Garnier to Maurin- Ancester of Mgvs of Spoleto ?
Jim Stevens
Per Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (269:38), Maurin, the earliest of the
margraves of Spoleto that I have found, was a Salic Frank who held lands in
Parma, Reggio, and Piacenza, 835-844.
Per Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (191:12), the Margraves of Spoleto were
descendants of GARNIER, the broter of ALARD. ALARD's unnamed daughter
probably married CARLOMAN, son of CHARLES MARTEL and Mayor of the Palace.
Approximately a century separates GARNIER and MAURIN.
Can anyone post the specific line of descent from Garnier to Maurin ?
Today is the first day of the rest of your life ! (jste...@iquest.net) Jim
Visit my genealogy website at
http://www.gendex.com/users/jast/index.html#Welcome
Jim Stevens
>Jim Stevens (jste...@iquest.net) wrote:
>
>>Per Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (269:38), Maurin, the earliest of the
>>margraves of Spoleto that I have found, was a Salic Frank who held lands in
>>Parma, Reggio, and Piacenza, 835-844.
>>
>>Per Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (191:12), the Margraves of Spoleto were
>>descendants of GARNIER, the broter of ALARD. ALARD's unnamed daughter
>>probably married CARLOMAN, son of CHARLES MARTEL and Mayor of the Palace.
>>Approximately a century separates GARNIER and MAURIN.
>>
>>Can anyone post the specific line of descent from Garnier to Maurin ?
<magasnip - incl. the wonderful chart !>
Thanks, Stewart, You either have one heck of a charting program of you put
a lot of time and effort into your reply. I am assuming the latter.
Well, it seems I opened up a much stinkier can of worms than I ever imagined.
It appears there were two rival families that produced margraves, dukes, or
whatever we want to call them, of Spoleto. The Maurin I referred to was
father of Suppo I, whose dau. Bertilla, m. Berenger I, King of Italy. It is
the other line of Spoloto that Guerin possibly spawned.
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (lines 265 and 330) and the Chaume table
differ in one major way. Stuart has Lambert, gg grandfather of Gui, King
of Italy as a descendant of Warinus and Kunza (who have been discussed in
this forum in the past), wheras Chaume has him as (tentatively) a
descendant of Guerin. The kicker is that Stuart cites Chaume as his source
! In fairness to Stuart, he also cites Winkhaus and Moriarity and it is
impossible to know which source he used for which generation.
Turton seems to generally agree with Stuart. I don't have access to
Moriarity or Winkhaus.
All of the above mentioned sources are, of course, quite dated. Does ES
address the issue of the orgins of the house of Spoleto ?
Stewart Baldwin
Jim Stevens <jste...@IQUEST.NET> wrote:
Chaume's Table II has count Guerin I d. 677 and his wife Gunsa (sister
of Basin, bishop of Treves) as the parents of Saint Lieven, bishop of
Troyes, who was at the top of the chart which I already posted, so
Chaume is making Guerin a tentative ancestor of Lambert (with 2
"dotted lines"). The only difference between Guerin and Gunsa, and
Warin[us] and Kunza is that the first two names give French forms for
the last two names, which are in German form. Thus, it is not clear
to me that there is any difference here (unless the intermediate
generations are different in RFC).
Stewart Baldwin
Todd A. Farmerie
Jim Stevens wrote:
>
> Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (lines 265 and 330) and the Chaume table
> differ in one major way. Stuart has Lambert, gg grandfather of Gui, King
> of Italy as a descendant of Warinus and Kunza (who have been discussed in
> this forum in the past), wheras Chaume has him as (tentatively) a
> descendant of Guerin. The kicker is that Stuart cites Chaume as his source
> ! In fairness to Stuart, he also cites Winkhaus and Moriarity and it is
> impossible to know which source he used for which generation.
