^{page 1 note 1} G.E.C., Complete Peerage, xi (1949), pp. 682–97Google Scholar, gives an admirable and fully documented account of the three Norman earls of Shrewsbury; Eyton, R. W., Antiquities of Shropshire, 12 vols (London, 1854-1860), remains invaluable. I have gained much from discussing the subject with Professor R. W. Southern and Mr J. O. Prestwich.Google Scholar

^{page 1 note 2} Douglas, D. C., ‘The Earliest Norman Counts’, Eng[lish] Hist[orical] Rev[iew], lxi (1946), p. 147Google Scholar, and ‘The Rise of Normandy’, Proceedings of the British Academy, xxxiii (1947), pp. 115–17Google Scholar and notes, especially n. 129. Cf. de Boüard, M., Guillaume le Conquérant (Paris, 1958), p. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 2 note 1} Discussed by White, G. H., ‘The First House of Bellême’, Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc., 4th Series, xxii (1940)Google Scholar, and Boussard, J., ‘La seigneurie de Bellême aux ^X et XI^e siècles’, Mélanges … Louis Halphen (Paris, 1951)Google Scholar. Cf. Historical Works of Sir Francis Palgrave, iii (Cambridge, 1921), map opposite p. 430.

^{page 2 note 2} For Troarn see Sauvage, R. N., L'abbaye de St Martin de Troarn (Caen, 1911).Google Scholar

^{page 2 note 3} Vitalis, Orderic[us, Historia ecctesiastica, ed. Le Prévost], A., (Société de l'hist. de France, Paris, 1838–1955), ii, pp. 178, 220.Google Scholar

^{page 2 note 4} The date given in G.E.C., Complete Peerage, i, p. 230.Google Scholar

^{page 2 note 5} V[ictoria] C[ounty] H[istory], Sussex, iv, p. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 3 note 1} Cf. Holt, J. C., ‘Feudalism Revisited’, Econ[omic[ory] Rev[iew], and Series, xiv (1961-1962), p. 334.Google Scholar

^{page 3 note 2} Regesta [Regum Anglo-Normannorum], i, ed. Davis, H. W. C. (Oxford, 1913), no. 71.1 hope to discuss this whole problem elsewhere.Google Scholar

^{page 3 note 3} Baring, F. H., ‘William the Conqueror's March through Hampshire in 1066’, Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club, vii (2) (1915), p. 38Google Scholar; Williamson, J. A., The English Channel (London, 1959), p. 97.Google Scholar

^{page 4 note 1} G.E.C., Complete Peerage, xi, Appendix K; there is a misprint on p. 685.Google Scholar

^{page 4 note 2} Regesta, i, nos 123, 158, 320, 361.

^{page 5 note 1} D[omesday] B[ook], i. 23aGoogle Scholar, 34b, 44c, 51a, 68d, 129a, 137c, 166c, 176a, 193b, 239b, 248a, 253b. The most important discussions of the honour in 1086 are by Salzman, L. F., V.C.H., Sussex, i, pp. 378–79Google Scholar, and Tait, J., V.C.H., Shropshire, i, pp. 290–300.Google Scholar For Shropshire there is also Dorothy Sylvester, ‘Rural Settlement in Domesday Shropshire’, Sociological Review, xxv (1933), while Eyton shows that very few changes in tenure took place in Shropshire between 1086 and 1102.Google Scholar

^{page 5 note 2} V.C.H., Sussex, i, pp. 360–61.Google Scholar

^{page 6 note 1} Hoyt, R. S., The Royal Demesne in English Constitutional History (Ithaca, N.Y., 1950), pp. 52–58Google Scholar; Galbraith, V. H., The Making of Domesday Book (Oxford, 1961), Appendix.Google Scholar

^{page 6 note 2} Stubbs, W., Select Charters, 9th edn (1913), p. 119.Google Scholar

^{page 6 note 3} Painter, S., Studies in the History of the English Feudal Barony (Baltimore, 1943), p. 22Google Scholar; Lennard, R. V., Rural England, 1086–1135 (Oxford, 1959), pp.49–51, 97.Google Scholar

^{page 7 note 1} No estimate has been made, however, of the total extent to which William used this procedure.

