William "the carpenter" de MELUN Lord & Knight of Melun, France 1. William "the carpenter" de MELUN Knight-16312 was born about 1042 in of Melun, Seine-et-Marne, Ile de France, France and was Lord of Melun, in 1084 to Abt 1098. He died about 1104/1109 in , Ile de France, France. TITLE: Known as "Guilaume I" Lord of Melun and possibly as Count of Corbeil. SEE NOTE BELOW "BOOK:" and "BATTLE OF HASTINGS:" regarding his nick name. William De Melun, Lord of Melun, Knight - nick named "the Carpenter". William "the carpenter" De Melun = Guillaume "le charpentier" De Melun. William the Carpenter b. abt 1098 of Melun, Seine-Et-Marne, France [Guillaume = William] - Film #: 170395, Page #: 134, Ordinance #: 4799 (Bap. 11 Feb. 1908 Manti - Pre 1970 ordinances) Per IGI. No mention in AF. Per Raymond George Carpenter, American Genealogist, The Carpenter and Related Family Association: "My British Genealogy of the New England English Carpenter Family has descent due to our three cross-crosslets Coat of Arms from Viscount William (Carpenter surname) de Melune, a Norman Knight in the First Crusade, 1098 A.D., at the siege of Antioch, Syria. He was "nicknamed, Carpenter, from the weighty strokes of his BATTLE AXE" in battle because the axe and great strength were associated with the carpenter's trade. This family of Melun, Seine-et- Oise, France." Letter 5/96. Note: There is a Meulun on the Seine at Oise north by northeast of Paris. Melun is on the Seine (it started on an island) at the Marne and is south southwest of Paris. If what Raymond George Carpenter wrote above is true, then the William the Carpenter who fought in the First Crusade was not born about 1098 AD but about 1042 (if he was 56). There is duplicative French records of Marne et Daniel of William, Lord William and William the Carpenter. IE William the Carpenter (born about 1042 who fought at Atioch) who had a son named William (born about 1066) and grandsons, William and Godwin. This William was a supporter of the French Crown. However his son, also named William, was an enemy of the French Crown. When looking at records regarding this family, you will see a good and an evil William in relationship to the French Crown. The first is this William and the former is his son named William. NAME: William Carpenter (Guillaume de Charpentier) - The youngest son also named the same. Note: William is a Saxon proper name. When one of the ancient germans had slain a Roman, the gilt helmet of the latter was placed on the head of the conqueror, who was known henceforward as gild helme. The name became in Latin "Gulielmus", in French "Guildhaume" [and afterwards] "Guillaume", and in English "William". Per Tony Carpenter in the UK. DESCENDANCY: This line is mostly speculation, except where historical documents indicate otherwise. From Maurice up to the 1400s is probable then the records become a little more tangible. The best documentation starts on the "Bevis" in 1638 and continues onward to our time. Due to the lack of records, and name changes when titles were given, it is difficult to piece a record together of the CARPENTER Family in this part of history. Often the " Best Guess" is all what we can do until another record is found. COAT OF ARMS: The arms granted to William "the carpenter" and his descendants were Pally of six, argent and gules, with three cross crosslets. This means a red and white vertical stripes with three French crosses. The first cross for the church sanctioned invasion of England in 1066 AD. The second for the church sanctioned liberation of Toledo, Spain in 1087. The third cross for the church sanctioned and so caled "First Crusade" that conquered the Holy Land in 1097-1099 AD. A religious crusade was a Holy Roman Church sanctioned or approved warfare for religious purposes. With the addition of the chevron, azure representing service to the French crown, versions of these arms are traced off and on from 1100 to the Church at Westbury upon Trin in 1443 placed there by Bishop John Carpenter of Worcester, England into the mid 1700s where Baron Carpenter of Killaghy had the same Coat-of-Arms. The above Coat of Arms and hereditary direct male descendancy became extinct in 1853. BOOK: Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - by Gibbons vol. 4, page 208: Earl of Melun slaughtered his opponents with a large axe, thus earning himself the nickname of "The Carpenter." SEE: Web page at: http://flying.swpi.edu.cn/books/ewjd/g/gibbon/hor/258.htm The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon (1737-1794). Chapter LVIII: The First Crusade. "... ^97 Among the chiefs, three heroes may be found without fear or reproach: Godfrey of Bouillon was supported by his magnanimous piety; Bohemond by ambition and interest; and Tancred declared, in the true spirit of chivalry, that as long as