• Fictitious sons of Albert II of Dagsburg

    From Peter Stewart@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 29 10:47:42 2021
    The legend that Albert II had two sons, named William and Henry, who accidentally killed each other while jousting persists even in the
    latest ESnF table for the family, vol. I/2 (1999), despite being an
    invention from the late-14th century.

    The story first occurs in the heavily-embellished chronicle of Jean d'Outremeuse titled 'Ly myreur des histors'. According to this, Albert
    with his sons (aged 14 and 13 respectively) attended a tournament at
    Andenne (or Andain, now Saint-Hubert) held over three days in mid-May
    1202 to mark the departure of Balduin IX of Flanders on crusade. Also
    attending were Henri of Louvain (duke of Brabant) and his paternal
    half-brother William of Perwez, both described as brothers of Albert
    (who was actually their uncle, a maternal half-brother of their father).
    The youths, oddly named after these two non-Dagsburg half-blood cousins,
    were allegedly over-excited by the sport and after returning home to
    Moha tried it for themselves, impaling each other on their lances with
    fatal results.

    Apart from this implausible outcome of teenage rashness, there are
    several holes in the narrative:

    1. Balduin IX actually left in mid-April 1202, not in May.
    2. Val Notre-Dame abbey at Antheit near Moha was founded by Albert in
    1209/10, not in 1202 as asserted by Jean d'Outremeuse.
    3. Albert evidently had no offspring in 1197 when his nephew Henri of
    Brabant and another relative named as attending the tournament at
    Andenne, Louis of Loon, agreed to divide his inheritance between
    themselves if he should die childless.
    4. Albert is supposed to have made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in honour
    of his dead sons, praying in the Holy Sepulchre on 15 August of an
    unspecified year and then travelling by sea to Constantinople where the reigning Latin emperor when he arrived was Balduin IX's brother and
    successor Henri of Hainaut (i.e. after the latter's coronation on 20
    August 1206). From the dating of Albert's documents we know that he
    could only have made such a journey in 1209, yet in his charter for Val Notre-Dame abbey dated 1210 he donated for the souls of various family
    members without mentioning any deceased sons.
    5. Albert's daughter and heiress Gertrude, born in 1206, was
    specifically described as his only child - this meant his only
    legitimate child, as she had at least one illegitimate half-brother,
    Walter of Turquestein, whom she named in a charter dated 1223 and her
    widower Simon of Leiningen named in 1233.

    In the 17th century the false tale of the foolhardy sons was picked up
    by Barthélémy Fisen in his history of the diocese of Liège, and from
    there it was repeated in the following century by Johann Daniel
    Schöpflin in *Alsatia illustrata* which unfortunately fixed it into the record.

    Peter Stewart

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Stewart@21:1/5 to Peter Stewart on Sun Oct 31 16:15:03 2021
    On 29-Oct-21 10:47 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
    The legend that Albert II had two sons, named William and Henry, who accidentally killed each other while jousting persists even in the
    latest ESnF table for the family, vol. I/2 (1999), despite being an
    invention from the late-14th century.

    The story first occurs in the heavily-embellished chronicle of Jean d'Outremeuse titled 'Ly myreur des histors'. According to this, Albert
    with his sons (aged 14 and 13 respectively) attended a tournament at
    Andenne (or Andain, now Saint-Hubert) held over three days in mid-May
    1202 to mark the departure of Balduin IX of Flanders on crusade. Also attending were Henri of Louvain (duke of Brabant) and his paternal half-brother William of Perwez, both described as brothers of Albert
    (who was actually their uncle, a maternal half-brother of their father).
    The youths, oddly named after these two non-Dagsburg half-blood cousins,
    were allegedly over-excited by the sport and after returning home to
    Moha tried it for themselves, impaling each other on their lances with
    fatal results.

