Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 1 Vol 4.djvu/40

 38 GLOUCESTER. II. 1121] 1. Robert Fitz-IIoy [Mius Regis), callol Rufus ami occasionally described as "de Cacn,"(*) but more usually as "Consul,"^) illegit. s. of King Henry I., by Nesta da. of libys ap Tudor, Prince of South Wales, was b. in or before 1100, and, having previously been knighted, obtained, vast estates in the West of England by his marriage concluded in June 1119, at Lisieux, (tho' negotiated many years earlier) with Mabel, da. and h. of Robert Fitz-Hamon, called Dcntulus, Lord of Corbeil in Normandy, Gov. of Caen, and Lord of the honours of Gloucester, Bristol, Tewkesbury Cardiff, &c, by Matilda (or Sybella), da. of Roger de Montgomery. He was accordingly cr. by his father, probably about 1121,(<>) EARL OF GLOUCESTER. ( d ) He fought, under his father's Standard, at Brenueville in 1119; was, jure uxoris, Gov. of Caen and Constable of Bristol. Commander of the army in Normandy, 1123-24. Soon after the accession of Stephen to the throne of England he did him homage and was a witness to his second charter of liberty 1136. He, however, soon espoused the side of, his half sister, the Empress Maud bringing her over to England and having the chief command of her forces 1139-47. He d. 31 Oct. 1147 and was bur. at St. James, Bristol, which priory he had founded. M.I.(°) III. 1147, 2. William (Fitz-Robert), Earl, of Gloucester, or to Earl ok Bristol,^ called De Maforache or Morjoaelic, and described 1183. (like his father) as " Consul," 1st s. and h. ; b. 23 Nov. (probably in) 1121 ; sue. to the Earldom 31 Oct. 1147; was a witness, in 1153, to the agreement between King Stephen and Henry, afterwards King Henry II. He usually resided at Cardiff Castle, where he is said(B) to have exercised jura regalia as Lord of the Honour of Glamorgan ; Hered. Gov. of Caen, &c. He TO., about 1150, Hawise, da. of Robert (Beaumont), 2d Earl op Leicester, by Amicia, his wife. Ho (who appears to have been a prisoner in 1182) d. s.p.m., 23 Nov. 1183, ( ll ) when the Earldom, or at all events the right of the disposal thereof, reverted to the Crown. His widow d. 24 April 1197. ( a ) He is sometimes said to have been so called from having been born at Caen, but Mr. Nichols conjectures some " misapprehension " to have arisen from his having jure uxoris been Constable and Governor of that city. ( b ) " Consul is often used for Earl in the time of the first age of the Norman Kings, in William of Malmesbury, Huntingdon, lloveden, and some such men; but with King Stephen this kind of use of that word ended ; only Bracton (that wrote under Henry III.), says, indeed, that Comitcs diei jiossunt Consulcs a considcndo." ( c ) " It is certain, therefore," writes Mr. Round, ''that Robert Fitz-Roy received the Earldom of Gloucester between April — May 1121, and June 1123," afterwards {Oen. iv. 213), narrowed to between May 1121, and the end of 1122. He adds, " I may point out that Robert's promotion may possibly have been due to his increased importance, consequent on the loss (25 Nov. 1120), in the White Ship of the King's only legitimate son, and of hia natural son, Richard. Of Henry's three adult sons he now alone remained." It is, however, pointed out by Mr. Chester Waters that the fact of Robert being designated as the " King's son " is not conclusive that he was not also an Earl, as he was described as the King's sou, by Ordcricus Vitalis (lib. xxii., cap. 34), in Nov. 1123, five months after, according to Mr. Round, he had become Earl of Gloucester. ( d ) The rhyming Chronicle of " Robert of Gloucester," as to this creation being conferred on marriage, inasmuch, as the lady would not accept of him without some " name " is (tho' of great interest), not entitled to much credit. It is given in "Sandford," p. 45, &c. (°) His effigy Mr. Planche considers " from the fashion of the hair," to have been erected at the beginning of the 13th century. He adds that if it was " really before 1150, which I am not prepared positively to deny, it would claim to be amongst the earliest, if not the earliest of the sepulchral effigies in England." (*) See vol. ii, p. 25, sub "Bristol." (b) Sandford. Book 1, chap. viii. ( h ) The date 1173 (20 Hen. II.) is that given by Dugdale and followed by Mr. Nichols, who expressly states that William was Earl for 26 [not 30] years. The account of Hoveden, &c., as followed by Vincent and adopted by Courthope [tho' not by Nicolas] give B the date as 1183, as in the text above. Mr. Chester Waters writes