descent of Zutphen from Matilda daughter of emperor Otto
M.Sjostrom
I have gathered that there exist some sort of genealogical tradition that the counts of Zutphen (many of them named Otto) in 11th and so centuries,
would have descended from Matilda of the Saxon dynasty, daughter of emperor Otto II and empress Theophano
what is basis of this filiation, and what is current scholarly view about its validity?
Matilda, daughter of emperor Otto II, and some of her descendants:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00080072&tree=LEO
counts of Zutphen in/near Holland:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00312985&tree=LEO
Alfred Stern
2006 has 'proved' (as far this is possible) in his article
'Wanburtich' that Matilda is a daughter of the famous Otto von
Hammerstein.
See also: http://www.mgh.de/deutsches-archiv/inhaltsverzeichnisse/2006/
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_van_Hammerstein and
http://www.graafschap-middeleeuwen.nl/zutphen/otto-i-zutphen.html (my
website)
taf
wrote:
I am confused by this 'correction' as you own page appears to show two
different Matildas, the mother (Saxon) and wife (Hammerstein) of
Liudolf. Perhaps you could lay out the specifics to be sure it is
clear.
taf
M.Sjostrom
concluded from material posed by Alfred, and from other material,
the key to the asked *descent* would apparently be whether
the heiress Adelheid, who seemingly brought Zutphen to her husband Godskalc,
actually were daughter of Ludolf, who clearly was son of Matilda of the Saxon dynasty,
or whether that Adelheid were daughter of Otto of Hammerstein.
http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00312984&tree=LEO
My educated guess is that some near-contemporary source indicates that Adelheid was ultimate heiress of Otto of Hammerstein's many lands.
And if so, this yet leaves open the precise descent: for example, whether Adelheid was his daughter, or maternal granddaughter.
is there anything in some other near-contemporary material, to actually solve this question of alternatives?
--------------------------
Ludolf clearly was son of this Matilda:
http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00080072&tree=LEO
and Ludolf married another Matilda, daughter of this Otto:
http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00312985&tree=LEO
Alfred
1) Mathilda, dr.of emp. Otto II and Theophano (*978/9 - +1025), wife
of count palatine Ezzo
2) Mathilda, dr. of Otto 'von Hammerstein (*1005/15 - >1031), wife of
Liudolf, duke of Bayern
Liudolf has a Mathilda as mum and a Mathilda as wife. Hopefully this
is more specific?
This also gives a peek into the so called 'emperor elections' and the
factions active in this 'election' after the Ottones all died and the
annihilation of Otto 'van Hammersteins' marriage with Ermgard 'of
Verdun'
There's an overwhelming academic consensus on Adelheid being the
daughter of Liudolf and Mathilde 'van Zutphen', old and new:
* Hömberg, Geschichte der Comitate des Werler Grafenhauses,
Westfälische Zeitschrift, Munster, 1950, tafel 2
* Maris, Van voogdij tot maarschalkambt, Boekhandel H. de Vroede,
1954, p27
* Van Winter, Het (palts)graafschap Zutphen en het Hamalandse
gravenhuis, Bijdragen en Mededelingen Gelre XCII, Arnhem, 2001,
p64
* Jongbloed, Tussen 'paltsverhaal' en 'IJssellinie', Bijdragen en
mededelingen, deel XCVII, 2006, tabel
No reason (yet) to doubt it, unless you have some evidence of the
contrary. On internet see also:
http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/zutphen_grafen_von/adelheid_von_zutphen_graefin_von_zutphen_1050/adelheid_von_zutphen_graefin_von_zutphen_1050.html
or
http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/ezzonen_pfalzgrafen_bei_rhein/liudolf_graf_von_zuetphen_+_1031.html
(not my websites :-))
The family of Otto 'von Hammerstein' has been extensively researched
(from Hlawitschka to Wolf/Jackman and many others) and no Adelheid has
come up. If Adelheid was a daughter of Otto 'von Hammerstein' you also
introduce also a chronical problem, because her son Otto II 'the Rich'
probably was born around 1045/50 and Adelheid herself around 1000/5.
Now, what about the educated guess: Adelheid as the heiress of Otto
'von Hammerstein'. There's no contemporary source by my knowledge.
It's all educated guess work from a lot of academics interpreting
sources.
