The origins of Redburh or Rædburh (a conjecture)
The...@aol.com
Hello All,
The subject of Redburh (Rædburh, also Redburga), wife of
Egbert of Wessex (King of Wessex 802-839), and her ancestry has
been a matter of debate for some time. Described by "regis
Francorum sororia" [ sister <better, sister-in-law> of the king
of the Franks ] in an early, but possibly not contemporary,
record, she has been variously identified as a sister or
sister-in-law of Charlemagne [1].
Something Chico Doria wrote in 1998 struck a cord the other
day. He suggested that the name Redburh sounded 'Robertinian',
i.e. similar to names found in the family of the Counts of Paris
(ancestors of the Capetian Kings of France). In particular, he
queried as to the equation or derivation, " Raedburh < ?
Hrodtburga or something similar " [2]. This suggestion deserves
further exploration, and certainly presents a good possibility
for the origin of Redburh.
Louis the Pious, king of the Franks (Holy Roman Emperor) was
married to his first wife Ermengarde in 794, with their issue
having been born during the period 795-805. As Louis was born in
778, it is reasonable to assume that Ermengarde was born say
778-780, and that she was likely aged between 16 and 17 (no less
than 15) when their first son Lothar was born in 795. This
reasonably parallels the family of Egbert. He was most
likely married to Redburh during his exile on the Continent,
between 799 and (probably no later than) 802. The birth date of
Egbert's son Ethelwulf is usually placed between 802 and 806,
although I have not noted a contemporary source for same.
While it is true that Charlemagne was King of the Franks
during the period that Egbert was in exile, it is also true that
his son Louis succeeded him as King of the Franks in 814, and
ruled as same (as well as Emperor) for 26 years, until his
death in 840. Louis and Egbert were more likely of the same
approximate age than say Charlemagne and Egbert: the greater
likelihood would be that the two would have married ladies of
a similar age (or younger).
Part of the uncertainty here derives from the dating of the
Trinity College MS cited by Searle. The question here is, how
contemporaneous was the document to the early 9th century, and
how best to interpret the term 'regis Francorum'? If the
meaning is the straightforward traditional approach, certainly
Charlemagne was intended: however, if the meaning is that
Redburh was sister-in-law to he who was King of the Franks when
the author of the MS wrote this entry, that could well mean
Louis, and not Charlemagne. Certainly, the careers of Louis
and Egbert would make their being 'brothers-in-law' more
likely than Charlemagne and Egbert.
The family of the Robertines (or the Counts of Hesbaye as
you may prefer) is now better understood, thanks to the work
of Christian Settipani and several others. If the name Redburh
is a Wessex rendering of Hrodtburga, or Chrodburga, it would
certainly point towards the possibility of a connection to
the family of Chrodegang, Bishop of Metz [see table below].
Given the problems in dealing with this family to date, the
possibility of a daughter of Count Ingram (father-in-law of
Louis the Pious) of the name Chrodburga being otherwise
unaccounted for in Frankish records is certainly believable.
Chico's suggestion, in addition to some onomastic support,
would (based on chronology and the Trinity College text) point
towards a sister-in-law of Louis the Pious as the best
candidate for Egbert's wife.
The following chart illustrates the conjecture relationship
(Redburh's connection to Ermengarde shown as a broken line
_ _ _ _).
NN = Landrada
__________________I______________________
I I I
Chrodegang NN Chrodbert
Bishop of Metz " fratris [Robert]
d. 766 Hruotgangi " I
I I
I I
Charlemagne = (2) Hildegarde Count Ingram Robert
d. 814 I of Hesbaye C of Worms
I I d. 822
____I __________I_ _ _ I
I I I I
Louis 'the Pious' = 1) Ermengarde ?Chrodburga? Robert
King of the Franks I (m. 794) <Redburga, C of Paris
(rex Francorum) I d. 818 Rædburh> d. 866
814-840 I = Egbert I
b. 778; d. 840 I (m. 799x802) V
I d. 838/839 <CAPET>
I I
__________________I_________ _____I_________
I I I I I I I
Lothar Pepin I Rotrude Louis Ethelwulf Ethelstan
fl. ___I fl. <Æthelwulf> <Æthelstan>
795-855 I 805-876 b. ca. 802- d. 850
Hildegarde 806
d. 858
There is no noted issue concerning consanguinity, as least
insofar as has been noted as yet. Ethelwulf, son of Egbert and
Redburh, was married (2ndly) to Judith, daughter of Charles
(the Bald), King of France and son of Louis 'the Pious'.
However, Charles was the son of Louis by his 2nd wife Judith.
Judith (the wife of Ethelwulf) was not related to Redburh.
