Robert II 'le Vaillant' d'Harcourt

• Preferred Name: Robert II 'le Vaillant' d'Harcourt^[1]
  
• Gender: M
  
• Birth: vers 1150 in Harcourt, Eure, Duchy of Normandie at LATI: N9.167 LONG: E0.7844
  
• Death: 1208 in England
  
• FSID: G8VV-FK4
  
• Notes:

  === Life Sketch ===
  Foundation for Medieval Genealogy
  
  ROBERT [II] "le Vaillant" d’Harcourt, son of GUILLAUME Seigneur d’Harcourt & his wife --- (-[1208]). The primary source which confirms his parentage has not yet been identified. Seigneur d’Harcourt. The Red Book of the Exchequer records enfeoffments in the duchy of Normandy in [1172], "Robertus de Harecurt" with one knight "in baillia Ranulfi de Rollancurt"[943]. "…Roberto de Haricuria…" subscribed the charter dated to [1172/78] under which Henry II King of England confirmed donations to the monks of Bec established at the church of Pré at Rouen which had been made by a charter of King Henry I dated 1122[944]. La Roque gives an extract (in French translation) of a charter dated 1192 under which “Robert de Harcourt surnommé le Tort” donated property to the monastery of Notre-Dame de la Noë, with the consent of “Richard, Jean et Amaury de Harcourt ses enfants”[945].
  