^{page 7 note 2} Johnston, G. D., ‘Hardham Causeway’, Sussex Notes and Queries, ix (1942–1943), pp. 83–86.Google Scholar A motte which may go back to fitz Tetbald's day overlooked the Arun at Pulborough (V.C.H., Sussex, i, pp. 472–73).Google Scholar

^{page 7 note 3} Doubts about the identity of ‘Robert’ or ‘William’ at a few manors do not affect the validity of these broad statements; it was certainly fitz Tetbald who held Pulborough: cf. Farrer, W., Honors and Knights' Fees, iii (Manchester, 1925), pp. 3Google Scholar ff.; V.C.H., Sussex, iv, passim, where (pp. 50, 77) a possible Domesday omission is suggested.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 1} Naturally discerned by Tait, , V.C.H., Shropshire, i, pp. 296Google Scholar, 297. Cf. Eyton, , op. cit., vii, p. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 2} Tait, J., Domesday Survey of Cheshire (Chetham Society, 1916), pp. 44–45.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 3} Round, J. H., V.C.H., Herefordshire, i, pp. 275, 276, hints at this.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 4} Farrer, W., V.C.H., Yorkshire, ii, pp. 157–58.Google Scholar

^{page 9 note 1} Chibnall, M., ‘Ecclesiastical Patronage and the Growth of Feudal Estates …’, Annales de Normandie, viii (1958), pp. 115–16. Other Norman houses benefited much less from Roger's generosity.Google Scholar

^{page 9 note 2} I.e. in Salop Osbern fitz Richard, Ralph de Mortimer, Roger de Laci (tenants-in-chief in south Shropshire and in Herefordshire), Roger ‘de Corcelle’, Ranulf Peverel, William de Warenne (tenants-in-chief from a distance, and the last a kinsman of Earl Roger); in Wales Earl'Hugh of Chester (in respect of the commote of Yale); Urse d'Abetot in Worcestershire and Henry de Ferrières in Staffordshire (both local barons); the ubiquitous Ralph d'Ouilly in Staffordshire and probably in Middlesex; and Reinaud.

^{page 9 note 3} Brooke, C. N. L., From Alfred to Henry III (Nelson, 1961), p. 96.Google Scholar

^{page 10 note 1} For this and the next two paragraphs cf. Mason, J. F. A., ‘The Officers and Clerks of the Norman Earls of Shropshire’, Trans. Shropshire Arch. Soc., lvi (3) (1960).Google Scholar

^{page 10 note 2} Cartulaire de l'abbaye de St Vincent du Mans, ed. Charles, R. and d'Elbenne, Menjot (Mamers, 1886–1913), nos 621 (Roger's dapifer, Robert ‘de Polliaco’), 600 (Robert de Bellême's dispensator Humphrey).Google Scholar

^{page 11 note 1} Cf. Lennard, , op. cit., p. 152.Google Scholar

^{page 11 note 2} Contrast, however, Thompson, A. Hamilton, ‘The College of St Mary Magdalene, Bridgnorth …’, Archaeological Journal, lxxxiv (1927), p. 4. Regesta, i, no. 183a, may suggest that Roger was a good road-builder.Google Scholar

^{page 11 note 3} Orderic, ii, pp. 52 (Mabel), 411 (Hugh); iv, p. 40 (Robert); see also iii, p. 367; Round, J. H., Calendar [of Documents preserved in France], no. 654Google Scholar; Gaimar, Geffrei, L'estoire des Engleis, ed. Bell, A. (Anglo-Norman Text Soc, Oxford, 1960), lines 5872, 5884, p. 186.Google Scholar

^{page 11 note 4} Graham, Rose, ‘The Monastery of Cluny, 910–1155’, Archaeologia, Ixxx (1930), p. 155.Google Scholar

^{page 11 note 5} Orderic, iii, p. 411; iv, pp. 32, 33. Orderic uses ‘three’ with perhaps suspicious frequency; but if Hugh's original fine of £3,000 was at best only partly paid off by 1098, it would have been reasonable to fix the same sum again.

^{page 12 note 1} Florence, of Worcester, , Chronkon ex chronkis, ed. Thorpe, B. (English Hist. Soc, 1848–1949), ii, p. 49.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 2} Gerald, of Wales, , Itinerarium Kambriae, in Opera (R[olls] S[eries], 1861–1991), vi, ed. Dimock, J. F., p. 143.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 3} Orderic, iv, p. 173.

