The first Yorkshire Beaumont - 1 of 2

This article follows three in which I have argued against the supposed involvement of William de Beaumont and Roger Constable of Chester in the Third Crusade. In this article I look at the first part of William's actual career in Roger's service.

A second article will track the second part of his career, from about 1205 onwards.

The great antiquarian of the Whitley family, R.H. Beaumont, did not know the origins of this man otherwise he would have no doubt said something at the beginning of the large family tree that he sent to his Nottinghamshire cousin in 1796.

Very nearly always I have found that anything actually written by RHB is right. Much that has been written afterwards by others is wrong.

Heading to the 1796 Pedigree (this archive, Box 1/157)

Many of the known facts come from copies of charters. These are usually undated, but one tries to ascertain the dates by looking at the subject matter, and the groupings and identity of witnesses. Most of the references to William are attestations by him of Roger's charters.

An early one is a charter by Roger to a man named William son of Fulk, described as Roger's marshall, relating to land near Clitheroe. The most senior witness to this charter is known to have been at Winchester in April 1194 when the inheritance of Pontefract and Clitheroe was confirmed to Roger. (1) (2) This makes it tempting to suggest that as the date, but that is uncertain.

Another early reference to William also relates to Clitheroe. William was a member of Roger's court there. Perhaps we should think in terms of member of a tribunal panel, chaired by Roger himself. This is dated, within the seventh year of Richard I's reign, thus 1195-1196. (3)

Clitheroe Castle (from explorebowland.co.uk)

This early reference to William specifically concerns Cliviger - the place where T.D. Whitaker's ancestors lived (at Holme) since the middle ages.

So where did William come from? I don't think anyone in the last 100-odd years has seriously tried to find out. The name is found frequently so one needs some context rather than make wild guesses. As I found no evidence of earlier Beaumonts in the Pontefract honour, I read up about the careers and affairs of Roger's father and indeed earlier ancestors (Constables of Chester), and I found several mentions of people called Beaumont.

Specifically this leads me to suggest that perhaps William was related to the Thomas de Beaumont who consented to the sale by his uncle (whose heir Thomas would have been), to Roger's father John Constable of Chester, of land at Staining in Lancashire, which John then gave to Stanlaw abbey. The charter in question was witnessed by (amongst others) Robert of Croxton, the name of the man whom John would put in charge of Nottingham castle (see earlier article). (4)

A near contemporary (perhaps the same) Thomas de Beaumont held at Pirton in Oxfordshire which belonged or had belonged to the early Constables of Chester (5), and it is noteworthy that the priest of Pirton was a witness to the Staining charter just mentioned.

And a mid c12 Philip de Bellomonte witnessed a charter of Roger's grandfather Richard son of Eustace which related to people called Croxton, who were tenants of the Constables of Chester somewhere in or near Nottinghamshire. (6)

The name of the uncle in the Staining charter was William "the monk," a figure who appears in affairs of the Cotentin peninsular in Normandy in the mid c12 where charter evidence confirms that his heir was his nephew Thomas de Bellomonte, and indeed that Thomas also had a brother named Philip, and other brothers in fact (7)

I feel that the likelihood of there being two sets of people with these names and the same relationship is quite low!

I have a lot of notes on these people. My suggestion is that our William was closely related to these Beaumonts, perhaps a younger son in that family.

Moving on......

Between the late 1190s and about 1205 references to William seem to dry up. Roger Constable of Chester was out of the country for four years, in Normandy, in the service of King John, and no charter evidence datable within that range seems to be available. It is well known that Richard "the Lionheart" left things in such a mess that his brother was unable in the end to hold on to Normandy.

Roger conducted the defence of one of the most important castles in this struggle, that of Chateau Gaillard, at Les Andelys on the Seine between Rouen and Paris. Roger was forced to surrender it in March 1204 when there were apparently 36 knights there who were taken prisoner by the French. (8)

Chateau Gaillard (from normandie-tourisme.fr)

A year or so later, when king John was at Northampton, for whatever reason, he ordered that a William de Beaumont should have a debt holiday due to being overseas in the kings service. This order is stated to be "by the Constable of Chester" (and Roger was present) which means that we can be very sure that our William de Beaumont is the one meant.

The full quote in my translation is "to respite William de Bellomonte from the payment of 10 marks (£6. 6s.8d) [see below] which he owes to the Jews in York, and to free him from the interest of the debt as long as he was beyond the sea with horses and arms in the king's service. Given at Northampton 23 May 1205. As witness me, myself. By the Constable of Chester." (9)

from Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum in Turri Londinensi Asservati
[Close Rolls kept in the Tower of London]
1833 edition ed T.D.Hardy vol. 1 p.33b

This was known to R.H.Beaumont who noted it in the 1796 Pedigree.

