1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SOC.GENEALOGY.MEDIEVAL

  • How many proven ancestors does Charlamange have?

    From Dude@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 1 06:41:02 2022
    1. Pepin (The Young) 751-768
    2. Berthe
    3. Charles Martel (Acting KiIng of the Franks) 717-741
    4. Caribert (Count of Laon)
    5. Pepin (Mayor of the Palace) 688/90-714
    6. Alpaïde
    7. Berthe
    8. Ansegisel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paulo Ricardo Canedo@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 8 19:40:27 2022
    A sexta-feira, 1 de julho de 2022 à(s) 14:41:05 UTC+1, Dude escreveu:
    1. Pepin (The Young) 751-768
    2. Berthe
    3. Charles Martel (Acting KiIng of the Franks) 717-741
    4. Caribert (Count of Laon)
    5. Pepin (Mayor of the Palace) 688/90-714
    6. Alpaïde
    7. Berthe
    8. Ansegisel
    I'd also count Arnulf of Metz, Oda, Pepin of Laden and Ida as proven.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Will Johnson@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jul 11 11:53:02 2022
    Bertrada "the Elder"'s father, according to https://www.genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=5

    was Hugobert, Seneschall, Pfalzgraf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From taf@21:1/5 to wjhons...@gmail.com on Mon Jul 11 17:15:50 2022
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:53:03 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    Bertrada "the Elder"'s father, according to https://www.genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=5

    was Hugobert, Seneschall, Pfalzgraf

    Which is just hypothesis, not a documented connection. Chaume hypothesized (without substantive basis) that she was daughter of one of the Merovingian kings.

    taf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Will Johnson@21:1/5 to taf on Tue Jul 12 10:33:36 2022
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 5:15:52 PM UTC-7, taf wrote:
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:53:03 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    Bertrada "the Elder"'s father, according to https://www.genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=5

    was Hugobert, Seneschall, Pfalzgraf
    Which is just hypothesis, not a documented connection. Chaume hypothesized (without substantive basis) that she was daughter of one of the Merovingian kings.

    taf

    But this Hugobert was not a King, nor descendant of the Merovingians.....

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From taf@21:1/5 to wjhons...@gmail.com on Tue Jul 12 11:16:56 2022
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 10:33:38 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 5:15:52 PM UTC-7, taf wrote:
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:53:03 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    Bertrada "the Elder"'s father, according to https://www.genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=5

    was Hugobert, Seneschall, Pfalzgraf
    Which is just hypothesis, not a documented connection. Chaume hypothesized (without substantive basis) that she was daughter of one of the Merovingian kings.

    But this Hugobert was not a King, nor descendant of the Merovingians.....

    No (at least to the 'king' part - I don't think his ancestry is _known_ well enough to determine whether he might have a Merovingian descent, but that's beside the point). My point was that there are multiple competing hypotheses.

    I don't remember who proposed the Hugomert version, Werner? but Settipani made Bertrada Hugobert's daughter-in-law, and as I said, Chaume made her and her 'sisters' children of Theoderic III. Obviously, the second and third are not mutually-exclusive,
    but just because we can make them both fit doesn't mean we should.

    taf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Will Johnson@21:1/5 to taf on Tue Jul 12 11:23:23 2022
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:16:58 AM UTC-7, taf wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 10:33:38 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 5:15:52 PM UTC-7, taf wrote:
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:53:03 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    Bertrada "the Elder"'s father, according to https://www.genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=5

    was Hugobert, Seneschall, Pfalzgraf
    Which is just hypothesis, not a documented connection. Chaume hypothesized (without substantive basis) that she was daughter of one of the Merovingian kings.
    But this Hugobert was not a King, nor descendant of the Merovingians.....
    No (at least to the 'king' part - I don't think his ancestry is _known_ well enough to determine whether he might have a Merovingian descent, but that's beside the point). My point was that there are multiple competing hypotheses.

    I don't remember who proposed the Hugomert version, Werner? but Settipani made Bertrada Hugobert's daughter-in-law, and as I said, Chaume made her and her 'sisters' children of Theoderic III. Obviously, the second and third are not mutually-exclusive,
    but just because we can make them both fit doesn't mean we should.

    taf

    Leo is quoting Settipani, by making her his daughter.
    Unless Leo got that wrong.
    He cites Settipani in doing this....