  [m firstly [JEANNE] de Meulan, daughter of ROBERT Comte de Meulan & his wife Matilda of Cornwall. Many secondary sources name Jeanne de Meulan as the wife of Robert [II] Seigneur d’Harcourt. This can be traced back to La Roque who states that “Jeanne de Meullent Dame d’Elbeuf…Dame de Beaumesnil, de Sainct Celerin et autres seigneuries”, daughter of Robert [II] Comte de Meulan and his wife, married “[son cousin]…Robert 2. Baron de Harcourt dit le Vaillant…par dispense”[946]. La Roque adds that “ailleurs il est dit que Galeran Comte de Meulent en execution de la volonté du Comte Robert de Meulent son pere, consentit que Jeanne de Meulent sa sœur eust les seigneuries cy-dessus et donna de son chef à Richard de Harcourt son neveu, fils aisné de Jeanne de Meulent, la seigneurie d’Elbeuf, en reconnoissant toujours qu’ils estoient de la mesme race et de mesme sang”[947]. He cites no source which supports this statement or provides the basis for the proposed marriage. The issue is to decide whether there could be any validity at all for this alleged marriage[948]. Thomas Stapleton, in his "Observations on the Great Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy", dismisses La Roque’s position as unsupported[949]. He traces the ownership of Elbœuf as providing one approach to testing the question. Stapleton quotes three documents relating to Elbœuf: firstly, the marriage contract between Waléran, son of Robert Comte de Meulan, and Marguerite de Fougères, dated 1189, under which Marguerite received dower including "100 livres in Elbœuf i.e. in land and men…and [if] Waléran [died], Marguerite his wife to have her dower in its entirety"; secondly, John King of England directed the bailiffs of the Lieuvin, Vaudreuil and La Londe, by writs dated 7 Feb and 12 Feb 1203, "to cause Richard d’Harcourt to have…the land which had belonged to Margaret filia Willelmi de Feugeriis" and "to have the rent qui fuit Margarete uxoris quondam Walerani de Mellent, sororis Willelmi de Feugeriis, que est cum Britonibus"; thirdly, King John, dated 28 May 1203, made known that Robert Comte de Meulan "had pledged all his land in Normandy to Us", that it would revert to Robert if the king predeceased him "except Elbœuf…which he hath granted to Richard d’Harcourt by Our consent"[950]. Stapleton assumes that Marguerite de Fougères, widow of Waléran de Meulan, was dispossessed by King John. Marguerite is stated to be "with the Bretons" ("cum Britonibus") in the source dated 12 Feb 1203. These events occurred during the critical period before and after the murder of Arthur Duke of Brittany (killed 3 Apr 1203), so such dispossession is plausible as part of the king’s operations against Brittany. On the other side of the argument, the 28 May 1203 source states that Comte Robert had granted Elbœuf to Richard d’Harcourt with the king’s consent, a point on which the 7 Feb and 12 Feb orders are silent. If the transfer was a voluntary one, a close family relationship between Robert de Meulan and Richard d’Harcourt would provide the best explanation for the grant. However, in that case, Robert de Meulan must have been complicit in depriving his own daughter-in-law of her dower before making the transfer. Such a scenario is unlikely as relations between Robert and the king were poor: an order of King John dated 2 Apr 1203 assured "R. com Melleti" that the king would end all bad feelings (“perdonavimus vobis omnem iram et malivolentiam que habemus adversus vos”) if he visited before the end of the Easter period ("si venitis ad nos infra claus Pasch pxim") and granted him safe passage[951]. The result was the 28 May 1203 order proclaiming Robert’s pledge of his lands to the king, which sounds anything but voluntary. That document, as quoted by Stapleton, states no Meulan/Harcourt family relationship and Stapleton takes this omission as indicating that no family connection existed. Although there are numerous examples of transfers between relatives where the documents are silent on the actual relationship, the omission is telling in this case. Stapleton also cites the charter dated 1 May 1204, under which Robert Comte de Meulan devised his lands "ex toto to Mabiria wife of William Earl of the Isle and to have them confirmed to [her], as to his next heir [tanquam heredi meo propinquiori]"[952]. He suggests that "tanquam heredi meo propinquiori" indicates that none of Comte Robert’s other children had surviving issue (which would mean that Richard d’Harcourt could not have been Comte Robert’s grandson). The phrase also covers the situation where there were surviving grandchildren, with Mabile being his only surviving child who was more closely related to him ("propinquiori") by one generation than the grandchildren. Such grandchildren would include the issue of Robert’s deceased son Waléran by Marguerite de Fougères, and so the 1 May 1204 decision could have formed part of the king’s repression of Breton sympathisers. In conclusion, political circumstances at the time suggest that the transfer of Elbœuf to Richard d’Harcourt took place against the wishes of the Meulan family, which in turn suggests that they were not related and that the alleged marriage of [Jeanne] de Meulan never took place. While it is impossible to conclude definitively on the likelihood of La Roque being correct, his work contains many inaccuracies and is not reliable, as noted elsewhere in the present document. By way of footnote, if the daughter of Robert Comte de Meulan did marry Robert [II] Seigneur d’Harcourt, the chronology indicates that she would have been his first wife. In addition, it is likely that her name was not Jeanne in light of the contradictory sources which refer to the wife of Guy de la Roche-Guyon, another daughter of Robert de Meulan, as explained in more detail in the Meulan section of the present document.]
  
  m [secondly] EVA Crispin, daughter of JOSCELIN Crispin & his wife Isabelle de Dangu (-[before 1192], bur Mortemer-és-Lions). The Historia cœnobiii Mortui-Maris records (during the period after "domnus Willelmus natione Anglicus" was appointed abbot of Mortemer, from the context, which appears to have been in [1179/80] judging from other parts of the same text) that "domina…Isabella de Dangu" chose burial at Mortemer and that after she died "vir eius domnus Joscelinus Crispinus et filii eorum" donated revenue "in molendino de Waltot" for her anniversary and that of "patris eius Robertus de Dangu", and also states that "Domina etiam de Harecort filia eius" donated books and other items for her own burial in the abbey[953]. Thomas Stapleton names "William, Robert and Eustace" as the sons of Joscelin Crispin and "Agnes, Eva and Emelina…the daughters…on whom Eva was lady of Harcourt", but he does not cite the primary source which confirms this information[954]. Assuming that all this information is correct, it is reasonable from a chronological point of view to suppose that the husband of Eva Crispin was Robert [II] Seigneur d’Harcourt. The absence of any wife’s name from the charter dated 1192, quoted below, suggests that Robert may have been a widower by that date.
  
