Adelais and Bonne: Whose the mom? [was Re: Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants]
Jay
following children:
Otto
Ermengarde* m. Adalbert I of Namur
Gerberga* m. Lambert "The Bearded" count of Louvain
Charles
Louis
*persons of particular interest to me.
I have two wives listed for Charles
Bonne of the Ardennes
Adelais
which children go with which wives, if known.
I have seen
Adelais listed as the daughter of Robert de Vermandois and Adelaid of
Burgundy
would this make her the same woman who married Geoffrey Grisgonelle
count of Anjou?, Seneschal of France?? If so Geoffrey would have to
be the first husband and Adelhaid the second wife.
Can anyone help in sorting out these folks and providing the exact
nature of the evidence behind the identification of these people?
Jay
Peter Stewart
Jay wrote:
> Charles duke of Lower Lothringia had if my information is correct the
> following children:
>
> Otto
> Ermengarde* m. Adalbert I of Namur
> Gerberga* m. Lambert "The Bearded" count of Louvain
> Charles
> Louis
>
> *persons of particular interest to me.
>
> I have two wives listed for Charles
>
> Bonne of the Ardennes
> Adelais
>
> which children go with which wives, if known.
First, jettison your source for the wives: there was no such person as
"Bonne of the Ardennes", and your suggestion below about the presumed
second wife's parentage is off-track as well.
Charles _may_ have had two wives, but this is far from certain. The
putative first wife's name is unknown. The evidence for her existence is
just the discrepancy between two sources, as follows:
1. 'Historia Francorum Senonensis' (MGH SS IX, pp 364-369, a generally
inaccurate work written many decades after these events, and in a
passage where the names and relationships are badly confused, says (pp
367-8) "Eodem anno rebellavit contra Karolum Hugo dux Francorum, eo quod
accepisset Karolus filiam Herberti comitis Trecarum" (In the same year
[stated to be 982, apparently in error for 986/7] Hugo [Capet], duke of
the Franks rebelled against Charles [erroneously said to have
"succeeded" his "brother" Louis & to be "son" of Lothaire, whereas
Lothaire and Charles were actually sons of Louis] because Charles would
have married the daughter of Heribert, count of Troyes). Some historians
have accepted that this marriage did take place, and the name Agnes used
to be attached to the bride for no good reason. She was said to have
been a daughter of Heribert the Elder, count palatine (died ca 980/4) by
an unknown wife before (or after) his only recorded marriage, which was
to Charles' own paternal grandmother, Eadgifu of Wessex. This is mere
speculation, as is Christian Settipani's theory that the first wife of
Charles might have been instead a daughter of Heribert's brother Robert
- who at least was count of Troyes, by right of his wife Adelaide (Wera)
of Chalon. Going by the chronology of 'Historia Francorum Senonensis',
such a wife could even have been daughter of Robert's son Heribert the
Younger, count of Troyes (died 995) by the unknown wife whom he married
in the 970s, but this would make it impossible for Charles to have
fathered the several children who were imprisoned with him and his
(then) wife Adelaide as below, and in any case conjecture on this point
may be unnecessary if the next source is to be believed as the whole
story. On the other hand, if the above report is to be credited (and I
think it is actually plausible) the interpreation should be that Hugo
Capet was driven to action by the threat that Charles might put away his
unfit wife Adelaide (see below) in order to marry a daughter, otherwise
unknown, of Heribert the Younger, count of Troyes - and, if so, this was
of course definitely prevented.
2. Richer, _Histoire de France (888–995)_, edited by Robert Latouche, 2
vols (Paris, 1930–1937, reprinted 1964) wrote that Charles was
considered unworthy (by the archbishop of Rheims) of succeeding his
brother on the throne due to his poor character and because (II p 160)
"uxorem de militari ordine sibi imparem duxerit" (he had married beneath
his rank to a woman of the vassal class). Later Richer named this wife
and Charles' children (pp 222-224), "K[arolum] ergo cum uxore Adelaide
et filio Ludovico et filiabus duabus, quarum altera Gerberga, altera
Adelaidis dicebatur...carceri dedit" (Therefore [Hugo Capet] imprisoned
Charles with his wife Adelaide and son Louis and two daughters, one
Gerberga and the other named Adelaide). NB two other sons, Otto the
eldest and Charles the youngest, and _possibly_ another daughter, were
not with them.