Unless I am missing something, this is a non-issue. Guerin and Warinus
are alternative forms of the same name, rather than being mutually
exclusive.
taf
Jim Stevens
Stewart Baldwin <sb...@AUBURN.CAMPUS.MCI.NET> responded:
>Jim Stevens <jste...@IQUEST.NET> wrote:
>
>>>Jim Stevens (jste...@iquest.net) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Per Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (269:38), Maurin, the earliest of the
>>>>margraves of Spoleto that I have found, was a Salic Frank who held lands in
>>>>Parma, Reggio, and Piacenza, 835-844.
>>>>
>>>>Per Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (191:12), the Margraves of Spoleto were
>>>>descendants of GARNIER, the broter of ALARD. ALARD's unnamed daughter
>>>>probably married CARLOMAN, son of CHARLES MARTEL and Mayor of the Palace.
>>>>Approximately a century separates GARNIER and MAURIN.
>>>>
>>>>Can anyone post the specific line of descent from Garnier to Maurin ?
>
>
>> <magasnip - incl. the wonderful chart !>
>
>>Thanks, Stewart, You either have one heck of a charting program of you put
>>a lot of time and effort into your reply. I am assuming the latter.
>
>>Well, it seems I opened up a much stinkier can of worms than I ever imagined.
>
>>It appears there were two rival families that produced margraves, dukes, or
>>whatever we want to call them, of Spoleto. The Maurin I referred to was
>>father of Suppo I, whose dau. Bertilla, m. Berenger I, King of Italy. It is
>>the other line of Spoloto that Guerin possibly spawned.
>
>>Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (lines 265 and 330) and the Chaume table
>>differ in one major way. Stuart has Lambert, gg grandfather of Gui, King
>>of Italy as a descendant of Warinus and Kunza (who have been discussed in
>>this forum in the past), wheras Chaume has him as (tentatively) a
>>descendant of Guerin. The kicker is that Stuart cites Chaume as his source
>>! In fairness to Stuart, he also cites Winkhaus and Moriarity and it is
>>impossible to know which source he used for which generation.
>
>Chaume's Table II has count Guerin I d. 677 and his wife Gunsa (sister
>of Basin, bishop of Treves) as the parents of Saint Lieven, bishop of
>Troyes, who was at the top of the chart which I already posted, so
>Chaume is making Guerin a tentative ancestor of Lambert (with 2
>"dotted lines"). The only difference between Guerin and Gunsa, and
>Warin[us] and Kunza is that the first two names give French forms for
>the last two names, which are in German form. Thus, it is not clear
>to me that there is any difference here (unless the intermediate
>generations are different in RFC).
>
>Stewart Baldwin
I guess I should have not tried to take a shortcut and posted the entire
conflicting lines in my earlier post. The intervening generations are
indeed quite different.
I have assigned identical generation numbers to those individuals who
appear to be the same.
From Chaume's table :
8. Garnier, 734 = a dau. of Saint Lievin
7. Nantier I, 734
6. Lambert I, count, ca. 750
5. Gui, 782, 796, "unus de stirpe Wernarhii"
4. Lambert II, ct. Nantes, d. 836
3. Guy I, Duke of Spoleto, 842, 858
2. Guy II, marquis of Camerino, 871
1. Guy IV, marquis of Camerino, duke of Spoleto, king, emporer, d. 894
From Stuart, line 330 (citing Chaume, Winkhaus, Levillian, & Moriarity):
11. Warinus = Gunza
10. Liutwin, Count & Bishop of Treves, d.c.722
9. Count Gui, occ 706-722
6. Lambert, Count and Lord of Hornbach, 760-c.783
continuing with line 265:
5. Gui, Count on the Breton march, d.814
4. Lambert I, Count of Nantes, d.836
3. Gui I, Margrave of Spoleto, d.858
1. Gui II, Duke of Spoleto, Count of Camerino, King of Italy, d.894
From Turton's "Plantaganet Ancestry" table 184:
11. Guerin + Gunza
10. Leoduin, c of Treves, d.713
9. Guido, d.c.722
6. Lambert
5. Guido, c.789 (? hard to make out his handwriting)
4. Lambert, c of Nantes, d.836
3. Guido, d. of Spoleto, d.858
1A. Lambert of Spoleto, d.879
1. Guido of Italy, d.894
I ask once more, in light of the age of all these sources, does ES address
the issue ?