    Apart from this implausible outcome of teenage rashness, there are
    several holes in the narrative:

    1. Balduin IX actually left in mid-April 1202, not in May.
    2. Val Notre-Dame abbey at Antheit near Moha was founded by Albert in 1209/10, not in 1202 as asserted by Jean d'Outremeuse.
    3. Albert evidently had no offspring in 1197 when his nephew Henri of
    Brabant and another relative named as attending the tournament at
    Andenne, Louis of Loon, agreed to divide his inheritance between
    themselves if he should die childless.
    4. Albert is supposed to have made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in honour
    of his dead sons, praying in the Holy Sepulchre on 15 August of an unspecified year and then travelling by sea to Constantinople where the reigning Latin emperor when he arrived was Balduin IX's brother and
    successor Henri of Hainaut (i.e. after the latter's coronation on 20
    August 1206). From the dating of Albert's documents we know that he
    could only have made such a journey in 1209, yet in his charter for Val Notre-Dame abbey dated 1210 he donated for the souls of various family members without mentioning any deceased sons.
    5. Albert's daughter and heiress Gertrude, born in 1206, was
    specifically described as his only child - this meant his only
    legitimate child, as she had at least one illegitimate half-brother,
    Walter of Turquestein, whom she named in a charter dated 1223 and her
    widower Simon of Leiningen named in 1233.

    A correspondent off-list asked me if Albert II's illegitimate son may
    have left descendants, wondering if a male line from his agnatic
    7th-century ancestor Eticho, duke in Alsace, could perhaps have
    continued into modern times.

    Unfortunately this does not seem likely. Walter of Turquestein, who is
    called variously Waltrikin and Waltguin in charters (and once William,
    probably a later copyist's mistaken expansion from his initial), was
    married by 1227 until least July 1231 to a lady named Lauretta, but
    there is no evidence for offspring. The next seigneur of Turquestein
    known after him was Hugo, occurring in 1272, and after him Jean in 1338
    - as far as we can tall, nothing beyond tenure of the castle connects
    these men to their predecessors.

    Turquestein was a fief belonging to the counts of Dagsburg (Dabo). The last-known castellan before Walter was Cono, apparently son of Hawise
    whose father Bencelin had held it in the 1120s-40s. Cono had a sister
    named Adelaide who was living at Turquestein ca 1200, evidently
    unmarried. She may possibly have been the mother of Walter/Waltrikin,
    but this is just a guess.

    At any rate, the suggestion by Franz Legl that Walter could have been
    Gertrud of Dagsburg's brother as a son of Albert II's wife by a prior
    husband is fanciful. Gertrud's mother (most probably the only wife of
    Albert rather than his second as often asserted) was daughter of a
    margrave of Baden, and not even remotely likely to have married an
    unimportant vassal of the count of Dagsburg. Her name is usually given
    as Gertrud but this is probably just a projection from the name of her
    daughter conjectured by Schöpflin in the 18th century. In 1987 Gerd
    Wunder suggested that she was the last of three countesses named Berta occurring in a 17th-century extract from the lost obituary of Backnang
    abbey, burial place of her birth family, but the rationale for this is questionable at best.

    Peter Stewart

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mike davis@21:1/5 to pss...@optusnet.com.au on Tue Nov 2 10:38:52 2021
    On Sunday, October 31, 2021 at 5:15:10 AM UTC, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
    On 29-Oct-21 10:47 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
    The legend that Albert II had two sons, named William and Henry, who accidentally killed each other while jousting persists even in the
    latest ESnF table for the family, vol. I/2 (1999), despite being an invention from the late-14th century.
    ..
    A correspondent off-list asked me if Albert II's illegitimate son may
    have left descendants, wondering if a male line from his agnatic
    7th-century ancestor Eticho, duke in Alsace, could perhaps have
    continued into modern times.

    Unfortunately this does not seem likely. Walter of Turquestein, who is

    I was wondering about the descent from Eticho too. It seems widely accepted across the net
    but did the counts of Eguisheim or a medieval source from the period ever claim that they
    were descended from the infamous Eticho?

    As I understand it the wife of Lothar I, daughter of Hugh of Tours is said to be descended from
    Duke Etih in the 9th century by the chronicler Thegan. Hugh is seen as the ancestor of the
    later counts of Alsace and the Eguisheimers are in turn descended from them. Eticho is also
    called Adalric - did he have 2 names or is Eticho/Etih a derivative?

    It seems it goes like this Adalric/Eticho [d683]--Eticho--Hugh, and this Hugh is seen as grandfather
    of Hugh of Tours [d837], and then there are a lot of differences across the net as to the filiation and
    numbering of the different Luitfrids and Hughs as Alsace was divided between Sundgau and Nordgau.

