, 120–1Google Scholar; but it was restored to William de Beauchamp by Stephen in 1139, when Walter's son Miles went over to the Empress (Cont. Flor. Wig., ed. Thorpe, II, 121—only in MS. G.; cf. John of Worcester, ed. Weaver, p. 56).

^{page 71 note 2} I assume that the earl had no official position in his county, although Bishop Stubbs seems a little doubtful (Const. Hist., I, 411). Cf. Palmer, , Peerage Law in England, pp. 36–8Google Scholar.

^{page 72 note 1} Notes and Queries, cl, 328.

^{page 72 note 2} There was no battle, as the Angevins, being warned by Robert de Courcy, made good their retreat before the royal army arrived. Ord. Vit., V, 109.

^{page 72 note 3} Harcourt, , op. cit., p. 38Google Scholar. Davis, , Poole Essays, p. 172Google Scholar.

^{page 73 note 1} Madox, , Hist. Exchequer, II, 138–9Google Scholar; Nichols, , op. cit., I, 25Google Scholar; Davis, , Poole Essays p. 173Google Scholar. I have followed Davis's text where there are slight discrepancies.

^{page 73 note 2} Davis, , Poole Essays, pp. 174–5Google Scholar.

^{page 73 note 3} Annals of Waverley—Ann. Mon., II, 228. Davis followed this version.

^{page 73 note 4} John of Worcester, pp. 60–1. Probably in March, from the sequence of events.

^{page 73 note 5} Ord. Vit., V, 123. But the legate (who wanted the see for his nephew, Henry de Sulli) and the chapter prevented Philip from securing the see. Philip, who became Bishop of Bayeux in 1142, seems to have revenged himself on the chapter of Salisbury by carrying off from the cathedral treasury an arm covered with plates of gold and adorned with precious stones. Round, Cal. Docts. France, No. 1438.

^{page 73 note 6} “Roberto de Gandavo cancellario.” Round, Cal. Docts. France, No. 1353.

^{page 73 note 7} Robert was brother to Gilbert de Gant, afterwards Earl of Lincoln. Monasticon, V, 518.

^{page 73 note 8} “Astantibus Radulfo cancellario.” Round, Cal. Docts. France, No. 1319.

^{page 74 note 1} MrHowlett, says that this charter is dated 26 12 (Gesla Stephani, p. xli)Google Scholar, but that is the date of the Inspeximus at Bury St. Edmunds.

^{page 74 note 2} Ord. Vit., V, 130.

^{page 74 note 3} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 118–20Google Scholar.

^{page 74 note 4} “Testibus … et Radulpho cancellario meo.” Monasticon, V, 452. Ralf's name follows those of the 5 earls and William de Yprès, but the text is known only from an Inspeximus.

^{page 74 note 5} In which case the “R. cancellario” before whom a Bull of Innocent II was exhibited in 1140 or 1141 (Ramsey Cartulary, ed. Hart, and Lyons, , I, 108, No. 553Google Scholar), may have been Ralf, and not Robert, as MrHowlett, supposed (Gesta Stephani, p. xxvii)Google Scholar.

^{page 75 note 1} Round, , Studies in Peerage and Family History, p. 203Google Scholar.

^{page 75 note 2} For the descent of Breteuil, cf. Ord. Vit., IV, 185–7, 337, 339, 410.

^{page 75 note 3} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 154Google Scholar; Harcourt, , op. cit., p. 38Google Scholar.

^{page 75 note 4} Harcourt, , op. cit., p. 58Google Scholar.

^{page 75 note 5} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 51, 97Google Scholar.

^{page 76 note 1} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 89, 181Google Scholar.

^{page 76 note 2} Ibid., p. 181.

^{page 76 note 3} So also in “Sciatis me fecisse Comitem de Gaufrido de Magnavilla de Comitatu Essexe,” I take the last words to mean “of the County of Essex,” and do not understand why Dr. Round considered that “Comitatus” here means “the dignity of an earl.” Ibid., p. 242.

^{page 77 note 1} Ibid., p. 272.

^{page 77 note 2} Stubbs, , op cit., I, 410Google Scholar.

^{page 77 note 3} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 271, 276Google Scholar.

^{page 78 note 1} Ord. Vit., IV, 169.

^{page 78 note 2} Ibid., V, xlviii, xlix.

^{page 78 note 3} He is styled Hugh the Poor in the notification of a transaction between St. Peter of Préaux and the Holy Trinity of Beaumont which took place in his father's lifetime (Prévost, Le, Notes sur l'Eure, III, 98)Google Scholar; but the notification must be of a later date.

^{page 78 note 4} Cf. Génestal, , Le Parage Normand, p. 10Google Scholar.

^{page 78 note 5} Henry, of Huntingdon, De Contemptu Mundi, p. 307Google Scholar.

^{page 78 note 6} Planché, , Conqueror and his Companions, I, 212Google Scholar.

^{page 78 note 7} He was living in the spring of 1136. (Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 171Google Scholar.)

^{page 79 note 1} Gesta Stephani (ed. Hewlett, ), pp. 30, 31–2Google Scholar. The younger Beauchamp was named Payn (Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 171Google Scholar).

^{page 79 note 2} Gesta Stephani, p. 73.

^{page 79 note 3} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 271Google Scholar.

^{page 79 note 4} Adams, , Political History of England, II, 221Google Scholar.

^{page 79 note 5} Probably the slip in the name is due to the writer having in mind Roger the Poor, Stephen's first Chancellor, as Mr. Howlett suggests.

^{page 79 note 6} Gesta Stephani, p. 32.

^{page 79 note 7} Ibid, p. 73.

^{page 80 note 1} Gesta Stephani, p. 80.

^{page 80 note 2} Monasticon, VI, 335. That William's earldom did not include Dorset is shown by the fact that Dorset was one of the four counties from which Aubrey de Vere was allowed to choose his earldom (Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 181Google Scholar).

^{page 80 note 3} I cannot find any justification for the attacks on Orderic's good faith made by M. du Motey in his Origines de la Normandie et du Duché d'Alençon and Le Champion de Normandie: Robert de Bellême; cf. Notes and Queries, clvi, 165–8.

^{page 80 note 4} Ord. Vit., V, 104.

^{page 80 note 5} Cf. Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 276Google Scholar.

^{page 80 note 6} Morin du Pin was banished for life by Henry I in 1124, for instigating the Count's rebellion (Ord. Vit., IV, 461–3); butthe King must have relented, for the Pipe Roll of 1130 shows that Morin du Pin and Ralf the Butler (of the Earl of Leicester) had been in joint charge of Leicester's lands in Leicestershire (P.R. 1130, ed. Hunter, p. 87). The note on the family by Merlet, Cartulaire de Tiron I., 77, is inaccurate.

^{page 81 note 1} Monasticon, VI, 240; Fowler, , Digest of Charters in Cartulary of Dunstable (Beds Record Socy., X, 81)Google Scholar.

^{page 81 note 2} Philip de Harcourt presumably received the deanery of Lincoln as consolation when he failed to obtain the bishopric of Salisbury in 1140, and held it until given the see of Bayeux in 1142. As Dean of Lincoln he attested the pancarte in favour of St. Nicaise de Meulan issued by Count Waleran in 1141 (Houth, op. cit., No. 13).

^{page 81 note 3} Fowler, , The Shire of Bedford and the Earldom of Huntingdon (Beds Hist. Record Society, IX, 23–34)Google Scholar.

^{page 81 note 4} Round, , Geoffrey de Mandeville pp. 192–3Google Scholar.

^{page 81 note 5} Ibid., pp. 181, 193–4.