^{page 12 note 4} Musset, L., ‘Actes inédits du XI^e siecle…’, Soc. hist, et arch, de I'Orne, Bulletin principal, lxxviii (1960), pp. 23, 27.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 5} Annales Cambriae, ed. Lloyd, J. E. (Trans. Hon. Soc. Cymmrodorion, 1899–1900), pp. 172–73Google Scholar; Brut y Tywysogion, ed. Jones, T. (Cardiff, 1952, 1955Google Scholar), A.D. 1073, 1074 (corrected dates). G.E.C., Complete Peerage, xi, p. 688Google Scholar, note b, gives the uncorrected date of ‘1072’ for Hugh's raid. Lloyd, J. E., The Story of Ceredigion (Cardiff, 1937), pp. 26 ff., puts these events in their local context.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 6} The History of Gruffydd ap Cynan, ed. Jones, A. (Manchester, 1910), pp. 123 (with Herefordshire and Cheshire help), 131 (with Cheshire help).Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 7} Lloyd made this point clearly in 1900 (Annales Cambriae, p. 160), but not in his later A History of Wales …, 3rd edn (London, 1939)Google Scholar. Cf. Episcopal Acts … relating to Welsh Dioceses, ed. Davies, J. Conway (Hist. Soc. of the Church in Wales, 1946), i, p. 80Google Scholar and n. 441. Edwards, J. G., ‘The Normans and the Welsh March’, Proceedings of the British Academy, xlii (1956), pp. 158–62, discusses the details.Google Scholar

^{page 13 note 1} Stenton, F. M., ‘The Development of the Castle in England and Wales’, Social Life in Early England, ed. Barraclough, G. (London, 1960), pp. 116–17Google Scholar. For the Montgomery area, see Lloyd, J. E., ‘Border Notes’, Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies, xi (1) (1941), pp. 48–51Google Scholar, and Davies, J. Conway, ‘Lordships and Manors in the County of Montgomery’, Montgomeryshire Collections, xlix (1) (1945), pp. 87–91Google Scholar. For Roger's castle at Arundel, see V.C.H., Sussex, i, pp. 473–74Google Scholar (and, for the possibility of a castle at Chichester, ibid., iii, p. 79); for Quatford and Hen Domen, see reports to be published by Mr P. A. Barker; for Shrewsbury Castle (not begun by Roger), see Radford, C. A. R., ‘The Medieval Defences of Shrewsbury’, Trans. Shropshire Arch. Soc., lvi (1) (1957–1958).Google Scholar

^{page 13 note 2} Brut, A.D. 110, where the reference to Roger's establishment of a castle at Dingeraint might just possibly denote 1073.

^{page 13 note 3} Orderic, ii, p. 220; The History of Gruffyddap Cynan, ed. Jones, , p. 131. Roger's own itinerary is naturally but imperfectly known: he seems to have crossed back to Normandy at least six times between 1074 and 1088.Google Scholar

^{page 13 note 4} In December 1079 on the charter evidence (Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc., 4th Series, xxii (1940), pp. 96–99Google Scholar); Orderic, ii, pp. 410–11, 431–33, would suggest Dec. 1077. Apparently Mabel had been a tenant-in-chief in her own right (Regesta, i, no. 97; ii, ed. Johnson, C.and Cronne, H. A. (Oxford, 1956), no. 718); but Earl Roger's second wife was not.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 1} D.B., i. 248c. The valet (£18) may perhaps be compared with the £18–5–0 assigned for Robert de Bellême's maintenance in prison in 1130.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 2} Orderic, iii, pp. 425–26.

^{page 14 note 3} D.B., i. 39Google Scholarc (a marginal entry: ‘Rex tenet Facumbe … Rogerius Pictavensis habet modo’), 269c, 273c, 290b, 301d, 332a, 352a; 11. 89, 243, 346 (worth about £260 in all, and capable of improvement). Cf Tait, J., Medieval Manchester and the Beginnings of Lancashire (Manchester, 1904), pp. 155–58Google Scholar, especially n. 1 to p. 157; Farrer, W., V.C.H., Lancashire, i, pp. 278–79Google Scholar, 291–92, and also Farrer's earlier articles in Trans. Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Soc., xvi, xviii (1898 and 1900).Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 4} Galbraith, V. H., The Making of Domesday Book, pp. 187–88.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 5} Mason, J. F. A., ‘The Date of the Geld Rolls’, Eng. Hist. Rev., lxix 1954), PP. 285, 288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 15 note 1} Round, J. H., ‘The Origin of the Fitzgeralds’, The Ancestor, i (April 1902), p. 122 and references there given.Google Scholar

^{page 15 note 2} D.B., ii. 348b, 349b, 350, 350b (especially last reference).

