Link between Charlemagne and Holy Roman Empire
jcbou
Is there somes genealogic links betweem Charlemagne and Holy Roman
Emperors as Othon I or Henri I
Thank you for your answer
Patrick MARIETTE
Leo van de Pas
I
Louis I the Pious 778-840
I
Gisela de France 819-874
I
Ingeltrud de Friaul 837-870
I
Haduwig/Hedwig von Babenberg
I
Heinrich I 'the Fowler', Emperor, 876-936
I
Otto I 'the Great', Emperor 912-973
Hope this helps.
Leo van de Pas
Frank H. Johansen
"Skandinavisk Historisk Magazin" has published this:
Charlemagne
I
Emperor Lothar I
I
Helletrude, m. Count Berengar of Spoleto
I
Baba, m. Count Heinrich of Babenberg
I
Hedwig, m. Duke Otto of Saxony
I
King Heirich I of Germany and the Romans
I
Emperor Otto I
But they have published a lot of controverisal material. One of the main
editors claim agantic descent from the Egyptain Pharaoes!
FHJ
Frank H. Johansen
Frank H. Johansen wrote:
> Leo van de Pas wrote:
>
> > At 12:32 PM 2/27/98 +0100, you wrote:
> > >Is there somes genealogic links betweem Charlemagne and Holy Roman
> > >Emperors as Othon I or Henri I
> > >
> > >Thank you for your answer
> > >
> > >Patrick MARIETTE
> > >
> > Charlemagne 742-814
> > I
> > Louis I the Pious 778-840
> > I
> > Gisela de France 819-874
> > I
> > Ingeltrud de Friaul 837-870
> > I
> > Haduwig/Hedwig von Babenberg
> > I
> > Heinrich I 'the Fowler', Emperor, 876-936
> > I
> > Otto I 'the Great', Emperor 912-973
>
> "Skandinavisk Historisk Magazin" has published this:
>
> Charlemagne
Ofcourse, Louis I should be between Charlemagne and Lothar!
Frank H. Johansen
Frank H. Johansen wrote:
> Frank H. Johansen wrote:
>
> > Leo van de Pas wrote:
> >
> > > At 12:32 PM 2/27/98 +0100, you wrote:
> > > >Is there somes genealogic links betweem Charlemagne and Holy Roman
> > > >Emperors as Othon I or Henri I
> > > >
> > > >Thank you for your answer
> > > >
> > > >Patrick MARIETTE
> > > >
> > > Charlemagne 742-814
> > > I
> > > Louis I the Pious 778-840
> > > I
> > > Gisela de France 819-874
> > > I
> > > Ingeltrud de Friaul 837-870
> > > I
> > > Haduwig/Hedwig von Babenberg
> > > I
> > > Heinrich I 'the Fowler', Emperor, 876-936
> > > I
> > > Otto I 'the Great', Emperor 912-973
> >
> > "Skandinavisk Historisk Magazin" has published this:
> >
> > Charlemagne
>
> Offcourse, Louis I should be between Charlemagne and Lothar!
>
> > I
> > Emperor Lothar I
> > I
> > Helletrude, m. Count Berengar of Spoleto
Stoyan says: "837-841 Herzog v.Spoleto, Tochter Baba; H.v.Schnehen.
Umstritten; Rösch"
So, can this H.v.Schnehen (Heinrich?) be indentified as Henirch of Babenberg?
Leo van de Pas
Dear Mr. Mann,
I am going through the additional lines you so kindly
supplied. I am having trouble with one link. The man you call
Godefrid of Haithabu, according to Erich von Brandenburg was murdered,
and according to Rosch he died in June 885. This may help you with
your dates. But, more seriously, neither source gives him children.
I only have Weiss 5th edition and that simply says Heinrich I the Fowler
married the daughter of Count Dietrich of Ringheim. No mention of a
Karolingian grandmother. Even Turton does not make Godefrid the
father-in-law of Dietrich von Ringelheim.
By the way---I looked up Faris---but he mainly starts with the much
later Plantagenet Kings---how does this source throw a light on
Otto I's descend from Charlemagne?
Next problem: You call him Arnulf of Germany died after 868.
Rosch calls him (after all Rosch is a German) :
Arnulf von Karnten, born circa 850, died 8 December 899 in Regensburg.