Thus, William has been in Normandy in the king's service. It must mean a year or more ago as Normandy had effectively been lost when Chateau Gaillard surrendered, so it leads to the intriguing possibility that William had been serving under Roger.

The rest of William's career will be considered separately. In closing this however I note that many years later William would witness a charter of Roger's son concerning the earlier gift of the land at Staining (10). This may point to his being related to the earlier Thomas de Beaumont.

.......................

(1) The fine was levied on 21st April 1194 before the king, archbishop and bishops, the Earl of Chester and other barons (Early Yorkshire Charters vol.3 no. 1522 p.208 and elsewhere).

(2) The Earl of Chester witnessed Roger's charter to his marshall, to which William de Beaumont was a mid-ranking witness (T.D.Whitaker's Hist. of Whalley, Fourth Edition vol.ii, p.100 and elsewhere).

(3) Early Yorkshire Charters vol 3 no.1524 p.211 and elsewhere incl Kirkstall Coucher Book no.274 where there is said to be a copy at Dodsworth viii 43. The RHB 1796 Pedigree notes this Clitheroe final concord as "Dodsw. MSS vol.58 fo.149." and as the earliest mention of William de Bellomonte. See Falconer Madan's Summary Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, volume 2 no. 5000 pp. 897-898 MS Dodsw.58, where folio 149 is extracts from the Kirkstall Coucher Book. I mention this in detail as an illustration of the accuracy of R.H. Beaumont's work.

(4) Whalley Coucher Book vol. 2 p.420 no. IV, and no. III is John's charter, a copyist having erroneously called him Lacy. The foundation of Stanlaw (by the Mersey) was moved to Whalley at a later date.

(5) Farrer, Honors & Knights Fees vol. 2 pp. 251-252, shows that Pirton belonged to the Constables of Chester and mentions a Philip de Beaumont of the 1220s, whose predecessor had been called Thomas. Proceedings in the early 1230s recited that the c12 Thomas de Beaumont had given some land at Pirton in marriage with a daughter (Bracton's Note Book vol. 2 no.566 p.439) (Curia Regis Rolls 6 p.139).

(6) Rufford Charters (Ed. Holdsworth) Vol 2 428 (page 234) - Thoroton Society Record Series vol. XXX (1974).

(7) A lot of the context here is to do with Neville-sur-mer and Montebourg abbey. It would take a whole chapter to review these people and their early associations with the early Constables of Chester. See Keats-Rohan Domesday Descendants pp. 283, 317; BN lat. 17137, 356/fol.246; also a Montebourg charter, BN lat. 10087, 422/139. There is a place called Beaumont near St. Pierre-Eglise.
The catalogue is hard to access but I think Archives de la Manche H-9504 refers to the priory at Neville-sur-mer. References to charters appear to show that the nephews Thomas and Philip were succeded by Philip, whose father was Thomas. A very similar naming pattern appears re Pirton. There were two mid c12 men called William "the monk." This one was a donor to Montebourg Abbey.

(8) A solid account of the siege and surrender (6 March 1204) of Chateau Gaillard, with many details and sources, was given by Kate Norgate in "England under the Angevin Kings," (1887) vol. 2 pp. 411-423. Another useful book is Sir Maurice Powicke's "The Loss of Normandy."

(9)  Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum i 33b .. I think the word "fuit" - meaning "was" or "used to be" - tells us that William has now returned, and the debt holiday is merely to be for the period he was away.... Perhaps in captivity.  I think that the phrase "horses and arms" is somewhat a stock phrase referring to military service. Note the letter that looks like a 9; this means "Con."...... Roger himself is the sheriff of York at this time, and is seen bending the royal ear on other matters as well.  He obtained a similar order two days later for a man called Robert de Leveland, which was put on the roll next (RLC i 33b also).

(10) Whalley Coucher Book vol. 2 p. 419-420 no. I. The charters are printed in the wrong order. It was common practice for an abbey to ask (say) a donor's son, in this case grandson, to reconfirm earlier gifts. Also, attestation of a charter by any individual can be taken in this way - that having seen the deed executed, he ought to have said at the time if he did object. Therefore someone who might have objected would be asked to come and attest the deed.

EMB
June 2020

Added 21 Aug.2020. I think I have goofed. As a mark was two thirds of a pound, ten marks would be £6-13-4 wouldn't it? £10 being 2400d. Two thirds of that being 1600d. 133.333 shillings.