1
Origins of the Sinclairs of Roslin.
Welcome to my cosy laptop. As you’ll see, I’ve put this Word document in landscape view for easier reading on your computer. I believe you can alter it back to portrait if you prefer. It’s a great pity I can’t provide you with workable links, but you can save and paste them. If you want to make a proper judgement of how probable my account is of being correct, it would help if you delved into some of thereferencesand readthe notes. Virtually all the references are available on-line, and most of them refer to primary sources and documents which are at least roughly contemporary with events. I have a Summary at the end, but if you want to properly assess my sources and arguments, I suggest you read through the text either from start to finish, or in any way that takes your fancy.
I’ve made extensive use of theMedlandssite, [Medieval Lands, a prosopography of medieval European noble and royal families]. I cannot recommend this site enough. It generally uses contemporary documents such as OrdericVitalis and various charters, and where it does not it says so. It gives quotes and a précis from the sources, and translates crucial points into English. It helps to have some Latin, but you can get the gist without. I’ve had to work with schoolboy Latin, but nevertheless it’s proved invaluable. If you want to examine this resource and you arrive at the Homepage, you need to find the Index Link. You might like to keep several pages of the site open simultaneously on your PC/Laptop/Spaceship, so you can confirm points as you encounter them.The site may look confusing at first, but you get used to it. Dates in square brackets are estimates. The link is fmg.ac/Projects/Medlands/CONTENTS.htm . It’s worth reminding that the individuals mentioned are the one that had their existence noted in a surviving document, so though we can be pretty confident that almost all the noble families have some reference or other, there will be many noble persons, and most of them women, who are now unknown and unsung to posterity.
The crucial sources at Medland are found among the following categories:
1The Norman Nobility, for the Family of Gunnora, for the Comte d’Eu, descendants of Geoffrey de Brionne, and for the Seigneurs de Vernon and de Reviers.
2The Capetian Kings, for Louis VI.
3The Paris Region, for the Comte de Dreux (Capet), and the Seigneurs de Chateaunef.
4France Northern, Northern France Nobility, for the Seigneurs de Chaumont-Guitry en Vexin. (There are two other de Chaumont lines, so you need the right one).
The way I’m approaching this is to have the narrative relatively unencumbered by detail, leaving them for the notes. This way you have the choice of reading through and looking at the notes afterwards, or dipping into them as you go. Notes are indicated by an alphabetical superscript, and references are numerical. The references are pretty casually laid out I’m afraid.
The story is tricky in parts, simply because I want to anticipate the sceptical mind,and so some of it is necessarily detailed and seemingly pedantic. There is so much questionable material on-line, and I want to show that the references and sources are pretty solid. But though my account is difficult in parts, I’m hopeful you’ll find it worth the read. If you want to look at every note, It’s going to be awkward going to and fro, so I suggest you use some subterfuge to manage this trick, such as copying the document and having both available simultaneously, or reading the notes afterwards.
We mainly need to discuss just two things; the identity and ancestral background of the first Sinclair of Roslina, and the earliest person of this paternal line that we can discover. These are the only areas which have so far been controversial or obscure.
1 /2
I’ll start with an assertion, and then argue the case.
The first Sinclair of Roslin was Sir William, son of Robert de Saint-Clair in Normandy and Eleanor, daughter of Robert II, Comte de Dreux. He married Amicia, daughter of Henry de Roskelyn (Roslin) .Between 1264 and 1288 he was variously Sheriff of Haddington, Linlithgow, Edinburgh and Dumfries. For a minimum of two years, 1279-1281, he was guardian to Prince Alexander, Alexander III’s heir. In 1285 he was one of the embassy to France representing Alexander III in negotiations for the hand of Joleta de Dreux, and escorted her back to Scotland to become the King’s second bride. There are obviously other known elements to his biography (some more exciting!), but that should be sufficient.
------
Contrary to myth, there is no evidence of any Sinclairs of Roslin prior to 1279. The HerdmanstonSinclairs were in Scotland from at least 1162b,0. The first documentary evidence for Sinclairsat Roslin is a charter of the 14th September 1279 c,1 To précis the entry:
Alexander, king of Scots, gives notice that, since Henry of Roslin (Roskelyn in the original charter), tenant of his lands of Roslin and Catcune (nr Borthwick,), has resigned and quitclaimed these lands to him by rod and staff, he has given to William Sinclair, knight, said lands of Roslin and Catcune, doing service of half a knight. 11
References to the holders of Roslin before this date are to a Thomas de Roslyn and a Roger de Roselyn, both as witnesses to charters6. There is no indication that these were Sinclairs, and other evidence to suggest that they were not. For instance, the Sir William Sinclair above, who received Roslin from Alexander III is mentioned in Burke’s Peerage2as marrying Amicia, daughter of Henry de Roskelyn, which if Henry de Roskelyn were William’s father would make the couple siblings. However, doubt has been expressed on whether Burke’s Peerage is correct in its entry for Sir William Sinclair, which I will address later. Some who propose the de RoskelynswereSinclairs, have got round the above difficulty by suggesting that Sir William Sinclair’s family and the de Roskelyns were paternal cousins. The problem is, why if the de Roskelyns were Sinclairs were they not called Sinclair, and why did Sir William Sinclair’s family then not begin to call themselves de Roskelyn likewise? However there is more evidence than this that Sir William was the first Sinclair of Roslin, which bleeds into the discussion of his parentage.