  Robert [II] & his [second] wife had three children:
  
  1. RICHARD ([1180/83]-[8 Jun 1236/39]).
  2. JEAN d’Harcourt (-Damietta 1219).
  3. AMAURY d’Harcourt (-after 1192).
  
  === Baron of Harcourt ===
  Seigneur and Baron of Harcourt, Cailville, Beauficel, and Lord of the Manor of Stanton-under-Bardon, co. Leicester
  
  === Name Suffix: Baron Harcourt Ancest ===
  Name Suffix: Baron Harcourt Ancestral File Number: 9Q86-NW
  
  === #Générale# Sire d'Harcourt Décès : ou b ===
  #Générale# Sire d'Harcourt Décès : ou bien encore entre 1204 et 1208
  
  === 1 _FA6 2 PLAC [BARON HARCOURT] From An ===
  1 _FA6 2 PLAC [BARON HARCOURT] From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996.
  
  === Robert II. de Harcourt, Seigneur and Bar ===
  Robert II. de Harcourt, Seigneur and Baron of Harcourt, etc., ancestor of the Dukes of Harcourt, peers of France and the Counts of Aumale, Counts of Tankerville, Viscounts de St. Sauveur and other branches of this illustrious house, was living in 1204, died before 1208. He remained in France, and regardless of the many wars and revolutions, which have occurred in France, the Dukes of Harcourt retain the chateau of Harcourt, near the old Norman stronghold that has born their name for over nine hundred years at They-Harcourt, arrondissement of Falaise. La Roque incorrectly says he married Jeanne de Meulent. He married Eve Crispin, lady of Lisors, daughter of Joscelyn Crispin.
  
  === 1. CD V712-01, Vol 12 World Family Tree ===
  1. CD V712-01, Vol 12 World Family Tree, dated b1996, BroderbundSoftware, Inc., Pedigree #1010. 2. "Blood Royal, Issue of the Kings and Queens of Medieval England 1099- 1399, The Normans and the Plantagenets", by T. Anna Leese, HeritageBooks, Inc., 1996. 3. CD181 English Origins of New England Families, Series 1, Volume 3,The Early Harcourts, bThe Learning Company, Jul 17, 1999.
  
  === Name Suffix: [BARON HARCOURT] Anc ===
  Name Suffix: [BARON HARCOURT] Ancestral File Number:< AFN> 9Q86-NW
  
  === From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 J ===
  From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996. From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996.
  
  === From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 J ===
  From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996
  
  === !NOTE: The Church of Jesus Christ of Lat ===
  !NOTE: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Ancestral File (TM); ; June 1998 (c), data as of 5 JAN 1998; ; , Family History Library, 35 N West Temple Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84150 USA
  
  === Ancestor of the Dukes de Harcourt, peers ===
  Ancestor of the Dukes de Harcourt, peers of France and the Countsd'Aumale, Counts de Tankerville, Viscounts de St. Sauveur and otherbranches of that illustrusious house. Sheriff of the Counties of Warwickand Leicester in 1199-1201, in which the last year he died;
  
  === Burke: Dormant and Extinct Peerages ===
  Burke: Dormant and Extinct Peerages
  
  === _P_CCINFO 1-14417 ===
  _P_CCINFO 1-14417
  
  === From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 5 J ===
  From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 5 JAN 1998.
  
  === --Other Fields ===
  --Other Fields
  
  === #Générale# Sire d'Harcourt Décès : ou bi ===
  #Générale# Sire d'Harcourt Décès : ou bien encore entre 1204 et 1208
  
  === Sir-- means he was a knight.
  
  Sir-- mean ===
  Sir-- means he was a knight.
  
  Sir-- means he was a knight.
  
  Sir-- means he was a knight.
  
  Sir-- means he was a knight.
  
  === From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 J ===
  From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996.
  
  === GEDCOM line 31312 not recognizable or to ===
  GEDCOM line 31312 not recognizable or too long: (SLGC) 2 STAT CLEARED GEDCOM line 31313 not recognizable or too long: (SLGC) 2 FAMC @01907373@ GEDCOM line 31314 not recognizable or too long: () 1 SOUR @S01@ GEDCOM line 58935 not recognizable or too long for MRIN 4727: (SLGS) 2 STAT CLEARED
  
  === From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 J ===
  From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996. From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996. From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996. From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996. From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996.From Ancestral File (TM), data as of 2 January 1996.
  
