SUSSEX. 333 "quod Comes Willelmus de Arundel fecit. "(*) Henry II. pave to him by a") charter in the 1st year of his reign (1155) the Castle of Arundel, with the whole honour of Arundel Had its appurtenants, together with the third penny of Sussex " undc comes eat-"{ b ) He d. 4 Oct. 1176. II. 1176. .?. William (de Albini), Earl of Sussex, or AaUHUEi or Chichester, s. and h., was, 1176 — 1177, confirmed in that dignity He received, in 11 S3, the third penny of the pleas of the countv of Sussex. He d. 24 Dec. 1193. III. 1193. 3. Wjixiam (de Albini), Karl op and h. He d. shortly before 30 March 1221. IV. 1221, 4- William (de Albini), Karl of Sussex, &c, p. and h. He d. unra. probably in Aug. 1224, but possibly not till 1234. V. 122 1? 5. Hugh (de Albini), Karl of Sussex, or Arundbi,, to or CntriiESTKH, br. and h. He (/. s.p. 12 May 1213, when the 1243. Earldom reverted to the Crown.
- 00
VI. 1282 ? 1. John (de Warenne) Earl of Surrey oA|=. Earl Warenne, s. and h. of William, F.aiil of Surrey or EaRL Warenne, s»r. his father 27 May 1 2 10. being then aged 5 years. He appears to have been made KARL OF SUSSEX! 11 ; in or after 12S2i,), being styled in various writs issued to him between 12i>2 ami 12!>7 " Earl ol Surrey and Sussex," tho' not till alter the death (1282) of his si>ter Isabel, dow. Countess of Sussex or Arundel, who held the e.-tates belonging to that Earldom in, JV5 5'j ill -j 3 « 7? fc] (*) He was, writes Round {«< supra) "indifferently styled at the time : (1) Earl of Sussex ; (2; Earl of Chichester ; (3) Earl of Arundel, and (1) Earl William de Albini." The Earldom of Arundel affords an example of the use < > f all the four possible varieties of an Earl's title as under, vh., when " the title is taken (1) from the county of which the bearer is Earl ; (2) from the capital town of that county ; (3) from the Earl's chief residence, and (41 from his family name . . . Karest. perhaps, are those cases in which the Earl took his style from his chief residence, as the Earls of Pembrokeshire) from Strigul (Chepstow) ,ve., but the most remarkable case, of course, is that of Arundel itself. It was doubtful for a time by which style this Earldom would eventually be known, and 'Sussex,' under Henry 1 1, seemed likely to prevail. The eventual adoption of ' Arundel,' was no doubt largely due to the importance of that ' honour ' and of the 1 castle 1 which formed its head." ( h ) Dugdale, speaking of this Earl, vol. i, p. 119, says :— " In the reign of Henry he did not only obtain the Castle and Honour of Arundel to himself and his heirs, but a confirmation of the Earldom of Sussex (for though the title of Karl was most known by Arundel and Chichester, at which places his chief residence used to be, yet it was of the County of Sussex that he was really Earl) by the Tertium Denariuvi of the Pleas of Sussex granted to him, which was the usual way of investing such great men (iu ancient times) with the possession of any Earldom, after those ceremonies of girding with the sword, ami putting on the robes, performed, which have ever, till of late, been thought essential to their creation." ( c ) See p. 327, note " b," sub "Surrey as to some doubt whether either of the Earls Warenne were actually Earls of Sussex. C) According to Glover, Richard Fitzalan (great grandson of John Fitzalan, by Isabel, sister, whose issue became coheir, to Hugh Albini, Earl of Sussex or Arundel) was cr. Earl ok Sussex in 12S9, i.e., during the same time in wdtich John de Warenne, Earl of Surrey, was receiving writs as " Earl ot Surrey and Sussex," as stated in the text. It is certain, however, that this Richard was Earl of Arundel, and as such was hereafter known. See vol. 1, p. 145, note " c," tub " Amndel," as to the presumed contention at this period for the Earldom of Sussex, between the families of De
