Page:Englishhistorica36londuoft.djvu/444

 436 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July But we see no reason whatever for attributing this charter to the reign of Louis d'Outremer, or for presuming that Yves was out of favour with the (unnamed) king whose ratification he states that he hopes to obtain. The king in question may have been Hugh Capet or even Robert I. We are driven back to the charter of L'Abbayette as our main authority for the antecedents of Yves. He there mentions his father Fulcoin and his mother Rhotais, but nothing further is known of them. He gives to L'Abbayette a number of vills in Mayenne near the frontier of the Avranchin, and speaks of them as old property of his house ; he mentions his uncle Bishop Sigefroy of Le Mans. From all this we may conclude that his family belonged to the county of Maine ; the inference is strengthened by the fact that his son William Talvas I speaks of many hereditary fiefs belonging to the family in the Norman Passais, which had been originally part of Maine. How the family acquired BellSme can only be conjectured, but Orderic calls Yves regis balistarius ; Yves may have held this office under Hugh Capet, and may have received Belleme as a reward for his official services. The transference of the Norman Passais from Maine to Normandy at some uncertain date before 1020 is probably the beginning of the close connexion between the Talvas family and the Norman dukes. The first clear proof of such a connexion is given by the charter of William Talvas I to the bishop of Seez. William had married a Norman wife, Matilda, who was possibly a sister of Duke Richard II (p. 117) ; and in 1022 we find him bestowing the bourg of Seez and other properties in the Pays de Seez upon another Bishop Sigefroy, who appears to have been his kinsman. Long afterwards it was claimed by Robert II of Belleme that Duke Richard (II) had given the bishopric of Seez to William (I) of Belleme. 1 Whatever may be the value of this statement, William Talvas I was a great proprietor in the Pays de Seez, and his position was approved by Duke Richard II, who attested his charter to the bishop. That William was lord of Alencon and Essai is proved by his foundation charter to Lonlay. M. du Motey is of the opinion that William had inherited his position in the Pays de Seez ; that his ancestors were practically seigneurs of this district before the diocese of Seez was divided between the duke of Normandy and the king of France ; that this division, which made the Sarthe the boundary between the French and Norman portions of the diocese, took place during the minority of King Lothaire and in the life- time of Duke Hugh the Great, consequently in the years 954-6 ; and that the duke allowed the lords of Belleme to hold from him on specially favourable terms such of their possessions as became Norman territory under the settlement (pp. 80-1). These interesting hypotheses rest, so far as we can see, upon no evidence whatever. M. du Motey does endeavour elsewhere to prove that the Talvas family enjoyed exceptional privileges in the Pays de Seez ; but his proofs are not strong. In 1269 St. Louis acknowledged that the pleas of the sword were appurtenant to the castel- ries of Alencon and Essai ; but rights of this kind were held by many Norman barons in the eleventh century. In 1089 Robert II of Belleme took from the abbot of St. Martin of Seez an oath that the men of the abbey would assist Robert and his father if they should make war on 1 Hist. Ecc, ed. Prevost, iii. 421.