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Will Johnson@21:1/5 to Will Johnson on Tue Jul 12 11:24:55 2022
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:23:24 AM UTC-7, Will Johnson wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:16:58 AM UTC-7, taf wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 10:33:38 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 5:15:52 PM UTC-7, taf wrote:
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:53:03 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    Bertrada "the Elder"'s father, according to https://www.genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=5

    was Hugobert, Seneschall, Pfalzgraf
    Which is just hypothesis, not a documented connection. Chaume hypothesized (without substantive basis) that she was daughter of one of the Merovingian kings.
    But this Hugobert was not a King, nor descendant of the Merovingians.....
    No (at least to the 'king' part - I don't think his ancestry is _known_ well enough to determine whether he might have a Merovingian descent, but that's beside the point). My point was that there are multiple competing hypotheses.

    I don't remember who proposed the Hugomert version, Werner? but Settipani made Bertrada Hugobert's daughter-in-law, and as I said, Chaume made her and her 'sisters' children of Theoderic III. Obviously, the second and third are not mutually-exclusive,
    but just because we can make them both fit doesn't mean we should.

    taf
    Leo is quoting Settipani, by making her his daughter.
    Unless Leo got that wrong.
    He cites Settipani in doing this....

    Oops. mea culpa
    he is quoting Rösch, Siegfried. 1977

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Will Johnson@21:1/5 to Will Johnson on Tue Jul 12 11:31:22 2022
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:24:56 AM UTC-7, Will Johnson wrote:

    Leo is quoting Settipani, by making her his daughter.
    Unless Leo got that wrong.
    He cites Settipani in doing this....
    Oops. mea culpa
    he is quoting Rösch, Siegfried. 1977

    OK.... so backtracking through the sources, Leo may have gotten this from Rosch or from the Wikipedia article for Hugobert which claims that "some genealogists" attribute her as a daughter of Hugobert and Irmina.

    The only source quoted is Settipani's addedum which is publicly available

    Settipani, Christian (1990), "Addenda aux "Ancêtres de Charlemagne", 1990" (PDF).
    http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~medieval/addcharlENG.pdf

    *However*, Settipani does *not* say this.

    He has this Hugobert married to Theodrada, having a daughter named Irmina (dotted line) who herself then had a daughter named Bertrada, and that she was the mother of Charibert Count of Laon

    So the whole thing is messed up.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From taf@21:1/5 to wjhons...@gmail.com on Tue Jul 12 12:03:31 2022
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:31:24 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:24:56 AM UTC-7, Will Johnson wrote:

    Leo is quoting Settipani, by making her his daughter.
    Unless Leo got that wrong.
    He cites Settipani in doing this....
    Oops. mea culpa
    he is quoting Rösch, Siegfried. 1977
    OK.... so backtracking through the sources, Leo may have gotten this from Rosch or from the Wikipedia article for Hugobert which claims that "some genealogists" attribute her as a daughter of Hugobert and Irmina.

    The only source quoted is Settipani's addedum which is publicly available

    Settipani, Christian (1990), "Addenda aux "Ancêtres de Charlemagne", 1990" (PDF).
    http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~medieval/addcharlENG.pdf

    *However*, Settipani does *not* say this.

    He has this Hugobert married to Theodrada, having a daughter named Irmina (dotted line) who herself then had a daughter named Bertrada, and that she was the mother of Charibert Count of Laon

    So the whole thing is messed up.

    Ok, that's another variant, so I don't know who is responsible for the son-in-law version (I suppose it could have been invented just so that the Hugobert connection could be maintained while still going all in on the highly-desirable Merovingian
    connection). I seem to remember the Hugobert connection appeared in Werner, Nachkommen Karls des Grossen (1967), but it is packed away so I can't look up whether it originated there.

    taf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Stewart@21:1/5 to taf on Wed Jul 13 10:30:08 2022
    On 13-Jul-22 5:03 AM, taf wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:31:24 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 11:24:56 AM UTC-7, Will Johnson wrote:

    Leo is quoting Settipani, by making her his daughter.
    Unless Leo got that wrong.
    He cites Settipani in doing this....
    Oops. mea culpa
    he is quoting Rösch, Siegfried. 1977
    OK.... so backtracking through the sources, Leo may have gotten this from Rosch or from the Wikipedia article for Hugobert which claims that "some genealogists" attribute her as a daughter of Hugobert and Irmina.

    The only source quoted is Settipani's addedum which is publicly available

    Settipani, Christian (1990), "Addenda aux "Ancêtres de Charlemagne", 1990" (PDF).
    http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~medieval/addcharlENG.pdf

    *However*, Settipani does *not* say this.

    He has this Hugobert married to Theodrada, having a daughter named Irmina (dotted line) who herself then had a daughter named Bertrada, and that she was the mother of Charibert Count of Laon

    So the whole thing is messed up.