he was at the head of forty knights, he would never relinquish the enterprise of Palestine. But the count of Tholouse and Provence was suspected of a voluntary indisposition; the duke of Normandy was recalled from the sea-shore by the censures of the church: Hugh the Great, though he led the vanguard of the battle, embraced an ambiguous opportunity of returning to France and Stephen, count of Chartres, basely deserted the standard which he bore, and the council in which he presided. The soldiers were discouraged by the flight of William, viscount of Melun, surnamed the Carpenter, from the weighty strokes of his axe; and the saints were scandalized by the fall ^* of Peter the Hermit, who, after arming Europe against Asia, attempted to escape from the penance of a necessary fast. Of the multitude of recreant warriors, the names (says an historian) are blotted from the book of life; ..." BOOK: THE NORMANS by R. Allen Brown 1984. St. Martin's Press, NY. ISBN: 0-312-57776-1 940.17 Brown. Page 130 and 131: At the Seige of Antioch, Syria about Feburary 1098 - "Nevertheless, as the seige wore interminably on and conditions worsened, and as the expectation of another relieving army under the powerful Kerbogha, 'atabeg' of Mosul, increased, morale began to crack in certain quarters and divisions to appear amongst the Christian leaders. There were desertions, real and suspected, both before and after the battle of the Lake of Antioch. Amongst them were Peter the Hermit (of all people) and William 'the Carpenter' (so called - he was a knight and Lord of Melun) who slipped away in January and were ignominiously caught and brought back by Tancred, Bohemond's nephew. The "Gesta Francorum" gives us a military scene, timeless across the ages, as the wretched William stood in Bohemond'd tent at first light, to have strip after strip torn off him by his commanding officer - 'You wretched disgrace to the whole Frankish army -- you dishonourable blot on all the people of Gaul! You most loathsome of all men whom the earth has to bear . . .' etc.54". 54 refers to a note on page 185: "54 Gesta Francorum, p. 33. William had evidently deserted once before, on an expedition against the Moors in Spain, an incident of which he was now forcefully reminded by the outraged Bohemond." Mean Knight age per the the above book for Lords, Barons and Princes = 40. Did William the Carpenter De Melun probably died during the First Crusade, since there is no further mention of him. More "knights" died of disease than in battle. FURTHER Record is found indicating he was alive on 17 July 1100 when he was granted lands for his "efforts" during the First Crusade. Those lands were contested by Bohemond. Christians from France helped take Toledo from the Moors in 1084 - 1086. William was there and known as William "the carpenter" at that time because of the "Gesta Francorum." See Book Note above regarding "The Normans." SPOUSE: IGI records. Spouse listed as "Mrs. William De Melun". BOOK: The ROLL OF BATTLE ABBEY by John Bernard Burke, Esq. reprinted Baltimore 1979, orginally printed in London 1848. 942.0 D3br. The Roll of Battle Abbey, the earliest record of the Normans, has at all times been regarded with deep interest, by the principal families of the United Kingdom. Especially those who show descent directly from the chiefs of William the Conqueror's host, as well as by those who indirectly establish a similar lineage. The Abbey of Battle, was erected upon a plain called Heathfield, about seven miles distant from Hastings, in fulfilment of a vow made by the Conqueror prior to the battle which won him the diadem of England. Of the names of the Norman Chieftains who survived the Battle we find "Melun" (page 6). BATTLE OF HASTINGS: On 20 October (current calender) 1066 at about 10 to 11 (14 October 1066 of the calendar then used) o'clock in the morning, William the Conqueror and his forces commenced Battle against King Harold's English army. It is highly likely that this (our) William fought under Robert De Beaumont who was in charge of the Norman Knights. We can only surmize that our Knight William was outfitted as any good Norman Knight would be during that time period. He wore a helmet of metal with a nose piece and his main weapon being a lance (a long spear), then a long sword. He was armored with leather jerkin and chain mail from his neck to his knees. He rode into battle with a horse that was unarmored and unprotected. A tapestry representing the battle shows the favorite weapon of the english, the Battleaxe, being used in disabling the horses of the Norman knights. Probably, during the fighting, William's horse was crippled and he was forced to fight on foot. Maybe he lost his sword and grabbed an enemies Battleaxe, then in his desperate attempt to survive began swinging with all his