He gives him three spouses, and one mistress. In circa 870 he married
an unnamed lady, between 870 and 875 he marries Ellinrat (of unknown
origin) she died after 24 May 914. His third wife, unnamed married about
888. Then also about 888 he starts an affaire with Oda (Konradischer origin,
but not properly identified) she died after 903. Arnulf is born circa 850,
and you give his daughter, Hedwige, as born circa 846.
Erich Brandenburg, also does not give Arnulf Hedwige as daughter.
Leo van de Pas
At 08:18 PM 2/27/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Leo van de Pas wrote:
>>
>> At 12:32 PM 2/27/98 +0100, you wrote:
>> >Is there somes genealogic links betweem Charlemagne and Holy Roman
>> >Emperors as Othon I or Henri I
>
>> Charlemagne 742-814
>> I
>> Louis I the Pious 778-840
>> I
>> Gisela de France 819-874
>> I
>> Ingeltrud de Friaul 837-870
>> I
>> Haduwig/Hedwig von Babenberg
>> I
>> Heinrich I 'the Fowler', Emperor, 876-936
>> I
>> Otto I 'the Great', Emperor 912-973
>
>Alternatively:
>
>Direct Descendants of Charlemagne
>
> 1 [1] Charlemagne b: 2 Apr 747 d: 28 Jan 813/14 ref #: Ä50-13
> *2nd Wife of [1] Charlemagne:
>... +Hildegarde von Linzgau b: 758 d: 30 Apr 783 ref #: Ä182-5
> 2 [6] Louis I de France b: Aug 778 d: 20 Jun 840 ref #: Ä140-14
>.... +Ermengarde de Hesbaye b: ca. 777 d: 3 Oct 818 ref #: (Ä140-14)
>. 3 Lothair I of the West b: ca. 795 d: 29 Sep 855 ref #: Ä140-15
>...... +Ermengarde de Orleans b: ca. 795 d: 20 Mar 850/51 ref #:
>(Ä140-15)
>.. 4 [2] Lothar II de Lorraine b: 827 d: 8 Aug 869 ref #: Ä145-16
>.. *2nd Wife of [2] Lothar II de Lorraine:
>....... +Waldrada b: ca. 824 d: Aft. 868 ref #: (Ä145-16)
>.... 5 Gisela de Lorraine b: ca. 863 d: Bef. 26 Oct 907
>......... +Godefrid of Haithabu b: ca. 834 d: Aft. 873 ref #: S217-38
>..... 6 Reginhilde von Friesland b: ca. 860
>.......... +Dietrich von Ringelheim b: ca. 872 d: 8 Dec 917 ref #:
>(Ä141-18)
>....... 7 [4] Mechtilde von Ringelheim b: ca. 890 d: 14 Mar 967/68 ref
>#: (Ä141-18)
>............ +[3] Henry I of Germany b: 876 d: 2 Jul 936 ref #: Ä141-18
>........ 8 [5] Otto I of the West b: 23 Nov 912 d: 7 May 973 ref #:
>Ä147-19
>. 3 Louis II, King of East Franks b: 806 d: 28 Aug 876 ref #: S172-41
>...... +Emma von Eritgau b: ca. 810 d: 31 Jan 875/76
>.. 4 Carloman of Bavaria b: Bef. 829 ref #: S172-40
>....... +Litwinde
>.... 5 Arnulf of Germany d: Aft. 868 ref #: S172-39
>......... +Oda von Bavaria
>..... 6 Hedwige von Bavaria b: ca. 846 d: 24 Dec 903 ref #: S172-38
>.......... +Otto von Saxony b: ca. 836 d: 30 Nov 912 ref #: Ä141-17
>....... 7 [3] Henry I of Germany b: 876 d: 2 Jul 936 ref #: Ä141-18
>............ +[4] Mechtilde von Ringelheim b: ca. 890 d: 14 Mar 967/68
>ref #: (Ä141-18)
>........ 8 [5] Otto I of the West b: 23 Nov 912 d: 7 May 973 ref #:
>Ä147-19
>
>--
>FWIW; AFAIK; IMHO; YMMV; yadda, yadda, yadda.
>
>Regards, Ed Mann mailto:edl...@mail2.lcia.com
>
>References:
> Ä = Weis, _Ancestral_Roots_, 7th ed.
