Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King Rich

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Douglas Richardson

Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King Rich

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 31 okt 2006 23:25:20

Dear Newsgroup ~

Since my first post on the death date of Queen Bérengère of England
back in 2003, I've been looking for other records of the good queen's
death. Recently I located another French obituary of Queen Bérengère
which again confirms that the queen died 23 December [1230].

A transcript of the obituary is given below. It is taken from a
calendrier of Maubuisson Abbey, which religious house was founded by
Queen Blanche of Castile, wife of King Louis VIII of France.

"X kal. januarii [23 December]. Obiit Berengaria regina et soror
ejus." [Reference: Léopold Delisle, Manuscrits latins et français
ajoutés aux fonds des nouvelles acquisitions pendant les années
1875-1894, Pt. 2 (1894): 509-510].

The above cited volume can be found through Google Book Search at the
following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... +Braine%22

Curiously, I see in a footnote that the editor, Léopold Delisle, an
astute historian, mistakenly identified Queen Bérengère of this
record as Queen Blanche's own sister, Queen Berenguela of León. It's
odd that Monsieur Delisle would make such a careless error, as the
death date of Queen Bérengère stated in the record doesn't match the
known death date of the queen of León. Mistakes happen.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Peter Stewart

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 01 nov 2006 00:01:01

"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1162333520.582652.6600@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Dear Newsgroup ~

Since my first post on the death date of Queen Bérengère of England
back in 2003, I've been looking for other records of the good queen's
death. Recently I located another French obituary of Queen Bérengère
which again confirms that the queen died 23 December [1230].

A transcript of the obituary is given below. It is taken from a
calendrier of Maubuisson Abbey, which religious house was founded by
Queen Blanche of Castile, wife of King Louis VIII of France.

"X kal. januarii [23 December]. Obiit Berengaria regina et soror
ejus." [Reference: Léopold Delisle, Manuscrits latins et français
ajoutés aux fonds des nouvelles acquisitions pendant les années
1875-1894, Pt. 2 (1894): 509-510].

The above cited volume can be found through Google Book Search at the
following weblink:

http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... +Braine%22

Curiously, I see in a footnote that the editor, Léopold Delisle, an
astute historian, mistakenly identified Queen Bérengère of this
record as Queen Blanche's own sister, Queen Berenguela of León. It's
odd that Monsieur Delisle would make such a careless error, as the
death date of Queen Bérengère stated in the record doesn't match the
known death date of the queen of León. Mistakes happen.

No doubt you will tell us what you make of "et soror ejus" in this record,
to justify your description of Delisle's error as "careless".

You will also have noted, I suppose, that the hasty guessworker Alberic of
Troisfontaines also confirms the date of 23 December.

For the sake of precision & certainty you will need to account for other
obituaries that give 22 December or Christmas day instead for the death of
Queen Berengaria.

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 01 nov 2006 00:56:36

Peter Stewart wrote:

No doubt you will tell us what you make of "et soror ejus" in this record,
to justify your description of Delisle's error as "careless".

The notation "and her sister" refers to Queen Bérengère of England's
own sister, Blanche of Navarre, not to Queen Blanche of Castile's
sister, Queen Berenguela of Leon. This should have been obvious to
you, Peter.

You made a similar careless error when you recently stated on the
newsgroup [7 Sept. 2005] that the sole claimants to Perche in 1226 were
"Blanche of Navarre, countess of Champagne (through her descent from
Count Geoffrey II) and Jacques, seigneur of Château-Gontier (through
his descent from Count Rotrou III)."

Blanche of Navarre was actually co-claimant to Perche with her sister,
Queen Bérengère of England, as indicated by several important
documents found in Léon Pigeotte, Histoire des ducs et des comtes de
Champagne, pp. 229, 230, 238. The two sisters' near kinship to
Guillaume, Count of Perche, was acknowledged by the count in October
1224 just prior to his death [Reference: Pigeotte, pg. 218].

We all make mistakes, Peter.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Peter Stewart

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 01 nov 2006 02:01:01

"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1162338996.784952.60520@e64g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

No doubt you will tell us what you make of "et soror ejus" in this
record,
to justify your description of Delisle's error as "careless".

The notation "and her sister" refers to Queen Bérengère of England's
own sister, Blanche of Navarre, not to Queen Blanche of Castile's
sister, Queen Berenguela of Leon. This should have been obvious to
you, Peter.

You made a similar careless error when you recently stated on the
newsgroup [7 Sept. 2005] that the sole claimants to Perche in 1226 were
"Blanche of Navarre, countess of Champagne (through her descent from
Count Geoffrey II) and Jacques, seigneur of Château-Gontier (through
his descent from Count Rotrou III)."