There are possibly similar names in other families. By his
3rd wife Chruodhaid, Charles Martel had a son Bernhard, and
allegedly Bernhard's daughter Rothais (or Chruodhaid) was the
concubine of her cousin Pepin, King of Italy (d. 810, brother
of Louis the Pious). While the title 'king of the Franks' in
the Trinity College MS cited by Searle seems definitive, the
matter cannot be shown as proven.
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] William George Searle, Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Kings and Nobles:
The Succession of the Bishops and the Pedigrees of the Kings
and Nobles [Cambridge: the University Press, 1899], p. 343.
Text and annotations (entitled Anglo-Saxon Pedigrees
Annotated-Part 1, transcribed by Michael Wood) courtesy
Foundation for Medieval Genealogy, http://fmg.ac/
See the SGM archives for numerous discussions on this issue.
[2] Francisco Antonio Doria, <Fwd: Re: Reburga-Raedburh: meaning
of 'sororia'>, SGM, , 9 June 1998.
* John P. Ravilious
Peter Stewart
giving some rationale for preferring one idea to another.
For starters, if Rædburh is supposed to be possibly an Anglo-Saxon rendering
of Ruodburga, are there examples of the name of any Frankish duke, king or
other called Ruodbert becoming "Rædbert" across the Channel?
And if the onomastic connection can be supported at all, why seize on just
one family with royal links using names with the "Chrod-" element? Why not
look at the family of Madelgarde, whose daughter by Charlemagne was named
Chrothildis? Or the mothers of his daughters Ruotrudis and Ruodhaid? Or the
family of his daughter-in-law Ruothais who married Pippin, king of Italy?
If these are to be eliminated, why? And why not also the family of Count
Ingramn?
Peter Stewart
<The...@aol.com> wrote in message news:324.b49366...@aol.com...
John P. Ravilious
I thought the rationale behind the conjecture was
straightforward, but nonetheless:
If the language of the Trinity College MS. in question is to be
taken verbatim, we are looking for a sister-in-law of the King of the
Franks (or, a King of the Franks anyway). One might argue re: Pepin of
Italy or another Carolingian of the period, but again, using the text
without additional inference we should be looking at Charlemagne or
Louis le Debonair.
My point: that Louis makes better sense, chronologically, and
his wife was a daughter of Count Ingram. Ruodburga, or Redburh, makes
a nice fit.
Does this disprove other possibilities? At this point,
certainly not. It merely seems to be the best interpretation of what
evidence and facts we have to hand.
As to your question concderning any examples of the name of
any male Frank called Ruodbert being rendered "Rædbert" in England, I
am not aware of any. Perhaps someone with direct knowledge (pro or
con) can chime in on this question.
Cheers,
John
Peter Stewart
> Dear Peter,
>
> I thought the rationale behind the conjecture was
> straightforward, but nonetheless:
>
> If the language of the Trinity College MS. in question is to be
> taken verbatim, we are looking for a sister-in-law of the King of the
> Franks (or, a King of the Franks anyway). One might argue re: Pepin of
> Italy or another Carolingian of the period, but again, using the text
> without additional inference we should be looking at Charlemagne or
> Louis le Debonair.
>
> My point: that Louis makes better sense, chronologically, and
> his wife was a daughter of Count Ingram. Ruodburga, or Redburh, makes
> a nice fit.
>
> Does this disprove other possibilities? At this point,
> certainly not. It merely seems to be the best interpretation of what
> evidence and facts we have to hand.
>
> As to your question concderning any examples of the name of
> any male Frank called Ruodbert being rendered "Rædbert" in England, I
> am not aware of any. Perhaps someone with direct knowledge (pro or
> con) can chime in on this question.
>From "a nice fit" to "the best interpretaion" is a long gap that needs
to be filled up with some kind of rationale if others are expected to
agree.
I understood that the date of the document cited by Searle is unknown,
so that the preference for Louis over Charlemagne or another Frankish
king of the same era is just another degree of conjecture, not in
itself a firm rationale.
Louis was a king (of Aquitaine) from 781, so that the chronological
overlap with his father Charlemagne ought to be considered in this
matter.
My point is that presenting one possibility in isolation from a number
of others - that are not mentioned, much less discussed - without
giving reasons for the promotion of one throry rather than another, can
be misleading.
Peter Stewart
The...@aol.com
Dear Peter,
Thanks for your reply yesterday to my post.
My reply of yesterday, concerning the rationale for the
placement of Rædburh in the family of Count Ingram, addressed
(on chronological and other grounds) the questions you raised
concerning my placement of her in "just one family with royal
links using names with the "Chrod-" element", i.e. that of Count
Ingram.
