The Skaggs-Files

[Pullen010502.FTW]

Excerpted from Les Seigneurs de Bohon by Jean LeMelletier, Coutances:
Arnaud-Bellee, 1978: Edward de Salisbury or Saresbury, lord of Chittern (Wiltshire), is often considered like a son of William d'Evreux, earl of Rosmare or Roumare and companion of William the Conqueror. He possessed very important lands at Salisbury and other areas. He wore the banner of Henry I at the Battle of Bremule where he fought against King Louis VI of France (20 August 1119). Besides his daughter Maud, he had a son, Walter (died 1147). Edward died 1130.

Sources:

1. Abbrev: Pullen010502.FTW
Title: Pullen010502.FTW
Note:
Call number:
Text: Date of Import: Jan 5, 2002

---

EDWARD OF SALISBURY, styled also Edward the Sheriff, whose parentage is unknown (b), was born ante 1060, it is said in England. He was sheriff of Wiltshire so early as February 1080/1. In 1086 he held in chief 33 manors in Wilts, as well as smaller estates in Surrey, Hants, Dorset, Somerset, Middlesex, Bucks, Oxfordshire and Herts, being styled in D.B. "Edwardus Sarisburiensis." He survived the Conqueror. He m. Unknown of whom nothing is known (e). [Complete Peerage XI:373-4, (transcribed by Dave Utzinger)]

[b] According to the Book of Lacock, he was the son of Walter le Ewrus, Earl of Rosmar, a fictitious person, and brother of Gerold, Earl of Rosmar, born in Normandy before the Conquest (Dugdale, Mon., Vol. vi, p. 501). The nickname "le Ewrus" [=I'heureux, or the fortunate) was converted into "de Evreux" by later writers, with the result that the family has been given the name of Devereux and has been tacked on to the Norman Counts of Evreux (see the tabular pedigree given by Planché, Journal of the Brit. Arch. Ass., Vol. i, p. 39; cf. Appendix G to this volume). For the exposure of this mistake see Herald and Genealogist, Vol. iv, p. 149. "Rosmar" is an error for Roumare (Normandy), which was not a comté (cf. ante, Vol. vii, sub Lincoln); but the statement that Edward was brother of Gerold de Roumare, though apparently accepted by Nichols, Arch. Inst., Salisbury Vol., 1849, p. 213, and in the 1st edition of this work, is baseless.

(e) By her he had issue, besides his son and heir, a daughter Maud, who m. Humphrey de Bohun II, at the instance (it is said) of William II.