*I’m so sorry that the following paragraph is quite complicated and indigestible, but it’s worth reading to fully appreciate the situation as to sources. After this the narrative becomes, I hope, more readable and interesting.
The source for my above assertion that Sir William’s parents were Robert de Saint-Clair in Normandy and Eleanor de Dreux, (relict (widow) of the Lord of Chateaunef), are Burke’s Peerage, (which is also the source for his wife’s identity), the Scots Peerage14, and Roland de Saintclair’s ‘The Saintclaire’s of the Isles’12. The Scots Peerage gives its source as Hayd,6, but in fact Father Haydoes not explicitly state the parentage, (at least in the edited version of 1835, published a couple of centuries after his death), but seems to infer it as a possibility,6. Burke’s Peerage does not give a reference, but intriguingly leaves blank the name and number of Eleanor’s father, eg ~Eleanor, relict (widow) of the Lord de Chateaunef, daughter of -----Lord of Dreux. The original papers of Father Hay have been lost, but there is a written copy, altered in parts by other hands, not necessarily complete, and marredover the years by ancient doodles, in the National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh (NLS). Clearly Burke is not using either Roland Saintclair or the edited Hay of 1835 as its reference, or it would have given the name and number of the Count of Dreux. Burke’s source may be either the unedited copy of Hay’s manuscripts in the NLS, or a source unknown. Roland Saint-Clair’s reference for the information is ‘Hay, Balfour’s Annals’ e,1.
The above, (and the notes), present room for doubtabout the parentage asserted, so we have to look for circumstantial evidence to see whether we can back it up further.
We know that Sir William Sinclair was a significant figure in late 13th century Scotland.5 A.A.M. Duncan (Emeritus Professor of Scottish History at the University of Glasgow), in ‘The Kingship of the Scots 842-1292’ (2002) 8, says that ‘Sir William Sinclair was closer to Alexander III than any other Scot.’ This was not a meritocratic age, andif Sir William were merely an obscure landless knight, to reach such an exalted position would be something of a conundrum. (He is given no territorial designation in the grant of Roslin or in prior references to him,6). Although some other apparently obscure characters have been appointed to positions of influence in the period, (such as the guardianship of the King’s son), I would suggest that they appear obscure only because we know so very little about them.
However, if we assume for the moment that Sir William was the son or Robert de Saint-Clair in Normandy and Eleanor de Dreux, everything begins to fall into place. The reason is that this makes him a close relative of King Alexander III. It’s interesting that the full relationship of Alexander III and Sir William has never before been fully detailed and exploited. Father Hay makes a passing reference to a possible relationship, and Burke’s Peerage and the Scots Peerage make no reference to it at all. Roland de Saint-Clair does refer to the relationship, but is unaware of the full extent of it.
Alexander III’s mother, Marie de Coucy, and Sir William Sinclair’s mother, Eleanor de Dreux, were related in the following way. Marie de Coucy’s grandfather was Raoul I de Coucy, and Eleanor de Dreux’s grandfather was also Raoul I de Coucy. Completely separately, Marie de Coucy’s paternal grandmother (Alix de Dreux) was Eleanor de Dreux’s Aunt (her father’s sister). Following from this, Eleanor de Dreux was the great-grand-daughter of King Louis VI of the Franks (reign 1108-1137). Marie de Coucy’s great-great grandfather was also King Louis VI. (Eleanor de Dreux’s father was Louis VI’s paternal grandson).f,9
To tie the knot even further, we need to nail the ancestry of Sir William’s father Robert de Saint-Clair. For Robert de Saint-Clair to marry a great grand-daughter of Louis VI it is presumed he would be from a requisite family, at the least a seigneur, or of the family of a seigneur. The record of the marriage of Eleanor de Dreux to Robert de Saint-Clair refers to him as ‘in Normandy’ g,9. I have trawled through lists of all the French nobility of this time, and can find no seigneur de Saint-Clair other than the one who was of Saint-Clair surEpte, and he happens to be Robert de Saint-Clair, son of Robert de Roux, of the family of the Seigneur de Chaumont-Guitry en Vexin9. He also fits time-wise. The only other place of any significance in the environs of Normandy called Saint-Clair is Saint-Clair-sur-Elle. I accept there was probably a seigneurship of this place, but if there is documentary evidence that has survived it has evaded me. Apparently it was in the hands of the de Creully family4. Seemingly the de Creully wereagnatic descendants of the Dukes of Normandy, or more correctly perhaps, King Henry I of England 9. (Philippe, one of the forum, will know more about this). At any rate the de Creullywho is given on the net as the seigneurde Saint-Clair4 is Richard de Creully, though he would not have described himself asseigneur de Saint-Clair, and it would have been just one of his familylandholdings.At any rate, there is no Robert among the de Creully familyanywhere near the correct date who would have been its seigneur.