might. This type of unthinking fighting is sometimes called "Beserking." A Beserker fights any enemy until he is killed or exhausted. We do not know if or how many times he was wounded, but he survived the battle. His comrades rewarded his efforts with the title "le charpentier." His strength and ability with the english Battleaxe was associated with the great strength and precision of the carpenter trade. So William the Knight of Melun became known as William the Carpenter. His descendants became known as of the Carpenter and later shortened to the surname of CARPENTER. Later during his rescue of a surrounded Norman army, William "the carpenter" again proved his worth in the present country of Turkey. This was before they got to the Holy Land. Compiled with the help of Willard (Will) N. Carpenter, Historian, of Gilbertsville, PA. PLEASE NOTE: The tapastry of the Battle at Hastings does show an event similar to the above event. However, it has been proven that it was another Norman Knight, not our William, being depicted. That this event happened several times is of no doubt. JRC BOOK: "The Domesday Book - English Heritage Then and Now" published by Crown Publisher Inc. Published 1985. 942.02 Dom. ISBN 0-517-55868-8. Sometimes referred to as the Doomsday Book, but its correct title is THE DOMESDAY BOOK of 1086, records "Meluns" and "Carpenters" who were Normans. This William's sons are found in the Domesday Book under Norman land holders as Rayner Carpenter, Stephen Carpenter and Durand Carpenter. The latin sometimes shows "le charpentier." Or loosely translated, for example, Durand the son of the carpenter. There was only one Norman Knight, a Count of Melun named William who earned the title "le charpentier" for himself and his posterity. This was our William "the carpenter" De Melun. Willard (Will) N. Carpenter, Historian, of Gilbertsville, PA provided the information and connection of William " the carpenter" De Melun to the children "of the carpenter" listed above. BOOK: Grand Dictionaire Universel DU XIX Siecle Paris 1873 Tome 10: (See also: Herve De Melun's notes) (page 1488) "Guillaume I. du nom, viscount de Melun, fut surnomme Charpentier, a cause u'il ne se trouvoit point d'armes qui pussent resister a l'effort de ses oups. "La pesanteur des siennes le faisoit apprehender dans les combats." Guillaume I., of name, Viscount of Melun, was named, Carpenter, because no weapon (opponents weapons that is) could be found that could resist the power his strikes. The heaviness of his (weapons) resulted in him being feared in combats". Carpenters must of, at the time, been among the most "well build" people... " per Jean P. "This is the report of Pierre, monk of S. Remi of Reims. This historian, who knew Guillaume count of Melun, assures in the fourth book of his history of the conquest of the Holy Land, speaking of the retreat of the christian army after the taking of Antioche in 1098, that this lord was of royal lineage, and was cousin of Hugues of France, count of Vermandois, brother of King Phillipe I." (long sentence!) In 1084, this King confirmed the privileges accorded by his predecessors to the Abbey of Holy Father of Melun, and to the prayer of the viscount. The name of his wife and the time of his death are not well known. He as the father of Ursion II, who follows (but it wasn't included in the copy)." Ironicly, "MELUN, (GUILLAUME DE) ... was a relative of Hugues de Vermandois, and accompanied Godefroi de Bouillon to Palestine (1096), where he distinguished himself by his bravery." This per the French Record above on page 1399-1400. It is an interesting contrast to the book called "The Normans" who decribes his efforts differently. !E-MAIL: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 From: "John F. Chandler" John R. Carpenter wrote: I had another translation which translated read, "This is the report of Pierre, monk of S. Remi of Reims. This historian, who knew Guillaume count of Melun, assures in the fourth book of his history of the conquest of the Holy Land, " What a coincidence that Pierre also speaks of Melun in the fourth book of a history of the Holy Land. It sounds to me as if there may be only one monk known perhaps by two different names. Better translation... "Robert, monk of Saint Remy de Reims, in his history of the Holy Land, Book 4, wrote that the house of Melun came from royal origins*. He gathered** "titles and monuments" of that great house, intended for a genealogical history more complete than could be given here. The first of that ancient house, whose memory is preserved to the present day, is..." * See du Bouchet, History of Courtenay, pp 194ff. ** Cabinee de M. de Clairembault. (Yes, the passage ends with a sentence fragment.) John Chandler BOOK: De Pairs De France by Joyeuse - Genealgie de la Maison de Melun. (of