Ferdinand Lot, in _Les derniers Carolingiens: Lothaire, Louis V, Charles
de Lorraine, 954–991_ (Paris, 1891), tried to reconcile these statements
by suggesting two marriages, on the ground that "de militari ordine" is
not a description that could be applied to the daughter of a count of
Troyes. Others, including Christian Settipani, have gone further in
placing Charles' eldest son Otto as the offspring of a first marriage.
However, this overlooks the obvious consideration that Otto would have
been himself from a throne-worthy marriage and would have had some
powerful close relatives to advocate his succession in place of his
father, a possibility that is not adumbrated in any source.
The paternity of Ermengarde, wife of Adalbert I of Namur, is debated.
Christian Settipani in _La préhistoire des Capétiens 481-987_ part 1
(Villeneuve d'Ascq, 1993) p 339 places her as daughter of Otto, and
granddaughter of Charles, following a 12th-century continuation of
'Gesta abbatum Trudonensium', MGH SS X p 382, "Otto absque filio
reliquit post se filiam Hermengardem Namursi comitissam" (Otto, lacking
sons, left a daughter Ermengarde, countess of Namur). Others have
preferred to identify this lady with Adelaide, the daughter of Charles -
and so a sister of Otto - named above by Richer. If she was Charles'
daughter, either she is supposed to have borne two names, or there was a
third daughter, named Ermengarde, who was not incarcerated with him and
the others. This is briefly discussed, giving further references, by
Thierry Stasser in 'La descendance féminine du comte de Namur Albert I',
_Annales de la Société archéologique de Namur_ 67 (1991) p 6.
> I have seen
> Adelais listed as the daughter of Robert de Vermandois and Adelaid of
> Burgundy
> would this make her the same woman who married Geoffrey Grisgonelle
> count of Anjou?, Seneschal of France?? If so Geoffrey would have to
> be the first husband and Adelhaid the second wife.
No - the Adelaide, named by Richer, who married Charles was clearly not
the daughter of a count. The first wife of Geoffroy Grisegonelle of
Anjou was Adela, very probably daughter of Robert of Vermandois, count
of Troyes & Adelaide (Wera) of Chalon mentioned above. The evidence for
this is a genealogy written in the 12th century, found in three codices
of the annals of Saint-Aubin, see _Recueil d'annales angevines et
vendômoises_, edited by Louis Halphen (Paris, 1903) p 49, as follows:
Herbertus de Tricis
|
Robertus
|
Adela
|
Fulco
|
Gaufridus Martellus
The only trouble here is that Robert's father Heribert was count of
Meaux, Soissons & Vermandois but not of Troyes. However, that is readily
enough explained as an anachronism, from his namesake grandson.
This Countess Adela of Anjou died (perhaps in childbirth) in 974 after
giving a charter dated 6 March on her death-bed, "ego Adela...in
extremis circumvallantibus angustiis constituta", _Cartulaire de
l'abbaye de Saint-Aubin d'Angers_, edited by A Bertrand de Brousillon, 3
vols (Angers, 1896-1903) I no 3, pp 8...10.
By March 979 Geoffroy was married again, to Adelaide the widow of
Lambert, count of Chalon. This is proved by his charter of that month,
"ego Gausfredus, comes, atque uxor mea Adeleidis, atque Hugo, filius
Lanberti comitis...Signum Gausfredi, comitis, et uxoris ejus Adeleidis
et Hugonis, filii ejus", _Recueil des chartes de l'abbaye de Cluny,
edited by Auguste Bernard & Alexandre Bruel, 6 vols (Paris, 1876-1903)
II no 1474, pp 528-529. There is also a charter of Thibaud, count of
Chalon confirming his grandmother's second marriage: "comes Gaufredus
qui, post mortem praestantissimi et christianissimi comitis avi nostri
Lamberti, accepit ejus conjugem, aviam meam Adeleidem comitissam", see
André Duchesne, _Histoire de la maison de Vergy_ (Paris, 1625) p 38.