Blanche of Navarre was actually co-claimant to Perche with her sister,
Queen Bérengère of England, as indicated by several important
documents found in Léon Pigeotte, Histoire des ducs et des comtes de
Champagne, pp. 229, 230, 238. The two sisters' near kinship to
Guillaume, Count of Perche, was acknowledged by the count in October
1224 just prior to his death [Reference: Pigeotte, pg. 218].

We all make mistakes, Peter.

Do not ascribe words to me, let alone false & ignorant ones intended to
misrepresent what I wrote.

To be accurate, as anyone can check, this was: "The claim was contested
between Blanche of Navarre, countess of Champagne (through her descent from
Count Geoffrey II) and Jacques, seigneur of Château-Gontier (through his
descent from Count Rotrou III). There was no claim made for a Thomas aged 11
by anyone, including Countess Helisende who was by then remarried to Garnier
IV de Traînel, seigneur of Marigny. She was certainly not the mother of this
person."

There is no statement here that the "sole claimants" were Blanche and
Jacques, but rather that they contested the inheritance. Queen Berengaria,
widowed and childless, was a mere cipher in the matter, barely figuring in
this - she was a party to concords regarding the dispute because obviously
as the sister of a contestant for the she had a potential claim of her own,
but she did not take a lead in pressing this & her own heir was Blanche
anyway. Merely finding Berengaria named in a few brief extracts from
documents that you have not read has no force to change circumstances, let
alone the narrative history of these events.

And one day you may learn to read well enough to check the title pages of
standard reference works that you seek to use & abuse, and even to cite
these correctly. The famous _Histoire des comtes et ducs de Champagne_ was
the work of Henri Arbois de Jubainville, in six volumes of which the last
two (I think) carried the name of Léon Pigeotte as his assistant only, not
as the author.

As to "et soror ejus", you have missed the point entirely: Queen
Berengaria's sister Blanche died in March, not in December, and was by far
the more important figure of these two, so why on earth would she be
commemorated merely as the anonymous sister of someone who had died in
veiled obscurity? We see what you made of the words, and we see that it is
tripe. The reference is to Berengaria's and Blanche's sister Constance, who
died young and was remembered by the two queens but not known by name to
most others in France. It was not "careless" of Delisle to overlook this dim
factoid, but it is typically absurd of you to get it wrong after criticising
him and then trying to do the same to me. "This should have been obvious to
you", indeed.

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 01 nov 2006 03:16:22

The documents I've cited make it clear that Queen Bérengère of
England was co-claimant to Perche in 1226 with her sister, Blanche of
Navarre, on the death of their cousin, Guillaume, Count of Perche. The
documents also indicate that Queen Bérengère was a party to the
treaty which partitioned Perche. You pretending that the former Queen
of England was a mere "cipher" veiled in obscurity to be ignored by you
is a novel excuse ... even for you, Peter.

As for the Pigeotte error, I'm afraid that Google Book Search is to
blame for this. Google cites Monsieur Pigeotte as the author of this
work. I have no idea why, as the title page clearly attributes the
work to Henri Arbois de Jubainville. I caught the error earlier this
week when I posted from this work, but not this time. Thank you for
bringing Google's error to everyone's attention.

We all make mistakes. Google Book Search does. Leopold Delisle did.
I do. And so do you. It's what makes us human. And that's a good
thing, Peter.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Douglas Richardson

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 01 nov 2006 03:35:35

Peter Stewart wrote:

And one day you may learn to read well enough to check the title pages of
standard reference works that you seek to use & abuse, and even to cite
these correctly. The famous _Histoire des comtes et ducs de Champagne_ was
the work of Henri Arbois de Jubainville, in six volumes of which the last
two (I think) carried the name of Léon Pigeotte as his assistant only, not
as the author.

Perhaps you should read the title pages of this work again. Google
Book Search includes this note in smaller print:

On t.-p. of v. 4-6: "Avec la collaboration de L. Pigeotte."

Thus, it would seem that volumes 4, 5, and 6 were written with the
collaboration of Monsieur Pigeotte, not just 5 and 6 as you have
stated.

The gaffe about the number of volumes issued with Pigeotte is really a
minor thing.