    The line from Hugh of Tours to Luitfrid VII [1003] in the Sundgau has several breaks in it but everyone
    accepts its the same family, however its not clear how the counts in the Nordgau starting with
    Eberard III [898] are descended from Hugh of Tours, and it is this line which becomes Eguisheim.
    It seems Hugh of Eguisheim [d1048] was a younger son of Hugh Raucus [d986] Count of Nordgau.
    The line I've seen on the net has the Nordgau descended not from Hugh of Tours but to Eberard I of
    Nordgau [777] a supposed descendant of Eticho. So I wonder how firm is this line from Eticho to
    the Eguisheimers?

    I expect that historians can find other ways to trace the Eguisheimers back to Hugh of Tours, but I
    just wondered if this descent from a 7th century merovingian duke was mentioned again in the
    medieval period after the 9th century.

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Stewart@21:1/5 to mike davis on Wed Nov 3 12:11:34 2021
    On 03-Nov-21 4:38 AM, mike davis wrote:
    On Sunday, October 31, 2021 at 5:15:10 AM UTC, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
    On 29-Oct-21 10:47 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
    The legend that Albert II had two sons, named William and Henry, who
    accidentally killed each other while jousting persists even in the
    latest ESnF table for the family, vol. I/2 (1999), despite being an
    invention from the late-14th century.
    ..
    A correspondent off-list asked me if Albert II's illegitimate son may
    have left descendants, wondering if a male line from his agnatic
    7th-century ancestor Eticho, duke in Alsace, could perhaps have
    continued into modern times.

    Unfortunately this does not seem likely. Walter of Turquestein, who is

    I was wondering about the descent from Eticho too. It seems widely accepted across the net
    but did the counts of Eguisheim or a medieval source from the period ever claim that they
    were descended from the infamous Eticho?

    As I understand it the wife of Lothar I, daughter of Hugh of Tours is said to be descended from
    Duke Etih in the 9th century by the chronicler Thegan. Hugh is seen as the ancestor of the
    later counts of Alsace and the Eguisheimers are in turn descended from them. Eticho is also
    called Adalric - did he have 2 names or is Eticho/Etih a derivative?

    As you say, Thegan wrote that Hugo of Tours, father of Lothar's wife,
    belonged to the lineage of Eticho ("Hlutharius ... suscepit in coniugium
    filiam Hugi comitis, qui erat de stirpe cuiusdam ducis nomine Etih"),
    but there is not complete certainty about which Etichonid descendant was
    Hugo's father.

    According to the mid-9th-century Vita of St Odilia, abbess of Hohenburg,
    Eticho was properly named Adalric ("Temporibus igitur Childerici
    imperatoris erat quidam dux illustris nomine Adalricus, qui etiam alio
    nomine Etih dicebatur"). He occurs as Adalric in a spurious charter of
    Thierry III confiscating his benefices for alleged disloyalty,
    ostensibly dated 4 September 679, that was included in a 12th-century chronicle. In earlier authentic sources he is also called Chadich and Chatalrich, suggesting that Etih/Eticho was indeed a nickname derived
    from Adalric.


    It seems it goes like this Adalric/Eticho [d683]--Eticho--Hugh, and this Hugh is seen as grandfather
    of Hugh of Tours [d837], and then there are a lot of differences across the net as to the filiation and
    numbering of the different Luitfrids and Hughs as Alsace was divided between Sundgau and Nordgau.

    The descent is all but certain from inheritance of the same leading
    names (Eticho, Hugo, Liutfrid) and power bases, including lay abbacies
    and monastic advocacies during a period when these were more reliably transmitted within agnatic lines than some other offices, though
    specifics are not recorded in a few generations.

    The line from Hugh of Tours to Luitfrid VII [1003] in the Sundgau has several breaks in it but everyone
    accepts its the same family, however its not clear how the counts in the Nordgau starting with
    Eberard III [898] are descended from Hugh of Tours, and it is this line which becomes Eguisheim.
    It seems Hugh of Eguisheim [d1048] was a younger son of Hugh Raucus [d986] Count of Nordgau.
    The line I've seen on the net has the Nordgau descended not from Hugh of Tours but to Eberard I of
    Nordgau [777] a supposed descendant of Eticho. So I wonder how firm is this line from Eticho to
    the Eguisheimers?