> BxP = _Burke's_Dormant_&_Extinct_Peerages_, [page].
> BPci = _Burke's_Peerage_, 101st ed., [page].
> BRF = Weir, _Britain's_Royal_Families_, [page].
> F = Faris, _Plantagenet_Ancestry_, [page:para].
> W = Weis, _Magna_Charta_Sureties,_1215_, 4th ed.
>
>
>
Todd A. Farmerie
> At 08:18 PM 2/27/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >.. 4 [2] Lothar II de Lorraine b: 827 d: 8 Aug 869 ref #: Ä145-16
> >.. *2nd Wife of [2] Lothar II de Lorraine:
> >....... +Waldrada b: ca. 824 d: Aft. 868 ref #: (Ä145-16)
> >.... 5 Gisela de Lorraine b: ca. 863 d: Bef. 26 Oct 907
> >......... +Godefrid of Haithabu b: ca. 834 d: Aft. 873 ref #: S217-38
> >..... 6 Reginhilde von Friesland b: ca. 860
> >.......... +Dietrich von Ringelheim b: ca. 872 d: 8 Dec 917 ref #:
> >(Ä141-18)
> >....... 7 [4] Mechtilde von Ringelheim b: ca. 890 d: 14 Mar 967/68 ref
> >#: (Ä141-18)
The maternal origins of Mechtilde is a matter of some debate. While
both versions I have seen name her mother from Freisland, they provide
different fathers. Moriarty placed her within the same family (of local
origin) which were to become Counts of Holland, while a couple of German
sources I have seen show her as daughter of the viking Godefrid (I
recommend not using Haithabu to identify him, as it brings to ming
Schwennicke's wretched pedigree of that non-entity kingdom), who was
paid off with Frisian land. Even were this so, it is far from certain
that that is the same Godefrid who married Lothar's daughter, or that if
it was, that she was mother of his children. Most cautious accounts of
Lothar's family do not show children of this marriage.
[snip]
> >.... 5 Arnulf of Germany d: Aft. 868 ref #: S172-39
> >......... +Oda von Bavaria
> >..... 6 Hedwige von Bavaria b: ca. 846 d: 24 Dec 903 ref #: S172-38
> >.......... +Otto von Saxony b: ca. 836 d: 30 Nov 912 ref #: Ä141-17
I do wish Sheppard hadn't done this. This traditional link is, as far
as I know, entirely unsupported (it was probably invented as a
justification for the Saxon dynasty "inheriting" the royal and imperial
titles). The vast majority of modern sources show Hedwig as daughter of
a Henry, and there seems to be a developing concensus that this Henry
was the Popponid (Babenberger) Duke of Thuringia. Several recent
authors (including Settipani and Keats-Rohan) have accepted the
identification of Henry's wife as Ingeltrude, sister of Emperor Berenger
I.
taf
phy...@computerpro.com
In article <1.5.4.32.1998022...@mail.iinet.net.au>,
leov...@iinet.net.au (Leo van de Pas) wrote:
>
> ............. I am having trouble with one link. The man you call
> Godefrid of Haithabu, according to Erich von Brandenburg was murdered,
> and according to Rosch he died in June 885. This may help you with
> your dates. But, more seriously, neither source gives him children.
> I only have Weiss 5th edition and that simply says Heinrich I the Fowler
> married the daughter of Count Dietrich of Ringheim. No mention of a
> Karolingian grandmother. Even Turton does not make Godefrid the
> father-in-law of Dietrich von Ringelheim.
>
<snippage>
> Ed Mann wrote:
> >
> >.... 5 Gisela de Lorraine b: ca. 863 d: Bef. 26 Oct 907=09
> >......... +Godefrid of Haithabu b: ca. 834 d: Aft. 873
> >ref #: S217-38
> >..... 6 Reginhilde von Friesland b: ca. 860 =09
> >.......... +Dietrich von Ringelheim b: ca. 872 d: 8
> >Dec 917 ref #:
> >
In Paul Theroff's files referring to the kings of the Haithabu, I find the
following information:
Godefrid, 15th King of Haithabu, oldest son of Harald Klak, murdered
885/6, married 882 Gisela, daughter of Emperor Lothar II; had daughter
Reinhilde, died 917, married ca. 900 Dietrich II of Saxony.