I do like the presentation of Leo's genealogical tables and if I see
it right, he uses the ES as evidence. Although the Stammtafeln is a
very good starting point to start your search, it is hardly the proof
we're looking for. The proof probably will never be delivered, unless
new contemporary sources pop up (they do sometimes). Too bad we can't
have a just little peek into the year 1000 :-)
And the last about the "educated guess": Adelheid being the "ultimate
heiress of Otto of Hammerstein's many lands". This can be more
precise. Actually Adelheid was the ultimate heiress of Godfried 'the
Prisoner', because Zutphen belonged to the house of Verdun, and not to
the late Konradiner Hammerstein. Godfried got his hands on it, because
of his marriage with Averarda, a daughter of Everhard 'of Salland'. In
his turn a son of Meginhard IV 'of Hamaland'. At this moment I'm
working on my site to get this all neatly in place :-D
with regards, Alfred
M.Sjostrom
actually, my suspicion was not more than just the ES filiation directly to Otto, as now presented in Genealogics by Leo.
So, I am not denying at all that the heiress Adelheid could be daughter of Ludolf. I just assume that ES would have had some reason.....
about the name Adelheid: actually, that very name IS present in Otto of Hammerstein's own forebears, and thusly does not need an explanation from Ludolf-Matilda-Ottonian emperors. This is because Otto of Hammerstein's own aunt (maternal aunt, i.e mother's sister) was that Abbess Adelheid of whom is the subject of 'Vitae Adelheidis'..... that hagiographic writing which actually is the usual source of Otto of Hammerstein's ancestry. So, there it is, at least one very prominent Adelheid comes up in Otto's own forebears.
You write that Adelheid were herself born around 1000/1005. Well, then that's a grave chronological problem for Ludolf being her father: Ludolf's mother Matilda was herself born in about 980 (or even a bit later) and married only in 990s. So Matilda's son (born in 990s at earliest and preferably closer to the year 1000) would not be siring any daughter by 1005. For Adelheid to be Ludolf's daughter, her birth in say 1020s, would be much more plausible. But, if Adelheid's own career (that's something I do not know, it's only that you say so) necessitates her birth in or before 1005, then there's a good reason to discard Ludolf from the paternity.
As itself, an Adelheid born in say 1025 would easily be mother of Otto the Rich born 1045/50.
But an Otto the Rich born in 1050 or 1045, *could* be son of an Adelheid born in 1005.
meanwhile, Otto of Hammerstein's and his wife's career (and ecclesiastical trouble over their marriage) would indicate that they could be having kids in the interval between say 1000 and 1025. So, an Adelheid, whether born in 1005, 1000, or 1025, or 1020, could by that be Otto's daughter, no prob.
about my educated guess: already the fact that Adelheid appears in conveying some of Otto of Hammerstein's landed properties to her husband and their issue, is actually a contemporary indication of her being Otto's heiress - either directly or after some intervening owner.
So, to discard this idea, demands more than just a platitude.
Because ownership chains are contemporary indications.
I am waiting rather for something like an analusis that Adelheid -contrary to general belief- did NOT possibly hold anything that belonged to Otto of Hammerstein. Or that the succession to such lands is attested by some other way than that descent.
--- On Sun, 11/29/09, Alfred <in...@graafschap-middeleeuwen.nl> wrote:
> From: Alfred <in...@graafschap-middeleeuwen.nl>
> Subject: Re: descent of Zutphen from Matilda daughter of emperor Otto
> To: qs...@yahoo.com
> Cc: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
> Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009, 7:26 AM
> There's an overwhelming academic
> consensus on Adelheid being the daughter of Liudolf and
> Mathilde 'van Zutphen', old and new:
>
> ���* H�mberg, Geschichte der Comitate des
> Werler Grafenhauses,
> � ���Westf�lische Zeitschrift,
> Munster, 1950, tafel 2
> ���* Maris, Van voogdij tot maarschalkambt,
> Boekhandel H. de Vroede,
> � ���1954, p27
> ���* Van Winter, Het (palts)graafschap
> Zutphen en het Hamalandse
> � ���gravenhuis, Bijdragen en
> Mededelingen Gelre XCII, Arnhem, 2001, p64
> ���* Jongbloed, Tussen 'paltsverhaal' en
> 'IJssellinie', Bijdragen en
> � ���mededelingen, deel XCVII, 2006,
> tabel
>
> No reason (yet) to doubt it, unless you have some evidence
> of the contrary. On internet see also:
> http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/zutphen_grafen_von/adelheid_von_zutphen_graefin_von_zutphen_1050/adelheid_von_zutphen_graefin_von_zutphen_1050.html
> or
> http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/ezzonen_pfalzgrafen_bei_rhein/liudolf_graf_von_zuetphen_+_1031.html
>
> The family of Otto 'von Hammerstein' has been extensively
> researched (from Hlawitschka to Wolf/Jackman and many
> others) and no Adelheid has come up. If Adelheid was a
> daughter of Otto 'von Hammerstein' you also introduce also a
> chronical problem, because her son Otto II 'the Rich'
> probably was born around 1045/50 and Adelheid herself around
> 1000/5.