    It is not unquestioned in the literature, but consensus regarding a
    male-line connection has been strong over centuries. The filiation and
    byname of Hugo Raucus are stated in a bull of his grandson Pope Leo IX
    for Altdorf abbey, so there is no doubt about a link from counts in the Alsatian Nordgau in presumed dynastc succession from Eticho to the
    comital lineage of Eguisheim.

    I expect that historians can find other ways to trace the Eguisheimers back to Hugh of Tours, but I
    just wondered if this descent from a 7th century merovingian duke was mentioned again in the
    medieval period after the 9th century.

    The mid-12th century chronicle of Ebersheim confused Eticho's father
    Liuteric with Leudesius son of Erchinoald, making them blood relatives
    of the Merovingians and describing Eticho's mother as a relative of
    Burgundian kings - this was accepted by some, not all, historians until
    the late-19th century. The 12th-century chronicle of Saint-Pierre de
    Bèze made Adalric/Eticho into the son of a duke in Burgundy named
    Amalgarius. In the 15th/16th-century cartulary of Honau abbey there is a genealogy of Eticho's descendants. He reportedly killed his son with a
    blow from a club for the boy's temerity in displaying Eticho's daughter
    St Odilia to a crowd when she was being carried in a litter at
    Hohenburg, so he and his immediate family figure in her hagiographies
    from the 9th and 13th centuries.

    Peter Stewart

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Stewart@21:1/5 to Peter Stewart on Wed Nov 3 18:14:14 2021
    On 29-Oct-21 10:47 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
    The legend that Albert II had two sons, named William and Henry, who accidentally killed each other while jousting persists even in the
    latest ESnF table for the family, vol. I/2 (1999), despite being an
    invention from the late-14th century.

    Before the subject of Albert II's family - that is perhaps a bit too
    medieval for this newsgroup - falls by the wayside, it's worth
    commenting on these Genealogics entries:

    for Albert

    https://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00330744&tree=LEO

    and for his daughter Gertrude:

    https://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00330745&tree=LEO

    First, although we do not know the name of Albert's wife we know that Gertrude's mother was a daughter of Hermann IV of Baden & Udalhild of Tübingen, whose sons called her their niece and to whom she was
    explicitly described as a sister's daughter in two documents dated in
    November and December 1226 respectively, a year or so after her death,
    when they were ensuring their share of her inheritance. There is no good
    reason to suppose that this lady was a second wife of Albert, as often
    asserted - this assumption was based on nothing more than the purported existence of two sons allegedly born 17 and 18 years before Gertrude,
    and on the expectation that Albert (who was probably born ca 1155) must
    have been married earlier to a woman closer to his own age, in common
    with most other dynasts of his time, since the children of Hermann IV of
    Baden were apparently not born until the 1170s/80s. The latter reason is
    very little stronger than the former, as we know that some high-ranking aristocrats in the 12th/13th centuries delayed marriage until they were
    in their mid-30s or older - for instance, Albert's brother-in-law
    Hermann V of Baden, born ca 1178/80, was not married until after 1214,
    probably in 1217.

    Secondly, Gertrude was born in the first half of 1206. There is no basis
    for doubting this, despite a specious objection raised by Michel Parisse
    in 1999 on the basis that she could not have been married by 1213 unless
    she was at least 10-12 years old. The qualifying age for girls to marry
    was actually 12, not 10, so that any birth year after 1201 ought to be discounted on this shaky rationale. But the rule was taken to preclude consummated marriage before a girl reached her 12th birthday, when she
    had the right (occasionally exercised) to renounce a marriage entered
    into at the behest of others beforehand. Renier of Saint-Jacques tells
    us that the birth of Albert's daughter in 1206 dashed the hopes of the
    bishop of Liège and the duke of Brabant (Albert's half-brother) for
    getting possession of Moha. We know that these hopes were raised, or at
    least still active, in 1204 from a document dated in that year setting
    out terms for the bishop's prospects and another, evidently from around
    the same time, contradicting this in favour of the duke. Albert was
    determined to ensure Gertrude's speedy marriage, as in September 1206 he contracted with the duke of Upper Lorraine for their heirs to wed.
    Albert died in 1211 or 1212 and the marriage took place between 27
    December 1213 and 25 March 1214 (new style), when Gertrude was aged 7 or
    8, in which interval her first husband titled himself count of Dagsburg
    and Metz in a charter for Saint-Pierre-aux-Nonnains.