As to your first question:
" For starters, if Rædburh is supposed to be possibly an
Anglo-Saxon rendering of Ruodburga, are there examples of
the name of any Frankish duke, king or other called Ruodbert
becoming "Rædbert" across the Channel?"
There is one early example of Rædbert, that of Eorpwald, son
of Rædbert, a king in East Anglia, who apparently converted to
Christianity in the early 7th century. This is obviously not a
Frankish example, but does indicate that the name Rædbert did in
fact exist before the time of Egbert and Rædburh. The only
subsequent examples I note of a (possibly) pertinent cross-channel
name change are 11th century, where we have assorted Roberts
(including dukes of Normandy) being called Rodbeorht in
Anglo-Saxon records, ca. 1050 and later [1].
To what extent Rædbert and Rodbeorht may, or may not, be
phonetically similar (or, specifically, to a 9th century
Anglo-Saxon ear) I am not certain. Unfortunately, I see no
9th or 10th century examples that would bear directly on the
matter.
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] W. G. Searle, Onomasticon Ango-Saxonicum (Cambridge:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 1897), pp. 393, 402.
Peter Stewart
<The...@aol.com> wrote in message news:56f.4cbeff...@aol.com...
> Friday, 8 September, 2006
>
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> Thanks for your reply yesterday to my post.
>
> My reply of yesterday, concerning the rationale for the
> placement of Rædburh in the family of Count Ingram, addressed
> (on chronological and other grounds) the questions you raised
> concerning my placement of her in "just one family with royal
> links using names with the "Chrod-" element", i.e. that of Count
> Ingram.
I must be missing something - an entire post perhaps.
All I can find in your reply yesterday is:
"...using the text without additional inference we should be looking at
Charlemagne or Louis le Debonair. [para] My point: that Louis makes better
sense, chronologically, and his wife was a daughter of Count Ingram.
Ruodburga, or Redburh, makes a nice fit."
Taking the text without additional inference to indicate either Charlemagne
or his son Louis involves narrowing down the chronology to before late 813,
otherwise you must add an additional inference that the author for some
unknown reason wrote of a "king" when he meant an emperor, "of the Franks"
when he meant of the Romans. Charlemange was emperor from December 800,
Louis from August/September 813. Within this timeframe, until July 810
Charlemagne's elder son Pippin was still living, a king and a Frank although
king of the Lombards. If the author in England must be inferred to have
overlooked the higher title of either Charlemagne or Louis, why not the
territorial title of Pippin? The last had a son by a lady name Chrothais,
closely related Adalhard and Wala, abbots of Corbie. Why could she not have
had a sister name Chrotburgis?
> As to your first question:
>
> " For starters, if Rædburh is supposed to be possibly an
> Anglo-Saxon rendering of Ruodburga, are there examples of
> the name of any Frankish duke, king or other called Ruodbert
> becoming "Rædbert" across the Channel?"
>
> There is one early example of Rædbert, that of Eorpwald, son
> of Rædbert, a king in East Anglia, who apparently converted to
> Christianity in the early 7th century. This is obviously not a
> Frankish example, but does indicate that the name Rædbert did in
> fact exist before the time of Egbert and Rædburh. The only
> subsequent examples I note of a (possibly) pertinent cross-channel
> name change are 11th century, where we have assorted Roberts
> (including dukes of Normandy) being called Rodbeorht in
> Anglo-Saxon records, ca. 1050 and later [1].
>
> To what extent Rædbert and Rodbeorht may, or may not, be
> phonetically similar (or, specifically, to a 9th century
> Anglo-Saxon ear) I am not certain. Unfortunately, I see no
> 9th or 10th century examples that would bear directly on the
> matter
It would also bear directly on the matter if you could find any female in
the Robertian lineage who has a name beginning with "Rod-". "Rodbeorht" is
far from "Rædbert" (it is only the first syllable that matters here, of
course).
So far we have absolutely nothing except an impression, without support from
onomastics, linguistics or circumstances, to direct the search in this
particular direction.
Peter Stewart
Steve Barnhoorn
name Redburh or Rædburh appear? I noticed it was not written anywhere
in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle or Asser's biography of Alfred the Great.
Does anyone have any idea of any contemporaneous source?
Ginny Wagner
Possibly you should be looking for Burhred ... I've listed
some webpages that give a Redburh (cited at 241.
Montague-Smith, Royal Line of Succession, p. 28.) then later
we find a Burhred.