Peter Stewart
Jay
> First, jettison your source for the wives: there was no such person as
> "Bonne of the Ardennes", and your suggestion below about the presumed
> second wife's parentage is off-track as well.
Bonnes has been banished into the woods. Noted the uncertainty as to
who the mother of Charles children is, and the information you have
provided. The information I had recieved did seem fishy, good to know
what the actual sources of the information and the problems are.
>
> The paternity of Ermengarde, wife of Adalbert I of Namur, is debated.
Looks like an issue that will remain unresolved given the nature of
the record. Have made the notes concerning the difficultis of
ascertaining her parentage.
>
> By March 979 Geoffroy was married again, to Adelaide the widow of
> Lambert, count of Chalon. This is proved by his charter of that month,
> "ego Gausfredus, comes, atque uxor mea Adeleidis, atque Hugo, filius
> Lanberti comitis...Signum Gausfredi, comitis, et uxoris ejus Adeleidis
> et Hugonis, filii ejus", _Recueil des chartes de l'abbaye de Cluny,
> edited by Auguste Bernard & Alexandre Bruel, 6 vols (Paris, 1876-1903)
> II no 1474, pp 528-529. There is also a charter of Thibaud, count of
> Chalon confirming his grandmother's second marriage: "comes Gaufredus
> qui, post mortem praestantissimi et christianissimi comitis avi nostri
> Lamberti, accepit ejus conjugem, aviam meam Adeleidem comitissam", see
> André Duchesne, _Histoire de la maison de Vergy_ (Paris, 1625) p 38.
>
> Peter Stewart
Is Fulk or Foulques III " le Noir" comte d'Anjou and his sister Moritz
from the first or second marriage of Geoffroy, or is this not known?
Jay
Peter Stewart
> Peter Stewart <p_m_s...@msn.com> wrote in message news:<Utk_b.72418$Wa.4...@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
<snip>
>>By March 979 Geoffroy was married again, to Adelaide the widow of
>>Lambert, count of Chalon. This is proved by his charter of that month,
>>"ego Gausfredus, comes, atque uxor mea Adeleidis, atque Hugo, filius
>>Lanberti comitis...Signum Gausfredi, comitis, et uxoris ejus Adeleidis
>>et Hugonis, filii ejus", _Recueil des chartes de l'abbaye de Cluny,
>>edited by Auguste Bernard & Alexandre Bruel, 6 vols (Paris, 1876-1903)
>>II no 1474, pp 528-529. There is also a charter of Thibaud, count of
>>Chalon confirming his grandmother's second marriage: "comes Gaufredus
>>qui, post mortem praestantissimi et christianissimi comitis avi nostri
>>Lamberti, accepit ejus conjugem, aviam meam Adeleidem comitissam", see
>>André Duchesne, _Histoire de la maison de Vergy_ (Paris, 1625) p 38.
>>
>>Peter Stewart
>
>
> Is Fulk or Foulques III " le Noir" comte d'Anjou and his sister Moritz
> from the first or second marriage of Geoffroy, or is this not known?
Fulk Nerra was definitely from the first marriage and his brother (!)
Maurice was apparently from the second.
Fulk named his parents at least twice - see _Gallia christiana_ vol XIV,
Instrumenta col 62, charter of October 989: "Ego quidem Fulco, Dei nutu
Andecavorum comes...pro remedio animae genitoris mei Gaufridi atque
genetricis meae Adelae"; and _Cartulaire noir de la cathédrale
d’Angers_, edited by C Urseau (Paris & Angers, 1908) no 22, p 53, dated
17 January 1000: "ego in Domini nomine Fulco Andecavorum comes…pro anima
patris mei Gauffredi et matris Adelae". He was certainly born before
974, when Geoffroy's first wife died, and succeeded his father in 987.