    Thirdly, her first husband did not repudiate her as stated in the
    Genealogics entry - they were still married when he died, either on 17
    February or 24 March in 1220. The latter, from a 20th-century copy of
    the 12th–13th-century necrology of Saint-Clément abbey at Metz that was destroyed in August 1944, is probably preferable. Around 50 years later
    it was said that he had been poisoned by a courtesan of Friedrich II.
    Thibaut was certainly dead by 7 April 1220, when we know from a charter
    of his mother that his younger brother had succeeded him as duke. This brother-in-law of Gertrude took it on himself to arrange her second
    marriage, to Thibaut le Chansonnier, count of Champagne & later king of
    Navarre (died 1253). He is the Thibaut who repudiated Gertrude, not his namesake of Upper Lorraine. The marriage took place in May 1220, just
    two months or so after Gertrude had been widowed, with the consent of
    the German king, subsequently emperor, Friedrich II. Specious objections
    have also been raised over the extreme haste of this: Alphonse HHuillard-Bréholles suggested that her first husband's death should be
    placed in 1219 rather than 1220, but his last-known document was dated
    January 1219 which by the usage of his chancery is 1220 new style.
    Again, the exceptional timing is not unexampled in this period - for
    instance, Ermesinde II of Luxemburg had been remarried by May 1214 after
    the death of her first husband in February of the same year. Gertrude's
    mother was reportedly still living when she married Thibaut of
    Champagne, though Franz Legl pointlessly suggested that the statement
    about this may have related to Thibaut's mother instead - the context
    was approval of Gertrude's marriage by Friedrich II, which of course did
    not apply to Thibaut as a French subject. The king later regretted his approval, as German princes complained about an alien getting hold of Gertrude's inheritance, and Thibaut was persuaded to repudiate the
    marriage after two years either on the grounds of affinity that
    conveniently came to light or because of her supposed sterility (when
    she was only 16 years old). Her third husband, unnamed in Genealogics,
    was Simon of Leiningen who continued calling himself count of Dagsburg
    after Gertrude's death, which occurred before 19 March 1225 when the
    bishop of Liège took possession of Moha as overlord. Simon was most
    probably heir to Leiningen in order to have secured such a notable
    heiress as wife, but died (after 16 March 1234) evidently before his
    presumed father, who lived until 1237.

    Peter Stewart

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mike davis@21:1/5 to pss...@optusnet.com.au on Thu Nov 4 05:05:59 2021
    On Wednesday, November 3, 2021 at 1:11:39 AM UTC, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
    On 03-Nov-21 4:38 AM, mike davis wrote:
    On Sunday, October 31, 2021 at 5:15:10 AM UTC, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
    On 29-Oct-21 10:47 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
    The legend that Albert II had two sons, named William and Henry, who
    accidentally killed each other while jousting persists even in the
    latest ESnF table for the family, vol. I/2 (1999), despite being an
    invention from the late-14th century.
    ..
    A correspondent off-list asked me if Albert II's illegitimate son may
    have left descendants, wondering if a male line from his agnatic
    7th-century ancestor Eticho, duke in Alsace, could perhaps have
    continued into modern times.

    Unfortunately this does not seem likely. Walter of Turquestein, who is

    I was wondering about the descent from Eticho too. It seems widely accepted across the net
    but did the counts of Eguisheim or a medieval source from the period ever claim that they
    were descended from the infamous Eticho?

