Three sons of Earl Roger at Rochester.
Hugh of Montgomery.
Roger of Poitou.
Action of Earl Roger. City for Christendom.[1] With him came Robert of Bellême; his share in the rebellion is his first act on English ground that we have to record. Himself the eldest son of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, he had either brought with him two of his brothers, or else they had already embraced the cause of Odo in England. Three sons of Roger and Mabel were now within the walls of Rochester.[2] The second was Hugh, who was for a moment to represent the line of Montgomery while Robert represented the line of Bellême, and who was to be as fierce a scourge to the Britons of the Northern border as Robert was to be to the valiant defenders of the land of Maine.[3] And with them was the third brother, Roger of Poitou, the lord of the debateable land between Mersey and Ribble,[4] carrying as it were to the furthest point of the earldom of Leofric the claim of his father to the proud title which the elder Roger bears at this stage of our story. It is as Earl of the Mercians that one teller of our tale bids us look for a moment on the lord of Montgomery and Shrewsbury.[5] But the Earl of
- ↑ "Eustatius junior," "Eustatius þe iunga." See N. C. vol. iv. p. 745.
- ↑ They are mentioned in the Chronicle along with the incidental mention of Eustace; "Innan þam castele wæron swiðe gode cnihtas, Eustatius þe iunga, and Rogeres eorles þreo sunan, and ealle þa betstboren men þe wæron innan þisan lande oððe on Normandige." This is followed by William of Malmesbury (iv. 306); "Erat tunc apud Roveceastram omnis pene juventutis ex Anglia et Normannia nobilitas; tres filii Rogerii comitis, et Eustachius Bononiæ junior, multique alii quos infra curam nostram existimo."
- ↑ The three sons of Earl Roger can hardly fail to be his three eldest
sons (see Will. Gem. vii. 16; Ord. Vit. 708 D), Robert, Hugh, and Roger,
all of whom figure in our story. Arnulf does not appear in English history
till later, and Philip the clerk does not appear at all. Geoffrey Gaimar
(Chron. Ang. Norm. i. 35), after setting forth the possessions of Robert of
Bellême, mentions the other three; but one does not exactly see why he
says,
"Le conte Ernulf ert le quarte frère,
Par cors valeit un emperère."Cf. Ord. Vit. 708 D, 808 C.
- ↑ See N. C. vol. iv. p. 488.
- ↑ See above, p. 33.