the House of Melun). Pg 221+. "Robert, moine de S. Remy de Reims, en son histoire de la Terre Sainte liv. IV. a ecrit, que la maison de Melun sortoit d'une source royale, (a) l'on a rassfemble (b) des titres & monumens de cette grande maison destinez pour une histoire genealogique plus complette, qu'on ne la peut donner ici. Le premier de cette ancienne maison, dont la memoire s'est conservee jusqu'a present est." (a) Voyez du Bouchet, hist. de Courtenay, pages 194. & Suivantes. (b) Cabinee de M. de Clairembault. COMPARE TO: Grand Dictionaire Universel above. Based on research by John R. Carpenter, 5850 Yorkshire Ave. La Mesa, CA 91942-2821 (619) 466-5735 Voice. E- Mail at "jrcrin001@cox.net". Please submit corrections, additions, et cetera to John R. Carpenter for additions to the CARPENTER MASTER FILE. GEDCOM or hardcopy accepted. MISC: This text (below) is part of the Internet Medieval Source Book. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history. Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use. Paul Halsall December 1997. halsall@murray.fordham.edu SEE: Web page at: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook.html First Crusade - Listed in related parts ... Soon they departed from their homes in Gaul, and then formed three groups. One party of Franks, namely, Peter, the Hermit Duke Godfrey, Baldwin, his brother, and Baldwin, Count of the Mount, entered the region of Hungary. These most powerful; knights, and many others whom I do not know, went by the way which Charles; the Great, wonderworking king of France, long ago had made,!, even to Constantinople. . . . The second party - to wit, Raymond, Count of St. Gilles, and the Bishop of Puy - entered the region of Slavonia. . . . The third division, however, went by the ancient road to Rome. In this division were Bohemund, Richard of Principati, Robert, Count of Flanders, Robert the Norman, Hugh the Great, Everard of Puiset, Achard of Montmerle, Ysooard of Mousson, and many others. Next, they went to the port of Brindisi, or Bari, or Otranto. Then Hugh the Great, and William, son of Marchisus, took to the sea at the port of Bari and, crossing the strait, came to Durazzo. But the governor of this place, his heart touched with evil design, took these most renowned men captive immediately upon hearing that they had landed there and ordered them to be conducted carefully to the Emperor at Constantinople, where they should pledge loyalty to him. Source: August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 57. NOTE: William "the carpenter" De Melun was in the third division with Hugh, see next. NEXT SECTION: Meanwhile Hugh reached the seacoast of Longobardy; there he sent envoys to the Governor of Durazzo, twentyfour in number, each decorated with gold and red breastplates. Along with them went COUNT CARPENTER and that Helia who had fled from the Emperor at Thessalonica. These men addressed the following message to the Governor: "Be it known to you, O Governor, that our lord, Hugh, will soon be here, bringing with him from Rome the golden banner of St. Peter; moreover, know that he is the highest leader of all the armies of France. Prepare yourself, therefore, to receive him and the army obeying him according to the dignity of his power; and gird yourself about to meet him." Source: August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 78- 79. NEXT SECTION: ... With his entire band of pilgrims Godfrey withdrew to the city of Constantinople itself. There, after pitching their tents, they lodged, a strong and powerful band, protected by armor and all warlike equipment. And, behold, at the meeting Hugh, Drogo, WILLIAM CARPENTER, and Clarebold, set free by the Emperor, were present, rejoicing because of the arrival of the Duke and of his multitudes, and meeting the embrace of the Duke and of the others with many a kiss. Source: August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 80- 86. NEXT SECTION: Gesta Francorum Circa 1100-1101, an anonymous writer connected with Bohemund of Antioch wrote the Gesta francorum et aliorum Hierosolymytanorum (The Deeds of the Franks) This text was used by the later writers as a source. See Also: Rosalind M. Hill, ed. and trans., Gesta francorum et aliorum Hierosolymitanorum: The Deeds of the Franks (London: 1962), [Latin text with English translation.]