    As I understand it the wife of Lothar I, daughter of Hugh of Tours is said to be descended from
    Duke Etih in the 9th century by the chronicler Thegan. Hugh is seen as the ancestor of the
    later counts of Alsace and the Eguisheimers are in turn descended from them. Eticho is also
    called Adalric - did he have 2 names or is Eticho/Etih a derivative?
    As you say, Thegan wrote that Hugo of Tours, father of Lothar's wife, belonged to the lineage of Eticho ("Hlutharius ... suscepit in coniugium filiam Hugi comitis, qui erat de stirpe cuiusdam ducis nomine Etih"),
    but there is not complete certainty about which Etichonid descendant was Hugo's father.

    my latin is not that good. does this phrase clearly mean that Hugo was descended from Etih or just his daughter who married Lothar? In other
    words could Lothar's wife be descended from Etih through her mother?
    All the historians quoted on the net have taken it to mean that it was
    Hugo so I assume that is correct, but I just wanted to be sure.


    According to the mid-9th-century Vita of St Odilia, abbess of Hohenburg, Eticho was properly named Adalric ("Temporibus igitur Childerici
    imperatoris erat quidam dux illustris nomine Adalricus, qui etiam alio nomine Etih dicebatur"). He occurs as Adalric in a spurious charter of Thierry III confiscating his benefices for alleged disloyalty,
    ostensibly dated 4 September 679, that was included in a 12th-century chronicle. In earlier authentic sources he is also called Chadich and Chatalrich, suggesting that Etih/Eticho was indeed a nickname derived
    from Adalric.

    It seems it goes like this Adalric/Eticho [d683]--Eticho--Hugh, and this Hugh is seen as grandfather
    of Hugh of Tours [d837], and then there are a lot of differences across the net as to the filiation and
    numbering of the different Luitfrids and Hughs as Alsace was divided between Sundgau and Nordgau.
    The descent is all but certain from inheritance of the same leading
    names (Eticho, Hugo, Liutfrid) and power bases, including lay abbacies
    and monastic advocacies during a period when these were more reliably transmitted within agnatic lines than some other offices, though
    specifics are not recorded in a few generations.
    The line from Hugh of Tours to Luitfrid VII [1003] in the Sundgau has several breaks in it but everyone
    accepts its the same family, however its not clear how the counts in the Nordgau starting with
    Eberard III [898] are descended from Hugh of Tours, and it is this line which becomes Eguisheim.
    It seems Hugh of Eguisheim [d1048] was a younger son of Hugh Raucus [d986] Count of Nordgau.
    The line I've seen on the net has the Nordgau descended not from Hugh of Tours but to Eberard I of
    Nordgau [777] a supposed descendant of Eticho. So I wonder how firm is this line from Eticho to
    the Eguisheimers?
    It is not unquestioned in the literature, but consensus regarding a male-line connection has been strong over centuries. The filiation and byname of Hugo Raucus are stated in a bull of his grandson Pope Leo IX
    for Altdorf abbey, so there is no doubt about a link from counts in the Alsatian Nordgau in presumed dynastc succession from Eticho to the
    comital lineage of Eguisheim.

    To those who havnt looked at this before it should be stated that the standard version has the duchy of alsace suppressed by Pippin III and divided into 2 counties, Nordgau and Sundgau which eventually came to be controlled by
    the descendants of Eticho. In Sundgau they are called the Luitfridings and are descended from Hugo of Tours. In Nordgau they are called the Eberards and
    are descended from Eberard I who last appears in 777.

    When I looked at this line on the net I found a big gap between the etichonids in the late 8th until the later 9th century when the family which Christian Wilsdorf
    calls the Eberards appear in Alsace, usually called the Counts of Nordgau in the
    10th century. Understand that I havnt looked at the sources or academic papers merely what others have put on the net, so there may be documentary evidence that I havnt seen. Perhaps I should start a new post about this if it interests people as its quite long?

    I expect that historians can find other ways to trace the Eguisheimers back to Hugh of Tours, but I
    just wondered if this descent from a 7th century merovingian duke was mentioned again in the
    medieval period after the 9th century.
    The mid-12th century chronicle of Ebersheim confused Eticho's father Liuteric with Leudesius son of Erchinoald, making them blood relatives
    of the Merovingians and describing Eticho's mother as a relative of Burgundian kings - this was accepted by some, not all, historians until
    the late-19th century. The 12th-century chronicle of Saint-Pierre de
    Bèze made Adalric/Eticho into the son of a duke in Burgundy named Amalgarius. In the 15th/16th-century cartulary of Honau abbey there is a genealogy of Eticho's descendants. He reportedly killed his son with a
    blow from a club for the boy's temerity in displaying Eticho's daughter
    St Odilia to a crowd when she was being carried in a litter at
    Hohenburg, so he and his immediate family figure in her hagiographies
    from the 9th and 13th centuries.