So Robert de Saint-Clair, father of Sir William, does seem likely to be of the de Chaumont-Guitry family, as he is the only French Robert de Saint-Clair in contemporary documents, and he fits neatly within the time slot. His attribution to this family is not new, though a correct description of the line backward from the Roslins would be new, as all sorts of accounts of it have been given to suit various purposes, but none that I have discovered which follow the contemporary evidence. When, however, we examine the de Chaumont-Guitry line h,9, it turns out that this Robert de Saint-Clair is the great-great grandson of King Louis VI. His great-grandfather Guillaume I of de Chaumont-Guitry (William I), married Isabel, the only illegitimate child of Louis VI.9 So when he married Eleanor de Dreux they both shared this same descent, although Eleanor was one generation closer.
It’s fascinating that all three, Alexander III, Eleanor de Dreux (twice) and Robert de Saint-Clairweredescended from Louis, who had comparatively few grandchildren and great grandchildren. To illustrate this, there were four lines from his nine children.The first wasthe Capetian line which continued with the Kings of France. King Louis VII’s first two marriages were barren, and in his third, very few of his children had offspring; but descendants of this line are descendants of subsequent Kings, so they are more aptly described as descendants of those particular monarchs and not Louis VI. Secondly there was the de Dreux line which is discussed above, having Alexander III and Eleanor de Dreux(twice) as descendants. Thirdly, there was theSeigneurs de Courtenay, the elder line of which inherited the Empire of Latin Constantinople from his brother-in-law. Interestingly, Constance de Courteney, brother of the above Emperor of Constantinople, Louis VI’s grand-daughter by his son Pierre de France, married Gasce de Poissy, who was a paternal descendant of the paternal Uncle of William of the Chaumont-Guitry referred to above, who married Louis VI’s daughter Isabellei. Lastly there is thisline from William and Isabelle aforementioned, which leads down to Robert de Saint-Clair.
This shows that Sir William Sinclair of Roslin, besides sharing this descent with Alexander III, was descended from Louis VI at least once from his father, and twice from his mother, even though King Louis VI had only a very few lines of descent at this time, and a significant proportion of them were among foreign royal houses, (though many of his descendants stem from the de Courtenays). In my opinion, given the tiny percentage of noble and gentle persons descended from Louis VI in the mid 1200s, this common descent must have been a consideration in the choices of marriage partner in the persons concerned. The full cultural significance of this may now be lost.
So in addition tothe sources that assert the parentage of Sir William,I believe the circumstantial evidence leads one to conclude that it would involve avery rare co-incidence of factors if Sir William’s father were not Robert de Saint-Clair of the de Chaumont-Guitry family, and his mother were not Eleanor de Dreux. It explains why Sir William Sinclair found such favour with Alexander III, and why he was in Scotland. Remember also that he was one of the persons comprising the embassy to France which escorted his relative Yolande de Dreux back to Scotland to be Alexander III’s second and final bridej, which of course created yet another link between Alexander and Sir William, and perhaps showed that Alexander set some store by his de Dreux connections. This was a time when the birth-rate of the French nobility increased significantly, so there was plenty of jockeying forpositions on offer, and Sir William had every reason to think he would receive a welcome from his mother’s relatives, Marie Queen of France, and her son Alexander III. I should say I think there is more to uncover about these relationships, and that every noble and gentle personage of this period did not necessarily get recorded in contemporary documents, (for instance the identity of most wives, as of the de Chaumont-Guitry family). So we may never know the full story.
2 /2
We now come to the de Chaumont-Guitry family, and Medlands’ 9 account of this line is referenced extensively by the surviving primary documents. Robert de Saint-Clair is listedas Robert de Chaumont, seigneur de Saint-Clair, son of Robert le Roux and younger brother of William and Amaury. Saint-Clair-sur-Epte is actually just over the border of Normandy, butGuitry itself, where the de Chaumont-Guitry family were based o, is in Normandy. Chaumont is also over the border but part of the Vexin, as is Guitry and Saint-Clair-sur-Epte. The Vexin,some time prior to this period, was a separate county and is still a distinct geographical and cultural entity.
Robert de Saint-Clair had as first wife Alicia, and first son Jean9. No other children are mentioned. It’s difficult to estimate when Robert and Eleanor de Dreux would have married, but Eleanor’s first husband, Hugues, seigneur de Chateauneuf, was alive in 12219, and Alicia, Robert’s first wife was alive in 1211. Robert de Saint-Clair and Eleanor were definitely husband and wife in April 1248, but the marriage must have taken place long before this, probably in the 1220s, and sooner rather than later. Eleanor is recorded as wife of Hugue de Chateauneuf in 1212, so she realistically was probably born no later than 1196. Assessing the ages of persons of this period isextremely difficult, as we are dealing with mention of them in often undated documents. I would think Sir William Sinclair would not have been born after 1240 at the latest, and probably between 1225 and 1235.