Osbert FitzHugh was the son of
Hugh "Blundus" FitzOsbern. Osbert was sometimes called 'Meschines' (i.e. 'The Younger'). Given his father was born c. 1040; Obsert must have been born around 1070-1080 and was dead before 1154.
From
Barons1:
Osbert Fitz Hugh, the second baron of Pulford, succeeded his father before 1119, for in that year he was with Earl Richard at Graham in Lincolnshire, and there witnessed his charter of confirmation to the Abbey of St. Werburgh. Not long after he was present at a similar act by Earl Ranulph Meschines, which I suppose was granted at Chester. The only other direct evidence concerning him which I have been able to find is contained in the record of 1194, which tells us that his brother Simon did homage to him for the land at Marton, and that he had three sons, Hugh, and Alexander, and Simon. One of the lords of Pulford gave in the twelfth century a part of the township of Wardle to the Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem, and it is possible that he was the donor.
I have not been able to trace many of the actions of this Osbert, but his possession of the barony and attendance upon the Earls tell much by inference. In these early days before the invention of scutage, and especially in a military principality like that of Chester, real military service had to be rendered by the holder of a fief to the lord of whom he held it, and it was even sometimes the case that an eldest son was disinherited because his younger brother was the better knight. A feudal tenant in the first half of the twelfth century could no more avoid doing his military devoir than he could avoid paying the debt of
nature, and the very fact that he held his fief is direct evidence that he followed his lord to all the wars in which the latter was engaged. Had it not been that the Scrope and Grosvenor controversy in 1386 put the facts, as kept alive by tradition, upon record, we should never have known that Ralph de Grosvenor was present at the battle of Lincoln in 1141, and at that battle two years later, in which the Earl was captured. We should, however, had we possessed independent proof of his existence at this date, have been justified in guessing that he was present, for there can be no reasonable doubt that every one of the Earl's military tenants, lesser as well as greater, followed him to war.
Osbern Fitz Hugh possessed several manors within a few miles of Lincoln, and we have therefore the better reason to conjecture that he may have been present at the great battle there in 1141, when King Stephen was captured by the Earl. He may have, and probably did, follow his chief in all those bewildering and selfish changes of alliance, those desertions now of the Empress now of the King, which remind one of a later king-maker and in the constant sieges, assaults and battles by which they were enlivened. We cannot doubt that all the Earl's feudal tenants were concerned in the sally which routed Stephen at the second siege of Lincoln; in the capture of Bedford by assault, and the Earl's subsequent reconciliation to the King, to whom he brought three hundred well-appointed horse to aid in the siege of Wallingford. To follow the Earl's fortunes at Coventry and in Wales would be tedious, and little to the point, for I do not believe that Osbern lived so long, but it may be remarked that the stronghold of Lincoln, which, together with the Earldom and Constableship of the county, Ranulph claimed as his inheritance, seems to have been constantly the base of his operations. Osbern Fitz Hugh and his eldest son, Hugh Fitz Osbern, the third baron of Pulford, both died before the accession of Henry the Second [1154]. The record tell us that this second Hugh Fitz Osbern had two brothers, Alexander, who, as I shall presently show, was disinherited, and Simon Fitz Osbern.
Footnotes
[1] The Barons of Pulford in the 11th and 12th Centuries; George Sitwell, Scarborough, 1889; pages xv
Est 1070 - Bef 1154 (~ 83 years)