Oct 2005, Chris Phillips came up with:

Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Agnes, wife of Geoffrey de Clinton
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:07:56 +0100

One question that's been discussed in the past, which is obliquely related
to the problem of the several Gundreds, is the marriage of Agnes, daughter
of Roger, Earl of Warwick, (d. 1153) to Geoffrey de Clinton [Complete
Peerage volume 12, part 2, page 362, note d].

CP refers to Pipe Roll, 31 Hen. I, p. 105 (albeit preceded by "cf"), which
if it implied the marriage took place by 1130 would create chronological
difficulties, as the parents of Earl Roger's known wife, Gundred, daughter
of William de Warenne and Elizabeth of Vermandois, were not married until
after June 1118.

In the new DNB, the marriage of Agnes to Geoffrey de Clinton is mentioned in
two articles by David Crouch, on Clinton, Geoffrey of (d. c.1133) and Roger,
second earl of Warwick (d. 1153).

In the former, Crouch says that the younger Geoffrey de Clinton was a minor
at his father's death in 1133, and that "he ran into trouble at some time in
1137 or 1138, when the earl of Warwick attempted to reclaim the lands
extorted from him by Geoffrey's father. The problem was eventually solved by
a marriage treaty, by which Geoffrey married Agnes, the earl's young
daughter, and received his lands back at preferential terms, with a
concession of the hereditary possession of the shrievalty of Warwick."

In the latter, the conflict is dated only to after the death of Henry I in
1135:
"Roger mobilized his followers to attack the Clintons and their imported
tenants. There was a siege of Kenilworth Castle; Kenilworth Priory's lands
were pillaged by the earl's men; but the Clinton party apparently fought
back hard enough for the king to feel called upon to intervene. The written
peace treaty survives. The young Geoffrey of Clinton made a formal
submission to the earl and accepted his daughter, still only an infant, in
marriage."

Crouch dates Earl Roger's marriage to Gundred to "before 1135", so the
marriage contract would have to be understood to refer to a small child,
under the legal age for either marriage or betrothal. I cannot see any
mention in either article about the troublesome description of Agnes's
husband as 'Camerario consilio Regis' discussed here previously, when the
son is not known to have been a royal chamberlain. Certainly Crouch's
article on Geoffrey senior doesn't mention that his son was chamberlain.
_________________________________________________________