• Born: Châteaudun, Eure-et-Loir, Beauce/Centre, France
• Married (1):
• Married (2): 1105
• Died: 25 September, after 1139

  Research Notes:

"…Filii eius Maulde et Pagano qui nondum erat christianus" consented to the donation by "Hugonis vicecomitis" by charter dated to [1080/1100], the actual date presumably being in the early part of this range if his son Geoffroy was not yet baptised. "Hugo vicecomes de Castroduno" donated the church of Saint-Léonard de Bellême to Marmoutier, with the consent of "Gausfredo comite fratre eius, Roberto Mandaguerran fratre eius, Comitissa uxore eius, Gausfredo filio eius, Matilde filia eius", by charter dated to [1092/1100]. "Hugo vicecomes de Castroduno" donated property with the consent of "…Gausfredo filio eius, Matilda filia eius" by charter dated to [1095/1100].

The primary source which confirms her first marriage has not yet been identified. Her second marriage is confirmed by the charter dated 1119 under which "Gaufridus de Castroduno" (her brother) donated property to the abbey of Sainte-Trinité de Tiron with the consent of "uxore mea [unnamed] Hugone filio meo et duabus filiabus meis Aupazia et Helvissa atque nepote meo Gofredo filio comitis Vindocinensis". "Gaufredus comes Vindocinensis qui cognominatus et Grisa Gonella…uxor eius Mathildis…comitissa necnon Eschirater eiusdem comitis" donated property by charter dated 1107. "…Mithildis comitissa Vindocinensis filia eiusdem Hugonis…" consented to the donation by "Hugo vicecomes Castriduni" by charter dated [1110/11].

A list of anniversaries of Vendôme La Trinité records the death "IX Kal Oct" of "Mathildis comitissa Vindocinensis". Saint-Venant suggests that Mathilde died before 1139, the date of a charter under which “Goffridus Grisagonella comes Vindocini et Johannes filius meus” donated part of the forest of Gâtineau to Marmoutier “pro salute anime matris sue et anime uxoris sue”. However, the repetition of the word “anime” in in the document would be unnecessary if the donor’s mother and his wife were both deceased at the time. The document indicates a distinction between their two situations, suggesting that the donor’s wife must have still been alive at the time. ²