>
> Now, what about the educated guess: Adelheid as the heiress
> of Otto 'von Hammerstein'. There's no contemporary source by
> my knowledge. It's all� educated guess work from a lot
> of academics interpreting sources.
> I do like the presentation of Leo's genealogical tables and
> if I see it right, he uses the ES as evidence. Although the
> Stammtafeln is a very good starting point to start your
> search, it is hardly the proof we're looking for. The proof
> probably will never be delivered, unless new contemporary
> sources pop up (they do sometimes). Too bad we can't have a
> just little peek into the year 1000 :-)
>
> with regards, Alfred
>
> M.Sjostrom schreef:
> > concluded from material posed by Alfred, and from
> other material,
> >
> > the key to the asked *descent* would apparently be
> whether
> > the heiress Adelheid, who seemingly brought Zutphen to
> her husband Godskalc,
> > actually were daughter of Ludolf, who clearly was son
> of Matilda of the Saxon dynasty,
> > or whether that Adelheid were daughter of Otto of
> Hammerstein.
> > http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00312984&tree=LEO
> >
> > My educated guess is that some near-contemporary
> source indicates that Adelheid was ultimate heiress of Otto
> of Hammerstein's many lands.
> > And if so, this yet leaves open the precise descent:
> for example, whether Adelheid was his daughter, or maternal
> granddaughter.
> >
> > is there anything in some other near-contemporary
> material, to actually solve this question of alternatives?
> >
> > --------------------------
> >
> > Ludolf clearly was son of this Matilda:
> > http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00080072&tree=LEO
> >
> > and Ludolf married another Matilda, daughter of this
> Otto:
> > http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00312985&tree=LEO
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >� � ���
> >���
>
> met vriendelijke groeten,
> Alfred
>
> -- D'een segget d'n anderen voort:
> De Graafschap in de Middeleeuwen
> http://www.graafschap-middeleeuwen.nl/
> http://www.graafschap-middeleeuwen.nl/forum2/
> RSS-feed:
> http://www.graafschap-middeleeuwen.nl/dgidm-feed.rss
>
Alfred
dates and years. Mine is just as lousy as all others, I've used some
years from dutch academics. I cited the birth year from Adelheid wrong
from my database. It should read 1020 (Van Winter, Otto de Rijke van
Zutphen (ca. 1050-1113), Bijdragen en Mededelingen Gelre XCIII,
Arnhem, 2002, p28).
What about ES: recently there's has been a lot published about the
house of Hamaland, Zutphen, Gelre, Kleve, Verdun, etc. ES just isn't
that actual. As I said it;'s a good starting point, though.
What I meant was that Adelheid never popped up as a daughter of Otto
'van H.'. Not that there aren't any Adelheids in the neighbourhood of
the family.
The analysis you're waiting for... you're looking for something NOT.
That's hard to proof.
If you want an analysis or thorough study: I recommend 'Wanburtich' of
Jongbloed in DA.
M.Sjostrom
there is also a grave chronological problem
IF "Mathilda, daughter of Otto 'von Hammerstein'" were born as late as in 1015,
for her to be the mother of Adelheid the heiress, wife of Zutphen's holder, had that Adelheid been born in the 1020s.
Namely, for biological reasons, there should be at least about 15 years between the mother and daughter's birthyears, and prefereably some 20 years.
So, if Adelheid were born in about 1025, then Mathilda, daughter of Otto of Hammerstein, should be born before est 1010 and preferably already nearer 1000.