  === --Other Fields STAT: CLEARED @01907373@ ===
  --Other Fields STAT: CLEARED @01907373@ Non-standard gedcom data: 1 HEAL 9Q86-NW
  
  === Sir Robert de Harcourt, Knt., sheriff of ===
  Sir Robert de Harcourt, Knt., sheriff of the cos. of Warwick and Leicester in 1199-1201 and 1202, in which last year he died. He m. Isabel, only child and heir of Richard de Camville, by Milicent his wife, cousin to Adeliza, King Henry I's 2nd consort. [Sir Bernard Burke, Dormant, Abeyant, Forfeited, and Extinct Peerages, Burke's Peerage, Ltd., London, 1883, p. 261, Harcourt, Barons Harcourt, of Stanton Harcourt, co. Oxford]
  
  NOTE: On p. 100 of the same book referenced above, Burke states that Isabella de Camville was the daughter of Richard [II], the son of Richard [I] who had four sons and a daughter, Gerald, Walter, Richard, William, and Matilda.
  
  Robert de Harcourt, who was sheriff of Warwickshire and Leicestershire, in the years 1199, 1201, and 1202, in which latter year he departed this life. This Robert m. Isabel, only child and heir of Richard de Camville, of Stanton, in Oxfordshire, and acquired thereby that lordship, which subsequently bore the name of Stanton-Harcourt. He was s. by his eldest son, William de Harcourt, Lord of Stanton-Harcourt.
  
  * Third son of Richard de Camville, who founded Combe Abbey, in Warwickshire, and was son and heir of Gerard de Camville, Lord or Lilbourne, near Creek, in Northamptonshire. Isabel's mother was Milicent, cousin to King Henry I's second consort, Adeliza, daughter to Godfrey I, Duke of Brabant, who gave to the said Millicent, on her marriage with the said Richard Camville, the lordship of Stanton, in the county of Oxford, which was confirmed to her and her heirs by Kings Stephen and Henry II. [John Burke, History of the Commoners of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol. II, R. Bentley, London, 1834-1838, p. 221, Harcourt, of Ankerwycke]
  
  === !GENERAL:Pedigree Resource File CD 4, Pe ===
  !GENERAL:Pedigree Resource File CD 4, Pedigree Resource File CD 4, (Salt Lake City, UT: Intellectual Reserve, Inc., 1999) !GENERAL:Ancestral File (TM), Ancestral File (TM), The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, June 1998 (c), data as of 5 JAN 1998 Repository: Family History Library 35 N West Temple Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84150 USA
  
  === Ancestral File Number: 9Q86-NW ===
  Ancestral File Number: 9Q86-NW
  
  === Line 32360 from GEDCOM File not recogniz ===
  Line 32360 from GEDCOM File not recognizable or too long: SOUR @S01@ Line 38687 from GEDCOM File not recognizable or too long: SLGS STAT CLEARED
  
  === Line 87 from GEDCOM File not recognizabl ===
  Line 87 from GEDCOM File not recognizable or too long: NAME Robert /HARCOURT/ GIVN Robert Line 88 from GEDCOM File not recognizable or too long: NAME Robert /HARCOURT/ SURN HARCOURT Line 91 from GEDCOM File not recognizable or too long: SOUR @S01@
  
  === !NAME:". . . Robert de Harcourt," of Sta ===
  !NAME:". . . Robert de Harcourt," of Stanton-Harcourt," !REFERENCE-QUOTED: Langston & Buck et al, - PEDIGREES OF SOME OF EMPEROR CHARLEMAGNE DESCENDANTS; Genealogical Publishing Company, Inc., Baltimore, MD., 1988, p. 306, Vol. II; Sutro Library, San Francisco, CA. Vol II - PSECD - Langston & Buck - Gen/Pub/Co/Inc, Balt/Md, 1986.
  