If I understand it properly, Redburh was a female, sister of
Mercian king Alfred the Great, then later down the Saxon
line, came Burhred who was the last Saxon king of Mercia,
routed by the Danes and is mentioned in the Anglo Saxon
Chronicles between 768 and 964AD as well as the Gesta Albini
(of St. Albans, Matthew Paris). Around the early 12c,
another Burhred appears in Talbot's translation of the Vitae
of Christina of Markyate.
Page 171 of Keats-Rohan's Domesay People had a Buered, a
Domesday tenant of Robert de Tosny of Stafford. His lands
were held in 1166 by Geoffrey of Coppenhall. Ulger of
Coppenhall occurs c. 1140 (Hist. Coll. Staffs., i. 181,
240-3). i., fol. 249c; i, fol. 249c.
http://members.aol.com/davidwilma/family/ROYAL001.HTM#subj20
0000000
or tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/kt8ek
.4E+9. Alpin; King of Scotland, founder of the House of
Alpin; d. 834.241
Known children of Alpin and an unknown spouse were:
.2E+9. i. Kenneth MacAlpin I.
Known children of Egbert and Redburh (see #.4E+9) were as
follows:
.2E+9. i. Ethelwulf.
ii. Athelstan; Under-King of Kent, 839-850.
Known children of Oslac and an unknown spouse were:
.2E+9. i. Osburh.
AND
Generation Twenty-Eight
.2E+9. Kenneth MacAlpin I (Alpin , #.4E+9); King of
Scotland, 839-860.
Known children of Kenneth MacAlpin I and an unknown spouse
were:
.1E+9. i. Constantine II.
Known children of Ethelwulf and Osburh (see #.2E+9) were as
follows:
.1E+9. i. Alfred The Great.
ii. Athelstan.
iii. Ethelbald; King of England 858-860; m. Judith his
stepmother.238
iv. Ethelbert; King of England, 860-866 and Under-King of
Kent, 858-860.
v. Ethelbert; King of England, 866-871.
vi. Ethelswith; m. Brughred;239 d. 888.240
Known children of Ethelred Mucel and Edburh (see #.2E+9)
were:
.1E+9. i. Ealhswith.
at http://www.stirnet.com/HTML/genie/ancient/ms/saxons03.htm
or tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/fmrha
[with sources listed as The Royal Line of Sucession and
others at the bottom of the page.]
Redburh, sister of king of franks, possibly Charlemagne so
possibly daughter of Pepin the Short, king of the Franks.
who married Egbert, King of Wessex (806-857), son of
Ealhmund, underking of Kent (a 786)
later on the page we find a Burhred:
There was a Burhred who was king of Mercia, married to
Aethelswith (sister of Alfred the Great), was expelled by
the Danes and died in Rome ca. 873. In the Gesta Albini,
Vol. 1, pg 408, Matthaei Parisiensis: Rex Burhredus Romam
profectus obiit ibidem anno domini DCCCLXXIV. He also
occurs in the Anglo Saxon Chronicles ca. 854 and later.
From The Coming of the Vikings at
http://www.roman-britain.org/chase/_vikings.htm
Burhred became king of Mercia in 852 and was witness (among
others) to an agreement between abbot Ceolred of Medhamsted
and Wulfred, possibly an East-Anglian nobleman. The
following year, assisted by king Æthelwulf of Wessex,
Burhred reduced the population of North Wales, later that
year cementing the Mercia-Wessex alliance by marrying
Æthelwulf's daughter; the same year, his new brother-in-law
prince Ælfred was sent by his father Æthelwulf to be
educated in Rome. In 868 Burhred applied to Æthelwulf for
aid against a Danish army which had taken the Mercian town
of Nottingham. He was unable to retake the town, and he held
an unsteady peace with the Danes throughout that winter. The
following year, the Danish army withdrew back to their
capital at Jorvik (York), but the year after that they again
plundered their way south through Mercia, destroying the
Abbey at Medhamsted and taking the town of Thetford, slaying
king Edmund of the East Angles that winter. Burhred made
other peace treaties with the Danes in 872 and 873, but was
finally expelled from his capital at Tamworth in 874,
whereupon he escaped to Rome. The Danes, in the meantime,
gave the government of Mercia into the hands of the Thane
Ceolwulf. Burhred died in exile at Rome and was buried there
in the church of Sancta Maria.
Burhred was effectively the last monarch of the Anglic
kingdom of Mercia, those who followed were descended mainly
from the royal house of Wessex, who treated Mercia as a
petty province within their own Anglish dominion.
Re Talbot's Christina of Markyate:
And in the story of Christina of Markyate, b. ca. 1100:
The bishop [Ralph Flambard], enraged at being deluded by a
mere girl, determined to have his revenge. About 1115 he
persuaded her parents to give her in marriage to a friend of
his named Burhred, ...
hth, Ginny Wagner