. The Sufferings of the Crusaders - 3. The Gesta Version. When the Armenians and Syrians, however, saw that our men were returning utterly empty-handed, they counselled together and went away through the mountains and places of which they had previous knowledge, making subtle inquiry and buying grain and other bodily sustenance. This they brought to the camp, in which hunger was great beyond measure, and they sold a single assload for eight perpre, which is worth one hundred and twenty solidi of denarii. There, indeed, many of our men died because they did not have the means wherewith to buy at such a dear price. WILLIAM CARPENTER and Peter the Hermit secretly left because of the great sorrow and misery. Tancred pursued and caught them,, and brought them back in disgrace. They gave him a pledge that they would return willingly to camp and render satisfaction to seignors. Then WILLIAM lay all that night, like an evil thing, in the tent of Bohemund. On the next day at early dawn he came shamefacedly and stood in the presence of Bohemund, who, addressing him, said, "O, the misfortune and infamy of all France, the disgrace and villainy of Gaul! O, most evil of all whom the earth endures! Why did you so vilely flee? Was it, perchance, for the reason that you wished to betray these knights and the host of Christ, as you betrayed others in Hispania?" HE was entirely silent and no speech proceeded from his mouth, Almost all those of Frankish race gathered together and humbly asked Lord Bohemund not to let anything worse befall him. He nodded, with calm countenance, and said, "To this I willingly consent for love of you, if he will swear to me with his whole heart and mind that be will never withdraw from the march to Jerusalem, whether for good or evil; and if Tancred will agree not to let anything untoward befall him, either through him or his men." When WILLIAM had heard these words, he willingly agreed, and Bohemund forthwith dismissed him. Later, indeed, CARPENTER, caught in the greatest villainy, slipped away by stealth without long delay. This poverty and wretchedness God meted out to us because of our sins. Thus in the whole army no one could find a thousand knights who had horses of the best kind. Source: August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 136-39. NEXT SECTION: Meanwhile, messengers came to camp, announcing that our ships had arrived at Joppa and that the sailors demanded that a guard be sent to hold the tower of Joppa and to give them protection at the port; for the town of Joppa had been destroyed except the castle, and that was nearly in ruins, with the exception of one tower. However, there is a harbor there, and it is the one nearest to Jerusalem, being about one day's journey distant. All of our people rejoiced when they heard the news of the ships, and they sent out Count Galdemar, surnamed Carpinellus, accompanid by twenty knights and about fifty footmen. Later, they sent Raymond Piletus with fifty knights and William of Sabran with his followers. (NOTE: Could this be Count Guilaume surnamed Carpintarius - latin for Carpenter?) Source: August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 250- 56. END. MORE: Related to last section: http://historymedren.about.com/library/prm/bl4cfc.htm Climax of the First Crusade (small portion relating to Geldemar Carpenel or Guilaume (Galdemar) Carpinellus or Carpintarius - probably William "the carpenter" De Melun). "More practical help had already arrived in the form of six ships that anchored at Jaffa, which had been abandoned by the Arabs. Two were Genoese galleys; the other four ships were almost certainly English. In their holds were food and armaments, including rope and hardware needed to build siege engines. At the news of their arrival, Count Geldemar Carpenel, a member of Godfrey of Bouillon's staff, set out with 50 knights and 50 infantrymen to ensure that the supplies were delivered safely. Almost immediately the wisdom of sending so small a force was questioned, and Raymond Piletus was dispatched with 50 knights to reinforce them. Still later, William of Ramleh, from the army of the Count of Toulouse, rode forth. Iftikhar dispatched 400 of his finest Arab soldiers and 200 Turks to destroy them. They waited at Ramleh, a few miles from Jaffa on the road to Jerusalem, then attacked Geldemar on the plain of Ramleh. The Muslim force surrounded the Europeans and began firing arrows. Geldemar stationed his knights and archers in his first rank, with all others behind, and advanced. Five knights, including young Achard of Montemerle, and all the archers were killed. Some 30 Europeans were still alive when a dust cloud was seen on the horizon--the 50 additional knights led by Raymond Piletus were coming to the rescue at full charge. Broken by the shock of this onslaught by heavy cavalry, the Muslims fled. The Crusaders killed many Muslims in the chase that followed, strewing a total of 200 dead on the field of battle, and much plunder was taken." The article was written by J. Arthur McFall and originally published in Military History Magazine June 1999. J. Arthur McFall writes from Newark, Ill. E-MAIL: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 From: "James A. Brundage" Dear Mr. Carpenter, Please forgive my tardiness in answering