Theroff also seems to have a lot of information not mentioned in some previous
discussions of Danish/Scandinavian kings. I don't know his sources (or
credentials <g>).
Disclaimer: I'm strictly an amateur (a lover) of genealogical pursuits; I have
no credentials relevant in historical or genealogical fields. I've been
reading this group for a couple months, and you're quite a helpful, although
intimidating, bunch <g>.
My primary interest has been in Norwegian ancestors, and I haven't pursued
lines that lead elsewhere. These lines become so intertwingled with the rest
of Europe in the medieval period, though, that I've been surprised not to see
more discussion of them.
Thanks to all for information shared,
Pam Hystad
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Richard Borthwick
At 06:12 PM 28/02/98 -0500, you wrote:
<snip>
>I do wish Sheppard hadn't done this. This traditional link is, as far
>as I know, entirely unsupported (it was probably invented as a
>justification for the Saxon dynasty "inheriting" the royal and imperial
>titles). The vast majority of modern sources show Hedwig as daughter of
>a Henry, and there seems to be a developing concensus that this Henry
>was the Popponid (Babenberger) Duke of Thuringia. Several recent
>authors (including Settipani and Keats-Rohan) have accepted the
>identification of Henry's wife as Ingeltrude, sister of Emperor Berenger
>I.
>
>taf
>
work or elswhere? Also a similar question about where K-R deals with the
question. I would dearly love to see the arguments for the marriage and that
Hathui/Hedwig was also dau. of Ingeltude (and not some other possible
spouse). I have no problem accepting Hathui as the dau. of Henry
(probabalistic in character though the argument is). The only information I
have on the possibility of and Ingeltrude/Henry marriage is the discussion
by K F Werner in his *Die Nachkommen Karls des Grossen* 452 #25. K A
Eckhardt *Genealogische Funde zur allgemeinen Geschichte* (1963) p.49f seems
to be the initiator of this theory.
Eckhardt (according to Werner) bases this on two sources.
(1) on an entry in the Confraternity Book of Reichenau abbey where a pair
Heimirich and Engiltrud are named.
(2) Agius in his *Vita Hathumodae* indicates that a brother of Hathumoda had
as wife 'regum neptem'.
Otto duke of Saxony was a brother of Hathumoda (d.874, Abbess of Gandesheim)
and Hathui was his wife. Hathumoda's other known brother was Bruno (d.880)
duke of Saxony. If Otto was the brother referred to then Hathui was a niece
(neptis) of a king. An Engiltrud/Ingeltrud (b.837/40 d. after 2 Apr 870) was
a sister of the emperor Berengar I (as Todd has noted) and thus a dau. of
Gisla dau. Louis the Pious. So if The Engeltrud mentioned in (1) is
identical with Berengar's sister and if Otto is the brother of Huthumoda
being referred to in (2) then Hathui would indeed be the niece of the
emperor Berengar. There may be more to the story than this since Werner's
work. The theory is ingenious (like many of Eckhardt's theories) but Werner
seems to have chronological doubts and does not indicate a spouse for
Ingeltrud. I would be most interested to hear more about this.
>
Stewart Baldwin
phy...@computerpro.com wrote:
>In Paul Theroff's files referring to the kings of the Haithabu, I find the
>following information:
> Godefrid, 15th King of Haithabu, oldest son of Harald Klak, murdered
> 885/6, married 882 Gisela, daughter of Emperor Lothar II; had daughter
> Reinhilde, died 917, married ca. 900 Dietrich II of Saxony.
>Theroff also seems to have a lot of information not mentioned in some previous
>discussions of Danish/Scandinavian kings. I don't know his sources (or
>credentials <g>).
Paul Theroff's source was Schwennicke's Europaische Stammtafeln, which
is usually a pretty good source, but blundered completely in this
"Haithabu" table, which should never have been included. Indeed,
although Hedeby (Haithabu) was an important commercial center during
the period, there is, to my knowledge, no evidence whatsoever that
there ever was a "kingdom" named Haithabu. The "Haithabu" table in
Schwennicke is a curious attempt to combine the Danish kings mentioned
in contemporary sources with Norwegian kings from the sagas. Some of
the kings given in the "Haithabu" chart were in fact historical, and
were referred to as kings of the Danes in the contemporary Frankish
chronicles, but the relationships given in the tables cannot be
trusted.