    I came across these later accounts too. The Honau genealogy is remarkably detailed for so late a source, but it is apparently a copy of an earlier compilation
    from 1079 presumably using the original documents. Its accepted by everybody
    it seems but the generations stop about c770. The other 2 accounts concern
    the origins of Eticho and have divided historians since the 18th century and continue to do so today. I notice Settipani favours the Amalgar version, while Medlands has Leudesius. I dont know enough to judge the merits of either,
    but the Amalgar version would push the male line back further to c600.

    However do either of these Chronicles say that the Eguisheimers or the nordgau were descended from Eticho? Both of these chroniclers were well aware
    of the legend of st.odile as was Bruno of Toul/Leo IX and the author of
    his Vita, Cardinal Humbert, but Eticho isnt mentioned among the Popes
    ancestors according to Christian Wilsdorf. He suggests that these Eberards
    of Nordgau who gave rise to the Egisheimers were linked to the Etichonids through marriage not by male line descent. I havnt seen an important article
    by Vollmer on the subject so I dont know if he deals with the Eberards.

    Finally to get back to the original subject of the Dagsburgs. There seems
    to be another break in the male line from Eticho to Albert II [d1212?] because I read that he is descended from Albert II lord of Moha [d1098] who married Heilwig of Dagsburg. Albert of Moha inherited Dagsburg & Eguisheim when both of her
    brothers Gerhard II and Hugo VI [d1089] died without heirs. This I read on
    Wiki for Moha but wiki can be wrong. Also the numbering of the various Hugos
    of Nordgau and Eguisheim is a nightmare. Everybody has their own version!

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mike davis@21:1/5 to mike davis on Thu Nov 4 09:40:46 2021
    On Thursday, November 4, 2021 at 12:06:01 PM UTC, mike davis wrote:

    Finally to get back to the original subject of the Dagsburgs. There seems
    to be another break in the male line from Eticho to Albert II [d1212?] because
    I read that he is descended from Albert II lord of Moha [d1098] who married Heilwig of Dagsburg. Albert of Moha inherited Dagsburg & Eguisheim when both of her
    brothers Gerhard II and Hugo VI [d1089] died without heirs. This I read on Wiki for Moha but wiki can be wrong. Also the numbering of the various Hugos of Nordgau and Eguisheim is a nightmare. Everybody has their own version!


    I've been emailed that the moha business is the other way round. Namely
    that Henry I of Eguisheim married the heiress of Moha [a tiny place near Leige] and that Albert II of Moha was in fact his son who then succeeded to his brothers counties after they both died.

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Stewart@21:1/5 to mike davis on Fri Nov 5 15:16:26 2021
    On 05-Nov-21 3:40 AM, mike davis wrote:
    On Thursday, November 4, 2021 at 12:06:01 PM UTC, mike davis wrote:

    Finally to get back to the original subject of the Dagsburgs. There seems
    to be another break in the male line from Eticho to Albert II [d1212?] because
    I read that he is descended from Albert II lord of Moha [d1098] who married >> Heilwig of Dagsburg. Albert of Moha inherited Dagsburg & Eguisheim when both of her
    brothers Gerhard II and Hugo VI [d1089] died without heirs. This I read on >> Wiki for Moha but wiki can be wrong. Also the numbering of the various Hugos >> of Nordgau and Eguisheim is a nightmare. Everybody has their own version!


    I've been emailed that the moha business is the other way round. Namely
    that Henry I of Eguisheim married the heiress of Moha [a tiny place near Leige]
    and that Albert II of Moha was in fact his son who then succeeded to his brothers counties after they both died.

    Several generations have been skipped in this summary - Albert I (died
    ca 1098) was son of the heiress of Moha. He married Ermesinde I of
    Luxemburg, who brought Longwy into the Dagsburg-Egisheim family (Alberic
    of Troisfontaines has perpetuated confusion over this). Albert II (died 1211/12) was their great-grandson.

    Albert I had at least three brothers, two of whom were counts, but
    Albert II had only one.

    Peter Stewart

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