your query: things have been uncommonly hectic at the University for the past few weeks and this has forced me to postpone a good many other obligations as well. Sorry about that. As for William the Carpenter from Melun who participated in the first crusade, very little is known about him because scarcely any evidence survives. For what little there is, see Jonathan Riley-Smith, _The First Crusaders, 1095-1131_ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 43 & 226 and Marcus Bull, _Knightly Piety and the Lay Response to the First Crusade: The Limousin and Gascony, c. 970-c. 1130_ (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), pp. 84-85. To the best of my knowledge, Riley-Smith and Bull have exhausted every scrap of evidence about the man that is known to survive. And at that, we know more about him than we do about most of the participants in the first crusade. Sorry I can't give you any more information, but I don't think there's any more information to give. James A. Brundage - History & Law University of Kansas - Member of the Medieval History Ring. MORE: Désertions pendant le siège d'Antioche, selon l'Anonyme Désertion de Pierre l'Ermite Guillaume le Charpentier (1) et Pierre l'Ermite, à cause de cette grande calamité et de cette misère, s'évadèrent secrètement. Tancrède les poursuivit, les rattrapa et les ramena avec lui en grande honte. Ils lui donnèrent leur foi et leur serment qu'ils reviendraient volontiers au camp et feraient satisfaction aux seigneurs. [Guillaume fut réprimandé par Bohémond dans sa tente] Mais dans la suite le Charpentier, dévoré d'une grande honte, n'attendit pas longtemps pour fuir en cachette (2). (1) Guillaume le Charpentier, vicomte de Melun, parent de Hugue le Mainsné. Il avait fait partie de l'armée de Godefroi de Bouillon. (2) Il s'enfuit pendant le siège d'Antioche par Kerbôga. Traduction prise dans Anonyme édité et traduit par Louis Bréhier, Histoire anonyme de la première croisade, Paris, Éditions " Les Belles Lettres ", 1964 (1924), p. 77-79. This from the following web page: http://www.callisto.si.usherb.ca/~croisade/Antioche.htm#antioche2 SEE ALSO: (This is a recap in French of the above material decribing desertions at Antioch) http://www.callisto.si.usherb.ca/~croisade/Crois06.htm Les chrétiens indigènes apportèrent des vivres, mais les vendaient chèrement. Le patriarche orthodoxe de Jérusalem, se trouvant en exil à Chypre, envoya ce qu'il pût à Antioche. De plus, il ne restait que sept cents chevaux dans le camp. Face à de tels obstacles, plusieurs croisés désertèrent et retournèrent en Europe. Ainsi, vers le 20 janvier 1098, Tancrède arrêta en pleine fuite et ramena Pierre l'Ermite et Guillaume le Charpentier, vicomte de Melun, au camp. Pierre fut pardonné, tandis que Guillaume passa la nuit debout dans la tente de Bohémond. Il dut promettre de rester avec l'armée jusqu'à Jérusalem, mais il brisa plus tard ce serment et déserta. MISC: A Question for the MGF, Under 1) and 2) below ... Would the "son of Marchisus" be like the son of the Commander previously noted? Source of these partial comments under web page under A). I found what I believe to be this type of definition below at B). Did I figure this out correctly? Any comments welcome. John R. Carpenter La Mesa, CA A) http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/cde-tocp.html 1) Then Hugh the Great, and William, son of Marchisus, ... (IE son of Hugh?) 2) Lord Bohemund diligently prepared himself to undertake in true earnest the journey to the Holy Sepulchre. At length, he crossed the sea with his army. With him were Tancred, son of Marchisus, ... (IE son of Bohemund?) William, son of Marchisus or Hugh the Great? Tancred, son of Marchisus or Lord Bohemund? B) http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1993/French-html/Boulton,Jonathan.htm The remaining two masculine titles¡®vicecomes ¡°vis-count¡±[12] and marchio or marchisus (comes) ¡°marquis¡± [13] ¡®were invented in the ninth century to designate (in the latter case irregularly and informally) the holders of administrative offices created under Charlemagne: respectively that of deputy to the count, and that of commander of a border region including several counties. Partly out of a desire to employ Classical language, and partly because the marchiones occupied a position roughly equivalent to that of the suppressed dux of the Merovingian period, the scribes of the period commonly referred to the march commanders as duces rather than marchiones or marchisi, and by 900 dux and marchio were virtually synonymous titles, often used in combination and alternation by the handful of men who exercised this office or the dominical authority that derived from it in the two centuries after the final partition of the Frankish empire in 888.