  === Married a cousin ===
  Married a cousin

1. Richard d'Harcourt I, b. ABT 1180     d. 1239

1. Title: Foundation for Medieval Genealogy
   Publication: Name: https://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/NORMANDY%20NOBILITY.htm#RobertIIHarcourtdied1212B;
   Note: ROBERT [II] "le Vaillant" d’Harcourt, son of GUILLAUME Seigneur d’Harcourt & his wife --- (-[1208]). The primary source which confirms his parentage has not yet been identified. Seigneur d’Harcourt. The Red Book of the Exchequer records enfeoffments in the duchy of Normandy in [1172], "Robertus de Harecurt" with one knight "in baillia Ranulfi de Rollancurt"[943]. "…Roberto de Haricuria…" subscribed the charter dated to [1172/78] under which Henry II King of England confirmed donations to the monks of Bec established at the church of Pré at Rouen which had been made by a charter of King Henry I dated 1122[944]. La Roque gives an extract (in French translation) of a charter dated 1192 under which “Robert de Harcourt surnommé le Tort” donated property to the monastery of Notre-Dame de la Noë, with the consent of “Richard, Jean et Amaury de Harcourt ses enfants”[945]. [m firstly [JEANNE] de Meulan, daughter of ROBERT Comte de Meulan & his wife Matilda of Cornwall. Many secondary sources name Jeanne de Meulan as the wife of Robert [II] Seigneur d’Harcourt. This can be traced back to La Roque who states that “Jeanne de Meullent Dame d’Elbeuf…Dame de Beaumesnil, de Sainct Celerin et autres seigneuries”, daughter of Robert [II] Comte de Meulan and his wife, married “[son cousin]…Robert 2. Baron de Harcourt dit le Vaillant…par dispense”[946]. La Roque adds that “ailleurs il est dit que Galeran Comte de Meulent en execution de la volonté du Comte Robert de Meulent son pere, consentit que Jeanne de Meulent sa sœur eust les seigneuries cy-dessus et donna de son chef à Richard de Harcourt son neveu, fils aisné de Jeanne de Meulent, la seigneurie d’Elbeuf, en reconnoissant toujours qu’ils estoient de la mesme race et de mesme sang”[947]. He cites no source which supports this statement or provides the basis for the proposed marriage. The issue is to decide whether there could be any validity at all for this alleged marriage[948]. Thomas Stapleton, in his "Observations on the Great Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy", dismisses La Roque’s position as unsupported[949]. He traces the ownership of Elbœuf as providing one approach to testing the question. Stapleton quotes three documents relating to Elbœuf: firstly, the marriage contract between Waléran, son of Robert Comte de Meulan, and Marguerite de Fougères, dated 1189, under which Marguerite received dower including "100 livres in Elbœuf i.e. in land and men…and [if] Waléran [died], Marguerite his wife to have her dower in its entirety"; secondly, John King of England directed the bailiffs of the Lieuvin, Vaudreuil and La Londe, by writs dated 7 Feb and 12 Feb 1203, "to cause Richard d’Harcourt to have…the land which had belonged to Margaret filia Willelmi de Feugeriis" and "to have the rent qui fuit Margarete uxoris quondam Walerani de Mellent, sororis Willelmi de Feugeriis, que est cum Britonibus"; thirdly, King John, dated 28 May 1203, made known that Robert Comte de Meulan "had pledged all his land in Normandy to Us", that it would revert to Robert if the king predeceased him "except Elbœuf…which he hath granted to Richard d’Harcourt by Our consent"[950]. Stapleton assumes that Marguerite de Fougères, widow of Waléran de Meulan, was dispossessed by King John. Marguerite is stated to be "with the Bretons" ("cum Britonibus") in the source dated 12 Feb 1203. These events occurred during the critical period before and after the murder of Arthur Duke of Brittany (killed 3 Apr 1203), so such dispossession is plausible as part of the king’s operations against Brittany. On the other side of the argument, the 28 May 1203 source states that Comte Robert had granted Elbœuf to Richard d’Harcourt with the king’s consent, a point on which the 7 Feb and 12 Feb orders are silent. If the transfer was a voluntary one, a close family relationship between Robert de Meulan and Richard d’Harcourt would provide the best explanation for the