Alan B. Wilson
Moriarty, Plantagenet Ancestry, p. 19, shows the following
descent for the "House of Parma":
1. Maurin, Pfalzgraf, a Salic Frank, fl. 835-844.
2. Suppo II of Spoleto, Count of Camerino {871-875}, d. 882/8.
3. Berthilda, fl. 889-910, d. after 915. Married circa 880
Beranger I, d. 924, Margrave of Friuli, King of Italy, Roman
Emperor.
Moriarty suggests that Maurin perhaps descended from a
Count Suppo I of Brescia, fl. 814.
Generations 2 and 3, above, are confirmed in Schwennicke
(ed.) Europaische Stammtafeln (ES), ii, 188A.
Moriarty, p. 74, Winkhaus, p. 193, and Turton, p. 184, as
well as Stuart, lines 265, 330 and 53, all show essentially the
following male ancestry for Guido I, Duke of Spoleto:
1. Warinus of Poitiers. Died 677. He married Kunza, daughter of
St. Clodoule of Metz Bishop. Fl 698, 705-717.
2. Lievin \ Leutwinus of Treves Bishop. Died circa 722. Buried
in Mettlach. Count, then Bishop of Treves {705-717}. Fl 705,
717.
3. Gui of Treves. Count {706-722}.
4. Lambert of Hornbach. Died after 782. Count & Lord of Hornbach {760-ca783}.
5. Gui on the Breton March Count. Died 814. Fl 782-799.
6. Lambert of Nantes Count. Died 1 Sep 836 in Italy. Count of
Nantes {818-834}. He married ? [dau. of Pepin of Lombardy],
daughter of Pepin of Lombardy King & Gundora (Gondres \
Theress).
7. Guido I of Spoleto Duke. Died circa 858. Fl 842. He
married Itana \ Judith.
ES ii, 188B starts with Lambert, generation 6, above.
I have not found a connection between these two lines
(which overlap in time) except for common descendants several
generations down the line.
Moriarty, by the way, refers to Chaume, "Les origines du
duche de Bourgogne" and later French literature as well as an
NEHGR article, cvii (1953) p. 276 sq. I have not checked this
subsequent literature, but I assume Moriarty's differences from
Chaume are deliberate.
--
Alan B. Wilson
abwi...@uclink2.berkeley.edu
Richard Borthwick
At 03:06 PM 21/07/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Jim Stevens (jste...@iquest.net) wrote:
>
>>Per Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (269:38), Maurin, the earliest of the
>>margraves of Spoleto that I have found, was a Salic Frank who held lands in
>>Parma, Reggio, and Piacenza, 835-844.
>>
>>Per Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (191:12), the Margraves of Spoleto were
>>descendants of GARNIER, the broter of ALARD. ALARD's unnamed daughter
>>probably married CARLOMAN, son of CHARLES MARTEL and Mayor of the Palace.
>>Approximately a century separates GARNIER and MAURIN.
>>
>>Can anyone post the specific line of descent from Garnier to Maurin ?
>
>1925-31), Maurice Chaume included an appendix with 13 genealogical
>tables giving the relations (both conjectured and proven) of many of
>the early noble familes, including the dukes of Spoleto in Table IV.
>(p. 535 - I forgot to write down the volume number when I photocopied
>the tables many years ago, but I believe it was vol. 4.)
Volume I contains the genealogical tables. Formally *Les origines* is a two
volume work, but volume II is printed in three sections (II.1, II.2, II.3)
The chart
>is given below (with accents omitted, to avoid problems for those who
>can't handle them). Dotted lines indicate conjectured relationships.
>The reason that Chaume conjectured Lambert I as a son of Nantier I is
>presumably the fact that Lambert's son Gui was described as "unus de
>stirpe Wernarhii" (the latter being a Latin form of the French name
>Garnier [German Werner]. I do not see a "Maurin" on Chaume's table.
