Roger Bomon Anglo-Norman aristocrat of the de Beaumont family Date of Birth: 02.06.1053 Country: Great Britain

1. Roger de Beaumont: An Anglo-Norman Aristocrat
2. Early Life and Inheritance
3. Support for King Stephen
4. Role in the Feudal Anarchy
5. Switching Sides and Death
6. Legacy and Piety
7. Family and Children

Roger de Beaumont: An Anglo-Norman Aristocrat

Roger de Beaumont was an Anglo-Norman aristocrat and participant in the civil war in England from 1135 to 1154. He was the eldest son of Henry de Beaumont, the 1st Earl of Warwick, who served as an advisor to English kings William II and Henry I, and Margaret of Perche, the daughter of Geoffroy II, Count of Mortain-Perche.

Early Life and Inheritance

Roger inherited his father's holdings in the western English counties, including the city of Warwick and the lordship of Gower in southern Wales. Being part of the de Beaumont family ensured Roger a prominent position among the English aristocracy in the second quarter of the 12th century. His cousins, Robert and Galeran de Beaumont, played leading roles at the court of King Stephen, and the extensive lands of the Beaumonts in England and Normandy made them one of the wealthiest noble families in the country.

Support for King Stephen

During the civil war in England, Roger de Beaumont supported King Stephen against Empress Matilda. However, he did not demonstrate any notable military or political talents and primarily focused on defending his estates from the raids of Robert of Gloucester's forces and other supporters of Matilda. After the Battle of Lincoln in 1141, Roger briefly switched sides and supported Matilda but returned to Stephen's camp by the beginning of 1142.

Role in the Feudal Anarchy

It is known that after the end of the civil war, Warwickshire received one of the largest discounts among all English counties when paying the national tax known as "danegeld" due to the damage caused to the county's economy during the feudal anarchy. However, the actual damage may not have been significant as Warwickshire was geographically removed from the main conflict zones, unlike Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, and Oxfordshire, which suffered from the ravages of warring factions. Roger de Beaumont, being a powerful baron, was able to maintain order in the county.

Switching Sides and Death

Towards the end of the feudal anarchy, Roger de Beaumont abandoned his support for King Stephen. When Matilda's son, Henry Plantagenet, landed in England in 1153, the Earl of Warwick switched sides and joined Henry's cause. In early June 1153, the city of Warwick was surrendered to Henry's forces. Just a few days later, on June 12, 1153, Roger de Beaumont passed away.

Legacy and Piety

According to the chronicle "The Deeds of King Stephen" by an unknown author from the mid-12th century, Roger was a pious and devout man. He founded a leper hospital in Warwick, a monastery in Llancarfan, Glamorgan, and granted lands to the Knights Templar. Roger also made multiple pilgrimages to Palestine and participated in the Second Crusade in 1147, serving under Emperor Conrad III. It is unclear how Roger's piety compared to other Anglo-Norman aristocrats during this period, as the feudal anarchy under King Stephen witnessed a significant rise in monastic establishments by the same barons who ravaged their enemies' lands and towns.

Family and Children

Roger de Beaumont was married to Gundrade de Warenne (died after 1166), the daughter of William de Warenne, 2nd Earl of Surrey, and Elizabeth de Vermandois. They had several children, including:
- William de Beaumont (died 1184), 3rd Earl of Warwick, who married Margaret d'Eyville and Matilda Percy.
- Valeran de Beaumont (1153-1204), 4th Earl of Warwick, who married Margaret d'Oilly and Alice de Harcourt.
- Agnes de Beaumont, who married Geoffrey II, son of Geoffrey de Clinton, Chamberlain of King Henry I.
- Margaret de Beaumont.
- Gundreda de Beaumont (c. 1135-1200), who married Hugh Bigod, 1st Earl of Norfolk, and Roger de Glanville.

Wilhelm Jumieges also mentions a certain Henry de Beaumont, Roger's son, but his existence is not confirmed by other sources, so it may be an error by the chronicler.