Geoffroy's second wife was still married to her first husband when the
names of Fulk and his younger brother Geoffroy were given as charter
witnesses. Lambert of Chalon died, according to _Art de vérifier les
dates_ II, p 527, most probably on 22 February 978 - assuming a
customary twelve-month interval, his widow was probably remarried in
Chalon shortly after 22 February 979 and certainly by the following
month when Geoffroy of Anjou gave the charter, dated in Chalon, that is
quoted above.
As for Maurice, see Christian Settipani's 'Les origines maternelles du
comte de Bourgogne Otte-Guillaume: nouvelle synthèse' in _Annales de
Bourgogne_ 66 (1994) pp 35–44 for discussion of Geoffroy Grisagonelle's
second marriage, answering a counter-interpretation by Henri de
Chizelle, 'Aperçu sur le comté de Chalon-sur-Saône au Xe siècle: à
propos de la comtesse Aélis' in _Annales de Bourgogne_ 58 (1986).
According to the speculation of Christian Settipani, Adelaide was
possibly daughter of Hugo of Troyes, count in Burgundy & of an
unrecorded Willa of Burgundy; Henri de Chizelle agreed with earlier
scholars, including Mabille, that she was daughter of Giselbert, count
of Autun and Chalon, and proposed as her mother Ermengarde of Burgundy
(or Dijon), heiress of Hugo le Noir, duke of Burgundy; however, he
concluded implausibly that this Adelaide had her son named Maurice to
Lambert, count of Chalon, her first husband, and that she was remarried
not to Geoffroy of Anjou but to a different count of the same name.
Maurice was called brother to Fulk Nerra in a charter written between 24
Oct 996 & 12 Jun 1005, _Cartulaire noir de la cathédrale d'Angers_,
edited by C Urseau (Paris & Angers, 1908), no 25 p 57: "Fulco comes
Mauriciusque, frater ejus"; however in nos 16 & 17 of _Cartulaire de la
Trinité de Vendôme_ edited by C Métais, Maurice is called "cognatus"
rather than "patruus" or "avunculus" of Fulk Nerra's son Geoffroy Martel.
He was apparently named in honour of St Maurice in preference to an
established family name such as Guy or Ingelger, or Geoffroy like his
half-brother who evidently died shortly before his own birth. Possibly
this was a "nom de candidature", with the intention that he should
become bishop of Angers where the cathedral was dedicated to
Saint-Maurice (however, Settipani, op cit p 45, suggested the name
derived from a connection to the Viennois).
According to 'Gesta consulum Andegavorum', _Chroniques des comtes
d'Anjou et des seigneurs d'Amboise_, edited by Louis Halphen & René
Poupardin (Paris, 1913) p 45, he became count of Anjou, married a
daughter of Aimery, count of Saintonge, a niece of Raimond, count of
Poitou - fictional figures - by whom he was allegedly _father_ of Fulk
Nerra: "Mauricius, Gosfredi Grise Tunice filius...Duxit autem uxorem de
Alniensi pago, filiam Haimerici consulis Santonici, neptam Raimundi
Pictavensis comitis, ex qua Fulconem Nerram genuit". This account is
certainly false, possibly concocted to justify a claim of the Angevin
counts to the Saintonge (see ibid, note 3). The details are contradicted
by other more reliable sources. Kate Norgate, in _England under the
Angevin Kings_, 2 vols (London, 1887) I p 193, suggested that Maurice
might have ruled Anjou as regent during his brother's absence on a first
pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which probably started in late 1002 or early
the following year, giving some verisimilitude to the 'Gesta consulum
Andegavorum' account of his "consulship".
