Cockayne's "Complete Peerage" (EU, pp. 153-154), he was Count of Eu and Lord of Hastings and held extensive estates. In 1088 he took a prominent place in the rebellion against King William Rufus in favor of Duke Robert of Normandy, invading Gloucestershire and destroying the town of Berkeley. In 903 Rufus won him back to his side by bribes and promises, but in 1095 William participated in Mowbray's plot to kill King William and place Eudes, the disinherited Count of Champagne, on the throne in his place. [Traditionally it has been said that] at the Council of Salisbury in 1095/6 William was charged with treason, and having been vanquished in single combat by his accuser, was condemned to be blinded and (at the insistence of [his brother-in-law] Hugh of Avranches, Earl of Chester) emasculated. [However, see a later note refuting this.] Nothing further is known about him, and he must have died then or soon afterwards.

"Genealogy of the Dutton family of Pennsylvania" compiled by Gilbert Cope, printed in 1871, reports that, according to "Burke's Landed Gentry, p. 1508, William and his second wife (whom Cope calls Jeanne rather than HELISINDE) were parents of six sons. One of these sons was ODARD OF DUTTON, who was the ancestor of all Duttons in England. The Cokayne article cited above, however, mentions no children born to Willam by the niece of Hugh of Avranches, Earl of Chester -by whatever name we choose to call her.
UTZ@@aol.com [Dave Utzinger] posted to GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@@rootsweb.com on 10 Jan 1999
Subject: HENRY II, COUNT OF EU--PART 3"
. "Notes for William II, Count of Eu:
. Succeeded on his father's death in 1090 to his English Barony and Norman County of Eu. The occupation of Eu by an English garrison was an act of treason to the Duke of Normandy, but Count William became within a few months the subject de jure as well as de facto of the King of England, for on Candlemas day 1091 William Rufus crossed over with a large fleet, and before the end of February a treaty was concluded, by which the County of Eu was ceded to the English King. Three years afterwards the war between Duke Robert and his brother was renewed, and at Mid Lent 1094 King William crossed over again from Hastings, and fixed his head-quarters at EU. But Robert engaged the assistance of the French King, and William Rufus would have been besieged at Eu by their united forces whilst he was waiting for reinforcements, unless he had tricked King Philip into deserting his brother's cause.
. According to all the received pedigrees the Count of Eu was in 1095 one of the leaders in the conspiracy to put Stephen Count of Aumale on the throne of England, for French and English genealogists are agreed in identifying him with William of Eu, who was cruelly mutilated at Salisbury in January 1096 for his treason . This agreement is the more remarkable, because William of Eu's cruel punishment is mentioned in every chronicle of the period, and they all without exception avoid describing the sufferer as the Count of Eu: whilst all that is known about him suggests that he and the Count of Eu were two different and distinct persons.
. The Count of Eu, and William of Eu are separately registered in Domesday, which gives no hint of any connexion or relationship between them. Domesday suggests that William succeeded his own mother and Ralph de Limesi in the ownership of some 77 manors in the Western and South-Western Counties, which for the most part belonged in the time of Edward the Confessor to Alestan of Boscombe in Wiltshire. They were scattered over nine counties and were valued at L401 per annum. They formed therefore a Barony of great importance, for there were scarcely 20 lay fiefs in the kingdom which were of greater value. They were afterwards known collectively as the Honour of Strigul, for the Castle of Strigul or (as it was afterwards called) Chepstow was the head of this
Barony, which passed in its entirety after William's forfeiture, by the grant of William Rufus, to Walter a younger son of Richard de Clare, who was the son of Count Gilbert of Eu of the elder line. It must be suspected that this grant to Walter was earned by Gilbert's timely denunciation of his accomplices, amongst whom William of Eu was Conspicuous. And if Walter was (as is likely) William's cousin through their common descent from the disinherited Count Gilbert of Eu, it was in strict accordance with the settled policy of this period, that the estates forfeited by William of Eu should be transferred to a more loyal kinsman. Walter transmitted these estates to his heirs, and it is certain that no claim was ever made to them by Count William's son Count Henry of Eu, although be was in high favour with King Henry I. and inherited without question the Domesday Barony of the Count of Eu, which must have been forfeited with the rest, if the traitor of 1096 was the Count.
. Again, I cannot believe that William of Eu's steward William de Alderie, who suffered with him at Salisbury and was the son of his maternal aunt, was the nephew of Beatrix Countess of Eu. Moreover, it is quite certain that William of Eu's wife, who was the Earl of Chester's sister, and whose jealousy was fatal to her husband, was not the wife of William Count of Eu , for it was judicially proved in 1220 that the mother of Count William's son and successor (Count Henry) was the daughter of Roger de Busli the Domesday Baron of Tickhill in Yorkshire. It is marvellous that in the face of such evidence the sufferer of 1096 was ever mistaken for the Count of Eu, and that this mistaken identity has been unsuspectingly repeated by every genealogist English and French from Dugdale and Pere Anselm to Planche and Freeman. It was never in fact called in question until 1878, when the late Mr. Eyton inferred from the antecedents of William of Eu's estate in Dorset, that
be had been "erroneously identified with the Count of Eu."
. This mistake has been a fruitful parent of error and confusion in the pedigree, for as William of Eu's wife was beyond all doubt sister of the Earl of Chester, the heiress of Tickbill had to be pushed back to the preceding generation, although it was distinctly proved in the law suit of 1220, that she was the mother of Count Henry of Eu. This error led to another, because it was chronologically impossible that Beatrix Countess of Eu, who was married long before the Conquest could be the daughter of Roger de Busli of Domesday. It was therefore assumed that Beatrix was Roger's sister, although in that case her descendant's title to the Barony would have been inferior to that of her opponent, who was the heir beyond all question of Roger de Busli's brother.
. All that the French genealogists can tell us about Count William II beyond the names of his parents and his children is an anecdote recorded by Guibert de Nogent, who tells us that the Count was at Rouen in 1096, after the first Crusade was proclaimed, when he rescued from the fury of the mob a Jew boy, who was educated as a Christian at the expense of his rescuer and died a nionk at the Abbey of St. Germes. The Crusade decreed at the Council of Clermont in November 1095 was proclaimed at Rouen in February 1096, so that this story, which Guibert heard from the lips of the Countess herself, is irreconcilable with the statement that the Count was mutilated in prison in England in January 1096.
. Count William II. died before 1100, and had issue by his wife Beatrix the daughter of Roger de Busli of Domesday and sister and heir of Roger de Busli . four sons.
. i. Henry I, Count of Eu, married Margaret de Sulli.
. ii. William de Eu. Fought gallantly in the army of Henry I, at the battle of Bourgteroude in Lent 1124, when he took Almaric de Montfort prisoner. But William was as generous as he was brave, and he knew the relentless and unforgiving character of the English King. He refused therefore to be the means of consigning Almaric to hopeless captivity for the rest of his life, and preferred to sacrifice his own prospects and career. Accordingly he released his prisoner, and accompanied him into exile, where he entered into the service of the French King and was lost henceforth to Normandy.
. iii. Robert de Eu.
. iv. Enguerrand de Eu." He is placed in the next generation by the French genealogists, who call him the fourth son of Count Henry; but this is disproved by chronological considerations, and by the express statement of the contemporary chronicler that Count Henry of Eu had only three sons.