>I do not know the extent to which any of the following has been
>overturned by more modern research. Dates by themselves indicate
>that the individual is mentioned in records of that year.
>
>Stewart Baldwin
>
>Saint Lievin, B. Troyes, 698, 704 Willigardis attava Willigardis
> _________|_________________......... ______|_____________
> | | | | | |
>Rotru md. Gui, count Mille dau md. Garnier, 734 Alard
>Charles 706, 722 B. Treves | founder of monast. 734
>Martel d. aft. 750 | of Hornbach
> ________________________|__________________
> | | |
> Nantier I, 734 Herolin, 734 Rotharius, 734
> .........|__________________
> | |
> Lambert I, count, ca. 750 Garnier, 767, 791, md. Engeltu
> _____|_______________________________ |
> | | | | |
>Guerin Gui, 782, 796 Rodoldus Garnier Nantier II, 791, bef. 814
>d. bef. "unus de stirpe 782 782, 807 prob. ancestor of Nantier,
>796 Wernarhii" d. 814 ct. Lorraine ca. 860
> | _____|____________
> | | |
> Lambert II Willigardis, 828 Erard?
> 796, 814, 819, 823 "alta Werinheri 819
> d. 836 ct. Nantes prosapia orta"
> _______|______________________ ___|......
> | | | | | |
> Gui I, duke Doue Garnier Lambert III Garnier dau md.
> of Spoleto abbess count 840, d. 852 828, 865 Aubri IV
> 842, 858 846 d. 852 ct. Nantes, ct. Blois
> md. 1. NN marquis
> 2. sister of md. Rotru
> Siconolf |
> |______________ |_____________
> | | |
> Lambert I Gui II ("senior"), 871 Guibert, 870, d. 882
> 860, 871 marquis of Camerino ct. Bolenois and
> dk. Spoleto md. 1. NN, 2. Yuta, dau. Bassigny
> of Evrard of Frioul md. Gautsa
> ______________|______________________________________
> |(1) |(1) |(2) |(2)
> Rohaut, 878, 895 Lambert II Gui IV, 877, d. 894 Conrad, 892
> md. Aubert II, 872, 879 marquis of Camerino ct. Lecco, md.
> marquis of duke of duke of Spoleto Ermengundis
> Tuscany Spoleto king, emperor |
> | | md. Ageltrudis |
> | ____| ______| ______________|
> | | | |.......... _________
> | | | | | |
>Aubert III Gui III Lambert III Radaldus Gui V Yuta, md.
>890, d. ca. (Rabia) 891, d. 898 895, 926 895, dk. Guaimar I
>915, marquis 881, dk. k. Italy ct. Lecco Spoleto prince of
>of, Tuscany, Spoleto emperor | Salerno
>md. Berthe, |
>dau. of |
>Lothaire II |
> |_______________________________ |______
> | | | |
> Gui, 931 Lambert, 934 Ermengard Guibert
> marquis of Marquis of md. Aubert, 937, d. 940
> Tuscany Tuscany marquis of |
> Ivrea |___________
> | | |
> Anchier III Atton Ermengard
> 935, d. 940 ct. Lecco
> marquis of
> Spoleto
>
How are you able to get such a well-behaved chart? Whenever I try something
like this in Eudora Light it ends up a mess.
Chris Bennett
In article <5r196h$qv$1...@news.campus.mci.net>, sb...@auburn.campus.mci.net
(Stewart Baldwin) wrote:
> Richard Borthwick <rg...@CYLLENE.UWA.EDU.AU> wrote:
>
> >How are you able to get such a well-behaved chart? Whenever I try something
> >like this in Eudora Light it ends up a mess.
>
> A few pointers:
<lots of sensible advice snipped>
> Stewart Baldwin
THis touches on a topic I toyed with a few years ago and never got very
far -- a little off-topic for this group, so feel free to yell at me.
Does anyone know of any good algorithms or software for automatically
laying out a genealogical tree like Stewart's, given a database in some
standard format?