Stewart Baldwin
Frank H. Johansen
Stewart Baldwin wrote:
There was never a "kingdom of Haithabu" (or Hedeby, as it was called in Norse). It
was the mightiest king (kind of high-king) in the area that controlled Haithabu.
This Goddfried was probably the same as the Norwegian King Gudröd. It was probably
written Gothred, wich the Germans easily adopted as Godfried. This
Gothred/Gudröd/Godfried probably controlled most of south-eastern Norway, the
west-coast of Sweden (were the Danes actually lived) and lands both in northern
Jutland and southern Jutland (wich later was called Schleswig). His son by a local
Norwegian woman, Halvdan the Black, became father of the first King of Norway,
Harold the Fairhaired. His son by the daughter of the last "High-King" of this
area, Hárekr, became King in Jutland. In the Danish chronicles he's called Erik
(Hárekr-Erikr-Erik). A third son became king of the most southern part of Norway
(Agder) and was possible an agnatic ancestor of the Kings of Dublin. A fourth son
was possibly an agnatic ancestor of the Earls of the Orkneys and the Dukes of
Normandy (wich in the Norwegian Saga's was kalled "Ruda-Jarl" wich means "Earl of
Ruda (Rouen)"
Frank H. Johansen
frank.j...@hm.telia.no
Stewart Baldwin
>Stewart Baldwin wrote:
>Frank H. Johansen
>frank.j...@hm.telia.no
Since you did not cite any sources for the above claims, it is
difficult to respond in full detail to the above. However, it is my
opinion that little (if any) of the above can be documented, and that
most of it is probably incorrect. A few observations:
1. It is extremely unlikely on chronological grounds that Ivar (d.
873), earliest traceable ancestor of the kings of Dublin, was a
descendent (or son) of a Norwegain king who in turn was son of a king
who died in 885.
2. No known early source makes Halfdan the Black a son of the king
Gudrod mentioned in Ynglingatal. There is a good possibility that it
is a late invention, made to enhance the genealogy of Harald Fairhair.
See the article "A Fragment of Viking History" by Jon Steffensen, in
Saga Book of the Viking Society, XVIII (1970-3), 59-78.
3. Both of the king Horics of Denmark who are mentioned in the
Frankish annals come before the above Godefrid, so it is unlikely that
the second of these was Godefrid's son.
4. The identification of the Gudrod mentioned in Ynglingatal with one
or more of the Godefrids mentioned as kings of the Danes in the
Frankish annals is uncertain.
5. Much of the above appears to be based on twelfth and thirteenth
century Icelandic sources, which have a pretty poor track record for
the history of ninth century Denmark, when compared to the
contemporary Frankish chronicles.
All of the above observations make me suspect that you have taken your
information from a secondary source which was not very careful in its
treatment of the evidence. If you want to provide more details
regarding the sources and reasons for the above claims, we could
discuss this in more detail.
Stewart Baldwin
[the standard apologies for omitting diacritical marks]
Frank H. Johansen
Stewart Baldwin wrote:
I might have mixed up two different Godfrieds. I'll check my sources...
Frank H. J.
Todd A. Farmerie
Frank H. Johansen wrote:
>
> Stewart Baldwin wrote:
>
> > All of the above observations make me suspect that you have taken your
> > information from a secondary source which was not very careful in its
> > treatment of the evidence. If you want to provide more details
> > regarding the sources and reasons for the above claims, we could
> > discuss this in more detail.
>
> I might have mixed up two different Godfrieds. I'll check my sources...
>
I think Frank has mixed up two Godfrieds. A standard reconstruction
places an earlier Godfried, who fl. 810, as identical to Gudrod,
"father" of Halfdan the Black. This view was championed by Howorth,
among other, but is centered on the assumption that the Heimskringla can
be accepted as valid historical tradition for this period. Considering
that it was written centuries later, this has more recently been
questioned. There are internal inconsistancies which suggest that
independant dynasties were cobbled together (specifically at the link
between Halfdan the Black and the earlier dynasty), and it has also been
suggested that the connections between Harald Fairhair and St.Olaf and
his half-brother Harald Hardrada have been invented to provide a
dynastic continuity.
taf