DR

Peter Stewart

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 01 nov 2006 03:41:01

"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1162347382.819378.14230@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The documents I've cited make it clear that Queen Bérengère of
England was co-claimant to Perche in 1226 with her sister, Blanche of
Navarre, on the death of their cousin, Guillaume, Count of Perche. The
documents also indicate that Queen Bérengère was a party to the
treaty which partitioned Perche. You pretending that the former Queen
of England was a mere "cipher" veiled in obscurity to be ignored by you
is a novel excuse ... even for you, Peter.

Berengaria was living in the cloister, and not capable of ruling Maine from
her vows. She did NOT personally claim the countship, but was merely
involved peripherally (and named first from her higher rank) as the sister
of one who did contest the inheritance - that as I said would have passed to
Blanche anyway if adjuged to Berengaria as senior.

You cannot rewrite history to cover your leaping into another mess. There is
no "pretending" in the account I gave, only historical reality. The contest
for power was directly between Blanche and Jacques.

As for the Pigeotte error, I'm afraid that Google Book Search is to
blame for this. Google cites Monsieur Pigeotte as the author of this
work. I have no idea why, as the title page clearly attributes the
work to Henri Arbois de Jubainville. I caught the error earlier this
week when I posted from this work, but not this time. Thank you for
bringing Google's error to everyone's attention.

This is no excuse for someone who aspires to bandy facts and criticism with
Delisle - EVERYONE who has studied these people at all should know that
Arbois de Jubainville wrote the great work on the counts of Champagne, not
Pigeotte. The people behind Google have not made such a study, and don't
pretend to cast aspersions on others who have.

We all make mistakes. Google Book Search does. Leopold Delisle did.
I do. And so do you. It's what makes us human. And that's a good
thing, Peter.

Once again, attempting to patronise others from your position of abominable
offenses on this score is the work of a loon, with a wild self-obsession but
no self-awareness.

Peter Stewart

Peter Stewart

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 01 nov 2006 03:56:01

"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1162348535.341254.288670@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

And one day you may learn to read well enough to check the title pages
of
standard reference works that you seek to use & abuse, and even to cite
these correctly. The famous _Histoire des comtes et ducs de Champagne_
was
the work of Henri Arbois de Jubainville, in six volumes of which the
last
two (I think) carried the name of Léon Pigeotte as his assistant only,
not
as the author.

Perhaps you should read the title pages of this work again. Google
Book Search includes this note in smaller print:

On t.-p. of v. 4-6: "Avec la collaboration de L. Pigeotte."

Thus, it would seem that volumes 4, 5, and 6 were written with the
collaboration of Monsieur Pigeotte, not just 5 and 6 as you have
stated.

The gaffe about the number of volumes issued with Pigeotte is really a
minor thing.

You really are pitiful, unable to help yourself in the face of
straightforward facts.

As quoted above, I wrote "(I think)", so this was suggested rather than
"stated" and there is no "gaffe" even though this was wrong as to volume 4.
I have it on my shelf, but didn't bother to get it down and so added the
qualification.

That is how careful scholars behave, always, something you are not qualified
to know. A "gaffe" on the other hand is a barefaced assertion that can't be
backed up, something that you done numerous times in the past few days.

We are still waiting to hear from you about the alternative dates for Queen
Berengaria's death that you seem to have made the gaffe of overlooking.
These are given in sources earlier than the late 13th-century one that you
found in Delisle's book, without telling us when the obituary was compiled.

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 01 nov 2006 06:18:36

Peter Stewart wrote:

As quoted above, I wrote "(I think)", so this was suggested rather than
"stated" and there is no "gaffe" even though this was wrong as to volume 4.
I have it on my shelf, but didn't bother to get it down and so added the
qualification.

Now what kind of a lame excuse is that? You can't be bothered to look
at a book on your shelf? Pardon but you come off sounding really lazy,
Peter. Are you expecting us to do your research for you?

That is how careful scholars behave, always, something you are not qualified
to know. A "gaffe" on the other hand is a barefaced assertion that can't be
backed up, something that you done numerous times in the past few days.

"Careful" scholars are human beings who make errors. Just like
Delisle. Just like Google. Just like me. Just like you.

Peter Stewart

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Peter Stewart

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 01 nov 2006 06:41:02

"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1162358316.446516.240320@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

As quoted above, I wrote "(I think)", so this was suggested rather than
"stated" and there is no "gaffe" even though this was wrong as to volume
4.
I have it on my shelf, but didn't bother to get it down and so added the
qualification.

Now what kind of a lame excuse is that? You can't be bothered to look
at a book on your shelf? Pardon but you come off sounding really lazy,
Peter. Are you expecting us to do your research for you?