grant. However, in that case, Robert de Meulan must have been complicit in depriving his own daughter-in-law of her dower before making the transfer. Such a scenario is unlikely as relations between Robert and the king were poor: an order of King John dated 2 Apr 1203 assured "R. com Melleti" that the king would end all bad feelings (“perdonavimus vobis omnem iram et malivolentiam que habemus adversus vos”) if he visited before the end of the Easter period ("si venitis ad nos infra claus Pasch pxim") and granted him safe passage[951]. The result was the 28 May 1203 order proclaiming Robert’s pledge of his lands to the king, which sounds anything but voluntary. That document, as quoted by Stapleton, states no Meulan/Harcourt family relationship and Stapleton takes this omission as indicating that no family connection existed. Although there are numerous examples of transfers between relatives where the documents are silent on the actual relationship, the omission is telling in this case. Stapleton also cites the charter dated 1 May 1204, under which Robert Comte de Meulan devised his lands "ex toto to Mabiria wife of William Earl of the Isle and to have them confirmed to [her], as to his next heir [tanquam heredi meo propinquiori]"[952]. He suggests that "tanquam heredi meo propinquiori" indicates that none of Comte Robert’s other children had surviving issue (which would mean that Richard d’Harcourt could not have been Comte Robert’s grandson). The phrase also covers the situation where there were surviving grandchildren, with Mabile being his only surviving child who was more closely related to him ("propinquiori") by one generation than the grandchildren. Such grandchildren would include the issue of Robert’s deceased son Waléran by Marguerite de Fougères, and so the 1 May 1204 decision could have formed part of the king’s repression of Breton sympathisers. In conclusion, political circumstances at the time suggest that the transfer of Elbœuf to Richard d’Harcourt took place against the wishes of the Meulan family, which in turn suggests that they were not related and that the alleged marriage of [Jeanne] de Meulan never took place. While it is impossible to conclude definitively on the likelihood of La Roque being correct, his work contains many inaccuracies and is not reliable, as noted elsewhere in the present document. By way of footnote, if the daughter of Robert Comte de Meulan did marry Robert [II] Seigneur d’Harcourt, the chronology indicates that she would have been his first wife. In addition, it is likely that her name was not Jeanne in light of the contradictory sources which refer to the wife of Guy de la Roche-Guyon, another daughter of Robert de Meulan, as explained in more detail in the Meulan section of the present document.] m [secondly] EVA Crispin, daughter of JOSCELIN Crispin & his wife Isabelle de Dangu (-[before 1192], bur Mortemer-és-Lions). The Historia cœnobiii Mortui-Maris records (during the period after "domnus Willelmus natione Anglicus" was appointed abbot of Mortemer, from the context, which appears to have been in [1179/80] judging from other parts of the same text) that "domina…Isabella de Dangu" chose burial at Mortemer and that after she died "vir eius domnus Joscelinus Crispinus et filii eorum" donated revenue "in molendino de Waltot" for her anniversary and that of "patris eius Robertus de Dangu", and also states that "Domina etiam de Harecort filia eius" donated books and other items for her own burial in the abbey[953]. Thomas Stapleton names "William, Robert and Eustace" as the sons of Joscelin Crispin and "Agnes, Eva and Emelina…the daughters…on whom Eva was lady of Harcourt", but he does not cite the primary source which confirms this information[954]. Assuming that all this information is correct, it is reasonable from a chronological point of view to suppose that the husband of Eva Crispin was Robert [II] Seigneur d’Harcourt. The absence of any wife’s name from the charter dated 1192, quoted below, suggests that Robert may have been a widower by that date. Robert [II] & his [second] wife had three children: 1. RICHARD ([1180/83]-[8 Jun 1236/39]). 2. JEAN d’Harcourt (-Damietta 1219). 3. AMAURY d’Harcourt (-after 1192).