^{page 15 note 3} William de Percy, Berengar de Todeni, Erneis.

^{page 15 note 4} They held some land in France, however. Philip is mentioned in Regesta, i, no. 172, but not in no. 356; it was perhaps in this interval that he became a clerk.

^{page 16 note 1} D.B., i. 113a (‘Regina dedit Rogerio cum uxore sua’), 234c, 278b, 284c, 319a, 3 5 2d; cf. i. 270a (‘Hanc terram totam dedit Rogerius Pictavensis Rogerio de Busli…’).

^{page 16 note 2} Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 1088; Freeman, E. A., The Reign of William Rufus (Oxford, 1882), i, pp. 57 (n. 3), 93.Google Scholar

^{page 16 note 3} Farrer, W., V.C.H., Lancashire, i, pp. 291–92.Google Scholar

^{page 16 note 4} De iniusta vexatione Willelmi episcopi, in Symeon, of Durham, , Opera omnia (R.S., 1882–1985), i, p. 178, and cf. pp. 176, 177, 181, 187, 194; the second Roger comes on p. 181 must be the earl of Shrewsbury, as indexed.Google Scholar

^{page 16 note 5} Farrer, W., Lancashire Pipe Rolls and Early Charters (Liverpool, 1902), pp. 269, 290.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 1} Round, , Calendar, p. xli, nos 667, 1236. The honour is in D.B., i. 228a, 236a, 323c, 360b; ii. 247, 432 (worth about £200 in all; but the Yorkshire values are clearly notional).Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 2} Dru's wife was the king's cognata according to the Chronica monasterii de Melsa, ed. Bond, E. A. (R.S., 1866–1868), i, p. 89; Odo was William's brother-in-law. Hainfrid of St-Omer preceded Dru in East Anglia.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 3} G.E.C., Complete Peerage, xi, p. 687, note d.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 4} S. Anselmi Cantuariensis archiepiscopi opera omnia, ed. F. S. Schmitt, iv, no. 270; Eadmer, , Historia novorum in Anglia et opuscula …, ed. Rule, M. (R.S., 1884), pp. 419Google Scholar, 425; Orderic, iii, p. 426, and iv, p. 177; Liber monasterii de Hyda, ed. Edwards, E. (R.S., 1866), p. 306Google Scholar; Gaimar, Geffrei, L'estoire des Engleis, ed. Bell, line 5889, p. 187Google Scholar; Bruty Tywysogion, ed. Jones, A.D. 1102; Gerald, of Wales, , Opera (R.S.), vi, p. 90Google Scholar; Round, Calendar, no. 670 (cf. nos 664–65, 672, for Roger the Poitevin).

^{page 18 note 1} Orderic, ii, p. 221.

^{page 18 note 2} Ibid., ii, pp. 422–23.

^{page 18 note 3} Lloyd, J. E., A History of Wales, ii, p. 403, n. 13.Google Scholar

^{page 18 note 4} Gerald, of Wales, , Opera (R.S.), vi, pp. 89–90Google Scholar; Round, Calendar, no. 566; Bruty Tywysogion, ed. Jones, A.D. 1097,1102,1105; Bateson, Mary, ‘The Laws of Breteuil’,Eng. Hist. Rev., xvi (1901), pp. 101–02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 18 note 5} Orderic, iii, pp. 406–07.

^{page 18 note 6} Tout, T. F., Collected Papers, ii, p. 5 and nn. 2–3Google Scholar; contrast Episcopal Acts relating to Welsh Dioceses, ed. Davies, , i, p. 116 (on insufficient evidence).Google Scholar

^{page 18 note 7} 1bid., i, pp. 107, 109, 112.

^{page 19 note 1} Round, Calendar, nos 1234 (Regesta, i, no. 410), 1235.

^{page 19 note 2} Acta Sanctorum, April, i, p. 430. I owe this reference, and other help on matters involving Poitou and Aquitaine, to the kindness of Mrs Jane Martindale.

^{page 19 note 3} Cf. also, perhaps, Arnulf's attestation of a grant to La Sauve-Majeure by a vassal of Hugh: Round, Calendar, no. 1238.

^{page 19 note 4} Orderic, iii, pp. 291, 299, 322, 356–57; Recueil des actes de Philippe I^er, ed. Prou, M. (Paris, 1908), no. CXXIX.Google Scholar

^{page 19 note 5} Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 1094; Florence, of Worcester, , Chronicon ex chronicis, ed. Thorpe, ii, p. 34.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 1} Orderic, iii, p. 362; iv, pp. 57–58.

