SALISBURY. ■2'J SALISBURY.( a ) Earldom J. Patrick r>R Salisbury, r>ften, l>W erroneously, called I 1149? rVvnncK I)kvkbkux,('V b. and h. of Walter dk Sai.ishi.'hy( c ) (who, ■■ as « Baron, witnessed n charter of King Stephen^) in 1136" and who was living in U42) by Sibil, da. of Patrick ue Ciucucus [i.e. Ch.wokthJ,(°) was b. before 1120; was Constable of Salisbury, Steward of (») The Earldom of Salisbury, down to its attainder in 1549, has been dealt with in the Salisbury volume of u The Archaoloijiral Intlituie," IS 19, by the well known antiquary. J. Q. Nichols, who embodied therein Stapleton'H critical corrections of the previous account of that Earldom in the " History of Laouck Abbey, by W. L. BowW," and who is himself corrected in some points by " Ten-art in " N. and Q.," 4th S., ix. 313. ( b ) " It has been sufficiently shewn that Devereux was never the surname of this family and that the misapprehension arose only from the passing attribution (in a monastic chronicle — Tht Book of Lacoek) of the designation / hearenx (or the fortunate) to Walter de itoumare, their apocryphal ancestor. [See note " c " below. J The error is of a very early date among the Peerage writers, as it occurs in Brooks'* Catalotjue [1619] ami it has been handed down to the most recent, for Courthopo in his Historic Ptmgt [1848] still names Patrick and William. Kails of Salisbury, tie Evrcux ; but it is remarkable that Sir W. Dilgdale in hit Baronage, instead of Walter tie Eurenx 'like Brooke: has Walter tit Enrus. which if it bad been printed le (instead of tic) Ewrut would have been a faithful transcript from the Book of Lacoek'.' [//cr. and Gen., vol. iv. p. 119. in an article doubtless by its editor. J. U. Nichols.] ( e ) This Walter was sou or possibly grandson (see authorities concerning this point ns quoted in note "a" above) of Edward de Salisbury, mentioned in Domesday as Sheriff ( Victamet) of Wilts, a magn >te of considerable importance. As to the earlier pedigree the following remarks are made in the article mentioned in note "b " above. " Courthope makes the following statement, which is not in his predecessor, Nicolas: — ' Walter de Evreux, Count of Itosmar in Normandy, accompanied William, Duke (jf Normandy, to Englaml, who bestowed upon him lauds, cos. l^erks and Oxon. as appears from the Doomsday Survey, where he is called Comes throicensis. His eldest sou succeeded him in his Norman possessions, whilst those in England descen- ded to his younger son, Edward of Salisbury or Saresbury, Sheriff CO. Wilts.' lu this statement further error is involved, for the Earls of Kvreux were altogether another race, and the Comes EbroietntU of the Domesday Survey was named William. See L'Art de verifier les dates and Sir Henry Ellis's Introduction to Domesday Hook. There is no trace in any authentic records of any such person as ' Walter le Ewru.i, Earl of Ilostiutr' the father (according to the Book ot Lacoek) of Edward of Sariaherie, the Domesday Sheriff of Wilts. Edward, however, has been ascertained to have been a brother of Ceroid de Itoumare, who was Dapifer of Normandy before the Conquest of England, and from whom descended in the male line William de Honiara, or de Roumare, who became Earl of Lincoln in the reign of Stephen." The high position of the family is shewn by the marriages of Hawise, da. of Walter de Salisbury, firstly, by 1126, to Kotrou, Comte du Perche (see their issue in " Her. and lien.,' vol. vi, p. 263). and secondly before 1145 to Robert of France, Comte de Dreux ; as also by that of Walter's sister, Matilda, to Humphrey de Bohun, by whom she was ancestress of the Kails of Hereford. (*) Nichols's treatise as in note "a" above. See list of the witnesses to this charter (a grant to the See of Winchester) in J. H. Hound's " Geoffrey de Mandecihe " (pp. 262-264) where the name of "Walter de Salisbury" occurs as the 7th of the 17 "/Urones" thus given. ( e ) See " The Genealogist" K.S., vol. xii, in the notes, by G. W. Watson, to the " Seize Quartiers " of Henry IY. The descent as above is that given by Sir H. Barkly [Genealogist N.S. vol. v, p. 209] who corrects the statement by the well-known K. W. Eyton, in his "Descendants of Arnulph de Heading," (Iter, and (/en., toL vi, pp. 241-252) that Sibil was one of three (laughters ami coheirs of the said Arnulph (a considerable proprietor in the west counties in the time of Domesilay), which Arnulph had (in reality) but two daughters, PIS (1) Matilda, wife of Patrick de Cadurcia or Cham-cos [ChaworthJ and (2) Avelina, wife of Alan Fitz Flaald, ancestor «f the family of FiUalau.