He first appeared as a charter witness some time before 1 May 985. If
his mother was Geoffroy's second wife Adelaide, then he may have been
conceived quite soon after her second marriage. Christian Settipani
placed her birth in 932, to allow for her as mother of Gerberge who gave
birth to Otte-Guillaume of Burgundy in 962, making a considerable
stretch to accommodate also the birth of Maurice ca 979/80 when Adelaide
must have been at the very least 46 or 47 years old — absent this
hypothesis, there is no reason to suppose she was born before ca 940 to
allow for her known daughter Mathildis to have given birth to Thibaud,
count of Chalon (possibly the eldest grandchild of Adelaide) ca 970.
Peter Stewart
Peter Stewart
This wasn't clear enough. Someone has written to me off-list querying
the interpretation I put, above, on the statement "Eodem anno rebellavit
contra Karolum Hugo dux Francorum, eo quod accepisset Karolus filiam
Herberti comitis Trecarum" (In the same year Hugo [Capet], duke of the
Franks rebelled against Charles because Charles would have married the
daughter of Heribert, count of Troyes).
As noted, some historians including Ferdinand Lot and Christian
Settipani have read "accepisset" as having an indicative sense, meaning
that Hugo rebelled against Charles because he _had_ married Heribert's
daughter.
I don't think this is sustainable. To make the point clearer, let me
settle on an ambiguous translation for "accepisset" as follows:
Hugo...rebelled against Charles because he might have married the
daughter of Heribert, count of Troyes. By this we could understand
either that the marriage was planned but not accomplished, or that it
was reported but not confirmed.
The pluperfect subjunctive "accepisset" allows for both of these, since
it suggests an allegation or possibility rather than a fact.
Now, Richer tells us that Charles was taken prisoner along with his wife
Adelaide, of the vassal class, and several children. So at the time Hugo
rebelled, Charles was _not_ married to a daughter of Heribert of Troyes.
Furthermore, there had been no such personage as Heribert, count of
Troyes until some time after 19 June 966, when Count Robert was
succeeded by his son Heribert the Younger who could not have had a
marriageable daughter until the 980s at the earliest. So it is not
practicable to make out an earlier, first amrriage of Charles to such a
woman much less to make her the mother of his eldest son Otto, as this
would lead to inevitable complications for Hugo Capet's royal election
as mentioned in my previous post.
The 'Historia Francorum Senonensis' places the rebellion in 982 but must
actually mean 987. There would be little point in Hugo Capet rebelling
_because_ Charles had married a woman acceptable as queen of the Franks,
since this could hardly forestall a move that would increase Charles's
chances of gaining the throne at the expense of Hugo's.
Consequently I think the only admissable reading of the text is that
Hugo rebelled when he did prompted by reports that Charles was then
considering or making plans to repudiate Adelaide in favour of a young
bride of fitting rank, who was daughter of Heribert, count of Troyes.
Peter Stewart
Jay
of the rebellion by Hugues Capet in 987 , (I hope I understand
correctly that, that was the cause of their imprisonemnt) then that
would also support the idea that the rebellion was instigated before
there was any repudiation, and if Charles died as a result of that
imprisonment in 991/2, there would be no possibility of a marriage to
? de Troyes daughter of Heribert, since you effectively have precluded
her status as a first wife, is not Charles imprisonment while Adelaide
is still his wife precludes a marriage to ? de Troyes as a second
wife? Or did Charles get out of prison before he died???
Jay
Peter Stewart
No, he never surfaced again after being taken prisoner on 30 March 991.
It is probable that he died shortly after he was transferred to Orleans,
possibly after January 992 when the separate datings of two charters
show that Charles was believed to be still living.
I should emphasise that Christian Settipani has added another layer of
speculation to the statement about a daughter of Heribert, count of
Troyes - as mentioned in my first post in this thread - suggesting that
this was an error for Heribert the Younger's father Robert. I find it
curious that he sets aside the chronology and person specified in a
questionable source, and then builds a new genealogy out of amending
both elements to suit a different case. But of course Christian may have
more to say on this matter.
Peter Stewart