^{page 20 note 2} Ibid., iv, p. 44.

^{page 20 note 3} Ibid., iv, pp. 32, 33. The Busli honour in 1086 was worth some £330 yearly, and later had 60¾ knights (The Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. Hall, H. (R.S., 1896), i, p. 435).Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 4} Roger had a brother Ernald, and a daughter (possibly sister) Beatrice married to William count of Eu (The Cartulary of St John of Pontefract, ed. Holmes, R. (Yorkshire Arch. Soc, Record Series, xxx, 1901), ii, p. 609Google Scholar; G.E.C., Complete Peerage, v, p. 154).Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 5} Stenton, F. M., ‘The Road System of Medieval England’, Econ. Hist. Rev., vii (1936–1937), pp. 10–11.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 6} Round, J. H., ‘King Stephen and the Earl of Chester’, Eng. Hist. Rev., x (1895), p. 87CrossRefGoogle Scholar, followed by subsequent writers, most boldly by Barra-clough, G., The Earldom and County Palatine of Chester (Oxford, 1953), p. 14.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 1} Cf. de Boüard, M., Guillawne le Conquérant, pp. 22, 43–44, 48, 67, 70.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 2} Orderic, iv, p. 98.

^{page 21 note 3} Ibid., iv, pp. 91, 95, 168; G.E.C., Complete Peerage, xii (2), p. 360, gives no date for the marriage, but her father (d. Oct. 1100) gave Margaret in marriage (Orderic, iii, p. 302). In 1103 her brother Rotrou himself married one of Henry I's daughters. If their descent is accepted, the Redvers were another line descended from Gunnor's kin to emerge at this time.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 4} Orderic, ii, p. 81 (cf. ii, p. 113); the victims may not, of course, have been as guiltless as Orderic implies.

^{page 22 note 1} Orderic, iv, pp. 112–13.

^{page 22 note 2} Bruty Tywysogion, ed. Jones, A.D. 1102; Florence, of Worcester, , Chronicon ex chronicis, ed. Thorpe, , ii, pp. 49–50. Florence's verbs coepit and festinavit imply a fairly lengthy period of work at Bridgnorth, as would be natural if some of the work was in stone. Robert probably chose the site in 1100, and work could have begun in the 1101 building season.Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 3} Orderic, iv, p. 169.

^{page 22 note 4} Regesta, ii, nos 540–41, 544–45, 548; Recueil des actes des comtes de Pontieu, ed. Brunei, C. (Documents inédits, Paris, 1930), no. XV.Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 5} Anselmi, S. … opera omnia, ed. Schmitt, , iv, no. 270; cf. Orderic, iv, pp. 32, 34.Google Scholar

^{page 23 note 1} Ibid., iv, pp. 177–78; Brut y Tywysogion, ed. Jones, A.D. 1102. This fascinating episode was studied (with imperfect dating) by E. Curtis, ‘Murchertach O'Brien … and his Norman son-in-law, Arnulf de Montgomery, c. 1100'’, Journal of Royal Soc. Antiquaries of Ireland, li (1921); Curtis omitted it from his History of Ireland.Google Scholar

^{page 23 note 2} Orderic, iii, p. 423; v, p. 4.

^{page 24 note 1} Orderic, iv, pp. 170–78, and Brut, A.D. 1102, give the fullest accounts, and Ramsay, J. H., The Foundations of England (London, 1898), ii, pp. 240–43, the best modern one. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, passim, shows how a majority of Robert's tenants survived his fall.Google Scholar

^{page 24 note 2} Roger may have been in England in 1109 (Regesta, ii, no. 919). Arnulf certainly was (Eadmer, , Historia novorum in Anglia et opuscula … (R.S.), p. 420), having been reconciled with Henry I by Anselm (S. Anselmi … opera omnia, ed. Schmitt, v, no. 426); but neither held land in England again. Their sister Emma's nunnery of Almenèches lost some land too near the south coast for Henry's comfort (Orderic, iv, p. 178). It was definitely not their half-brother Everard who became bishop of Norwich in 1121 (I owe this information to Miss B. Dodwell), and Orderic's statements well after 1121 that he was still a chaplain, inter mediocres, of Henry I, must be accepted, although the chaplain Everard last attests in the very year 1121 (Orderic, ii, p. 412; iii, pp. 425–26; Regesta, ii, no. 1245).Google Scholar

^{page 24 note 3} Eyton, , Antiquities of Shropshire, ii, p. 191Google Scholar. For a novelist's conception of Earl Roger, see H. F. M. Prescott, Son of Dust.