    Ok, that's another variant, so I don't know who is responsible for the son-in-law version (I suppose it could have been invented just so that the Hugobert connection could be maintained while still going all in on the highly-desirable Merovingian
    connection). I seem to remember the Hugobert connection appeared in Werner, Nachkommen Karls des Grossen (1967), but it is packed away so I can't look up whether it originated there.

    Do you mean Karl Ferdinand Werner, and if so are thinking of 'Bedeutende Adelsfamilien im Reich Karls des Grossen' in vol. 1 of *Karl der Grosse: Lebenswerk und Nachleben* (1965) rather than 'Nachkommen' in vol. 4
    (1967, which is about Charlemagne's descendants not ancestors)?

    Either way, I doubt that he messed anything up in this matter - by my
    memory he agreed with Eduard Hlawitschka in 'Die Vorfahren Karls des
    Grossen' in vol. 1.

    Peter Stewart

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
    https://www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Olivier@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 15 03:33:56 2022
    Le vendredi 1 juillet 2022 à 15:41:05 UTC+2, Dude a écrit :
    1. Pepin (The Young) 751-768
    2. Berthe
    3. Charles Martel (Acting KiIng of the Franks) 717-741
    4. Caribert (Count of Laon)
    5. Pepin (Mayor of the Palace) 688/90-714
    6. Alpaïde
    7. Berthe
    8. Ansegisel

    There are all the proved ancestors in Settipani's "Les Ancêtres de Charlemagne", 2014 2e édition

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From taf@21:1/5 to Olivier on Fri Jul 15 06:14:02 2022
    On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 3:33:57 AM UTC-7, Olivier wrote:
    Le vendredi 1 juillet 2022 à 15:41:05 UTC+2, Dude a écrit :
    1. Pepin (The Young) 751-768
    2. Berthe
    3. Charles Martel (Acting KiIng of the Franks) 717-741
    4. Caribert (Count of Laon)
    5. Pepin (Mayor of the Palace) 688/90-714
    6. Alpaïde
    7. Berthe
    8. Ansegisel
    There are all the proved ancestors in Settipani's "Les Ancêtres de Charlemagne", 2014 2e édition

    With much of Setipani's work being hypothesis-based, you are going to have to be more specific which additional ones you consider proven.

    taf

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Olivier@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jul 21 02:52:51 2022
    Le vendredi 15 juillet 2022 à 15:14:03 UTC+2, taf a écrit :
    On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 3:33:57 AM UTC-7, Olivier wrote:
    Le vendredi 1 juillet 2022 à 15:41:05 UTC+2, Dude a écrit :
    1. Pepin (The Young) 751-768
    2. Berthe
    3. Charles Martel (Acting KiIng of the Franks) 717-741
    4. Caribert (Count of Laon)
    5. Pepin (Mayor of the Palace) 688/90-714
    6. Alpaïde
    7. Berthe
    8. Ansegisel
    There are all the proved ancestors in Settipani's "Les Ancêtres de Charlemagne", 2014 2e édition
    With much of Setipani's work being hypothesis-based, you are going to have to be more specific which additional ones you consider proven.

    taf
    I misspoke: only the 8 people mentioned are considered proven ancestors of Charlemagne.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stewart Baldwin@21:1/5 to Olivier on Thu Jul 21 08:59:59 2022
    On Thursday, July 21, 2022 at 4:52:53 AM UTC-5, Olivier wrote:
    I misspoke: only the 8 people mentioned are considered proven ancestors of Charlemagne.

    It would be better to say that in Settipani's opinion, these eight individuals are the ancestors of Charlemagne who are documented by solid contemporary evidence. Despite my admiration for Settipani's work in general, his emphasis of this point has
    always left a bad taste in my mouth. Since the list excludes some individuals (such as Bishop Arnulf of Metz) whose evidence for being ancestors of Charlemagne is very good (if not strictly contemporary), this approach almost seems like an excuse to
    lower standards. After all, if Arnulf is only a 98.7% proven ancestor of Charlemagne (a percentage I just now invented for the sake of argument), shouldn't we also include 95% proven ancestors, 90% proven, 80%, 70%, . . . ? Where do we draw the line?
    In fact, as any experienced genealogist knows, there are a multitude of shades of grey between "solidly documented" and "false" (to which "percentages" cannot be reasonably assigned). Perhaps I was overreacting, but I felt that putting Arnulf in the
    same "category" as some questionable "ancestors" had the effect of giving the latter more status than they deserved.

    Stewart Baldwin

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)