Its not too hard to come up with an algorithm that works on an infinite
plane, but when you make the plane a finite width (like a page), and start
asking it to optimise the use of space -- knowing when best to drop a
branch an extra generation, knowing how to deal with multiple marriages,
knowing how to have cousins marrying each other and when to
cross-reference across the tree -- and above all knowing whjen to give up!
-- the problem rapidly becomes quite complicated.
Another approach I thought of was a tree-drawing package -- one that had a
suite of tools (insert children....) appropriate for the task, but left
the direction up to the user. Since my programming skills are definitely
pre-GUI I decided to drop it at that point.
CHris
Stewart Baldwin
Jim Stevens <jste...@IQUEST.NET> wrote:
>I guess I should have not tried to take a shortcut and posted the entire
>conflicting lines in my earlier post. The intervening generations are
>indeed quite different.
>I have assigned identical generation numbers to those individuals who
>appear to be the same.
>From Chaume's table :
>8. Garnier, 734 = a dau. of Saint Lievin
>7. Nantier I, 734
>6. Lambert I, count, ca. 750
>5. Gui, 782, 796, "unus de stirpe Wernarhii"
>4. Lambert II, ct. Nantes, d. 836
>3. Guy I, Duke of Spoleto, 842, 858
>2. Guy II, marquis of Camerino, 871
>1. Guy IV, marquis of Camerino, duke of Spoleto, king, emporer, d. 894
>From Stuart, line 330 (citing Chaume, Winkhaus, Levillian, & Moriarity):
>11. Warinus = Gunza
>10. Liutwin, Count & Bishop of Treves, d.c.722
>9. Count Gui, occ 706-722
[Since Chaume makes Gui a (hypothetical) brother-in-law of Garnier (8.
above), shouldn't these be numbered 10, 9, 8?]
>6. Lambert, Count and Lord of Hornbach, 760-c.783
> continuing with line 265:
>5. Gui, Count on the Breton march, d.814
>4. Lambert I, Count of Nantes, d.836
>3. Gui I, Margrave of Spoleto, d.858
>1. Gui II, Duke of Spoleto, Count of Camerino, King of Italy, d.894
>From Turton's "Plantaganet Ancestry" table 184:
>11. Guerin + Gunza
>10. Leoduin, c of Treves, d.713
>9. Guido, d.c.722
>6. Lambert
>5. Guido, c.789 (? hard to make out his handwriting)
>4. Lambert, c of Nantes, d.836
>3. Guido, d. of Spoleto, d.858
>1A. Lambert of Spoleto, d.879
>1. Guido of Italy, d.894
>I ask once more, in light of the age of all these sources, does ES address
>the issue ?
There are two clear differences here:
1. Was Gui[do] of Italy (d. 894) a son or a grandson of Gui[do] of
Spoleto (858, son of Lambert).
In the notes to his table, Chaume acknowledges that when he makes
Gui(894) a grandson of Gui(858) instead of a son, he is going against
current opinion, but it is hard to see what his reasons are. (He
appears to be citing a source "Erchenpert, 35" and "Erchenpert, 58",
and I assume you need Chaume's bibliography to find out what that
source is.) What does ES say about this? If it also makes Gui(894)
the son of Gui(858), then it probably means that modern opinion has
rejected Chaume's suggestion, but I would only fill in the
relationship "in pencil" until I got a chance to look at the actual
primary evidence and the reasons for rejecting Chaume's version.
2. Was count Lambert I (6. above) the son of Gui (son of
Lievin/Liutwin), or was he grandson of Gui's sister, as Chaume
conjectures?
Sources cited by Chaume which make Gui (son of Lambert 6.) a
descendant of Garnier include the Cartulary of Hornbach and the
"Miracula S. Pirminii". In my opinion, it would be premature to pick
one version over the other until all of the bibliographic sources (and
especially the primary evidence) have been tracked down and analyzed.
An older source for the dukes of Spoleto which Chaume cited was
Wustenfeld's article "Uber die Herzoge von Spoleto aus dem Hause der
Guidonen", in "Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte" III, 383-432.
Stewart Baldwin