^{page 24 note 4} Eyton, , op. cit., viii, p. 244.Google Scholar

^{page 25 note 1} The … Martyrology of Ricemarch, ed. Lawlor, H. J. (Henry Bradshaw Soc, xlvii, 1914), i, pp. 121–23Google Scholar (cf. Gerald, of Wales, , De Invectionibus, in Opera (R.S.), iii, p. 57)Google Scholar; Florence, of Worcester, , Chronkon ex chronkis, ed. Thorpe, , ii, p. 42. Brut, A.D. 1102, condemns Earls Roger and Hugh together.Google Scholar

^{page 25 note 2} Henry, of Huntingdon, , Epistola de contemptu mundi, in Historia Anglorum, ed. Arnold, T. (R.S., 1879), p. 310Google Scholar; William, of Malmesbury, , Gesta regum, ed. Stubbs, W. (R.S., 1887–1989), ii, pp. 475–76Google Scholar; cf. perhaps also the ‘popular ballad’ of 1102 divined by Poole, A. L., From Domesday Book to Magna Carta (Oxford, 1955), p. 118.Google Scholar

^{page 25 note 3} Gaimar, Geffrei, L'estoire des Engleis, ed. Bell, , lines 5881–82, p. 186.Google Scholar

^{page 25 note 4} Orderic, iii, p. 297; for general accusations of cruelty against Robert, see ibid., ii, pp. 47, 422; iii, p. 301; iv, pp. 33–34; (Orderic had less animus against the Perche branch of the Bellême family; for Robert's sister Matilda, see Round, Calendar, no. 1206).

^{page 26 note 1} Orderic, iii, pp. 303, 423; cf iv, p. 34; v, pp. 3–4.

^{page 26 note 2} Chroniques des églises d' Anjou, ed. Marchegay, P.and Mabille, E. (Soc. de I'hist. de France, Paris, 1869), p. 28: defectione suorum.Google Scholar

^{page 26 note 3} Freeman, E. A., The Reign of William Rufus (Oxford, 1882), i, p. 181.Google Scholar

^{page 26 note 4} Stenton, , op. cit., p. 109; Orderic, iii, pp. 358, 415; iv, p. 21.Google Scholar

^{page 26 note 5} Freeman was occasionally wrong-headed and often wise in his William Rufus; but his picture of Robert is probably more of a caricature, and less rounded, than Orderic's.

^{page 26 note 6} At Quatford (Round, Calendar, no. 1237) and Bellême itself (Cartulaire de Marmoutier pour le Perche, ed. Barret, P. (Mortagne, 1894), nos 13, 14).Google Scholar

^{page 26 note 7} G.E.C., Complete Peerage, xi, p. 690Google Scholar, note h; Recueil des actes des comtes de Pontieu, ed. Brunel, no. XV; Haskins, C. H., Norman Institutions (Cambridge, Mass., 1918), p. 19, n. 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 26 note 8} Brunel, , op. cit., no. XVI; Orderic, iv, pp. 57–58.Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 1} Ibid., iv, pp. 104–05.

^{page 27 note 2} An independent attitude may even be evinced in charter styles. Once as count of Ponthieu and once even as earl of Shrewsbury, Robert styled himself Dei gratia (Brunel, , op. cit., no. XVGoogle Scholar; Round, Calendar, no. 1237); even Roger is made to do so, again as earl of Shrewsbury (Orderic, ii, p. 413). But if, as would be normal, the original instruments were drawn up by scribes of the beneficiaries, they would prove nothing as to the earls' own attitude. Norman counts in south Italy certainly seem to have used the formula in an independent, rather than a devout, spirit, before c. 1150; cf. also de Boüard, M.. Guillaume le Conquérant p. 44.Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 3} Lemarignier, J.-F., L'hommage en marche et les frontières féodales (Lille, 1945), p. 67.Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 4} Jamison, E., ‘The Counts of Molise…’, Eng. Hist. Rev., xliv (1929), pp. 530–31.Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 5} Blanchet, J. A. and Dieudonné, A., Manuel de numismatique française, iv (Paris, 1936), p. 332.Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 6} Brut, A.D. 1102.

^{page 27 note 7} Orderic, iv, p. 34.