[14] All four of the titles in question continued to be used by the heirs of the late Carolingian officials who succeeded in converting their administrative districts into hereditary dominions in the period between about 850 and 1000 AD (see Appendix 1), and both comes and vicecomes were usurped by a handful of men who managed to carve out wholly new dominions on the basis of their private lands and castles in the eleventh century.[15] Between about 900 and 1075 most of the great men who used the titles dux and marchio continued to use them in random alternation, not only with one another, but with the titles comes (since all marchiones held at least one civitas or pagus in their march) and princeps (a Classical Roman title long used to indicate sovereign authority). Between 1075 and 1125, however, although they survived elsewhere, the titles princeps and marchio were abandoned completely as titles indicative of the lordship of territories dependent on the kingdom of France.[16] REPLY: http://genforum.genealogy.com/medieval/messages/1396.html Posted by: Jim (ID *****3801) Date: May 05, 2002 at 23:50:05 In Reply to: "son of Marchisus" "Marchisus" equal to "Commander" circa 1100 AD? by John R. Carpenter John, Hugh 'the Great,' Count of Vermandois &c., could have appropriately been called Marchisus, and a Marchisus was a commander. And among his eleven children was a son named Guillaume (William), according to ES III:55. But it seems curious that in the page you quoted, the author, in writing "Hugh the Great, and William, son of Marchisus," * didn't* say "Hugh the Great and his son William." My question would be that if the William mentioned was Hugh's son, why would the author seem to want to obscure this fact? Your question as to the reference to a "Tancred, son of Marchisus" as being to a son of Bohemed seems to have the same problem. It just doesn't seem that the Medieval Sourcebook article is providing enough information to come to the conclusions you suggest. I'd say more information is needed. The following quote from 'The First Crusade,' by Steven Runciman (Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 69-70, provides a little more information: "The first to leave his home was Hugh, Count of Vermandois, known as Le Mainsne, the younger, a surname translated most inappropriately by the Latin chroniclers even in his own time as Magnus. He was the younger son of King Henry I of France and of a princess of Scandinavian origin, Anne of Kiev; a man of some forty years of age, of greater rank than wealth, who had acquired his small country by marriage with its heiress, and had never played a prominent part in French Politics. He was proud of his lineage but ineffectual in action. We cannot tell what were his motives in joining the Crusade. No doubt he inherited the restlessness of his Scandinavian ancestors. Perhaps he felt that in the East he could acquire the power and riches that befitted his high birth. Probably his brother, King Philip, encouraged his decision in order to ingratiate his family with the Papacy. Leaving his lands in the care of his countess, he set out in late August for Italy, with a small army composed of his vassals and some knights form his brother's domains. Before his departure he sent a special messenger ahead of him to Constantinople, requesting the Emperor to arrange for his reception with the honors due to a prince of royal blood. As he journeyed southward he was joined by Drogo of Nesle and Clarambald of Vendeuil and William the Carpenter and other French knights returning from Emich's disastrous expedition. Hugh and his company passed by Rome and arrived at Bari early in October. In southern Italy they found the Norman princes themselves preparing for the Crusade; and Bohemond's nephew William decided not to wait for his relatives but to cross the sea with Hugh. From Bari Hugh sent an embassy of twenty-four knights, led by William the Carpenter, across to Dyrrhachium to inform the governor that he was about to arrive and to repeat his demand for a suitable reception." Here Runciman makes no connection between Hugh 'Le Mainsne' (aka: the Great) and William 'the Carpenter' other than William joined Hugh's party before their arrival in Italy. William, nephew of Bohemend, seems to have traveled with Hugh, while William the Carpenter was sent on ahead. So, evidently, these are two different Williams. Hopefully though, this work might help with some of the points found in the Medieval Sourcebook article you referred to. I do know of one other place to look. The viscounts and counts of Melun are listed in ES (Detlev Schwennicke, " Europäische Stammtafeln," Neue Folge) Volume VII, Tafels 55 & 56. If you can find a set of ES in a library near you, this might provide more information on William 'the Carpenter.' Anyway, I hope this is helpful. Jim