Not an excuse, and it's not a question of research, much less mine - I don't
owe you anything at all, including the effort to cross the room. I wrote "(I
think)" to indicate to sensible readers that I was going by memory, not
certainty. Everyone but you - indeed everyone including you - must surely
have understood that. Honest people, and those with a modicum of sense,
don't make a twisted song-and-dance about misrepresented trifles.

For someone who didn't even have a clue who was author of the work in
question, you are making a most ludicrous cock-sparrow of yourself by trying
to turn the issue onto someone else over such a silly point.

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 01 nov 2006 06:44:52

Peter Stewart wrote:

For someone who didn't even have a clue who was author of the work in
question, you are making a most ludicrous cock-sparrow of yourself by trying
to turn the issue onto someone else over such a silly point.

Peter Stewart

You've been taking your meds, right?

DR

Douglas Richardson

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 01 nov 2006 07:06:46

Peter Stewart wrote:

No doubt you will tell us what you make of "et soror ejus" in this record,
to justify your description of Delisle's error as "careless".

In answer to Mr. Stewart's request for free research, as I stated
earlier, the notation "and her sister" [et soror ejus] in the
Maubuissson Abbey calendrier refers to Queen Bérengère of England's
own sister, Blanche of Navarre, NOT to Queen Blanche of Castile's
sister, Queen Berenguela of Leon.

A similar example of Queen Bérengère's obit being celebrated on
December 23rd with that of her sister, Blanche of Navarre, can be found
in Lalore, Cartulaire de l'Abbaye de Boulancourt (1869), page 95,
which source I quote below:

Obituaire: "23 Dec.-solemnel pour dame Bérangère de Castille,
reine d'Angleterre, et dame Blanche, sa soeur, comtesse de
Champagne."

In this instance, Queen Bérengère's sister, Blanche, is specifically
named in the record. So, yes, Delisle made a careless error in
attributing the Maubuisson Abbey obit to the wrong queen. What can I
say? It happens.

Now that I've done Peter Stewart's research for him, perhaps he will be
decent enough to thank me.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Peter Stewart

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 01 nov 2006 08:41:02

How great a twit are you trying to show yourself?

Have you not noticed the language of this record from Boulancourt? It is NOT
medieval, just a modern memorial record glossing such an entry as Delisle
printed from Maubuisson and - like Delisle - making an understandable
misidentification of the sister in question.

Blanche's obit occurs in a number of necrologies, always in March, variously
on 5, 11, 12 or 14 of the month, never on 23 December or in combination with
her sister.

Queen Berengaria probably arranged for the joint memorial with her otherwise
forgotten sister Constance. Berengaria died after Constance but BEFORE
Blanche - so how could a contemporary obituarist tack on the living sister
to the dead one's obit? Pray tell us how you make that out.

And pray stop trying to misrepresnt me as somehow upholding the error of
Delisle: I acknowledged this from the start, when I wrote 'No doubt you will
tell us what you make of "et soror ejus" in this record, to justify your
description of Delisle's error as "careless".' The only point I was making
is that the error was NOT "careless", while I explicitly called it an error
on Delisle's part.

You on the other hand are making a "careful" error about this, a very stupid
proceeding.

Peter Stewart



"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1162361206.265456.168740@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

No doubt you will tell us what you make of "et soror ejus" in this
record,
to justify your description of Delisle's error as "careless".

In answer to Mr. Stewart's request for free research, as I stated
earlier, the notation "and her sister" [et soror ejus] in the
Maubuissson Abbey calendrier refers to Queen Bérengère of England's
own sister, Blanche of Navarre, NOT to Queen Blanche of Castile's
sister, Queen Berenguela of Leon.

A similar example of Queen Bérengère's obit being celebrated on
December 23rd with that of her sister, Blanche of Navarre, can be found
in Lalore, Cartulaire de l'Abbaye de Boulancourt (1869), page 95,
which source I quote below:

Obituaire: "23 Dec.-solemnel pour dame Bérangère de Castille,
reine d'Angleterre, et dame Blanche, sa soeur, comtesse de
Champagne."

In this instance, Queen Bérengère's sister, Blanche, is specifically
named in the record. So, yes, Delisle made a careless error in
attributing the Maubuisson Abbey obit to the wrong queen. What can I
say? It happens.

Now that I've done Peter Stewart's research for him, perhaps he will be
decent enough to thank me.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Peter Stewart

Re: Death date of Queen Bérengère of England, widow of King

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 01 nov 2006 08:46:02

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:qeY1h.56897$rP1.21215@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
How great a twit are you trying to show yourself?

Have you not noticed the language of this record from Boulancourt? It is
NOT medieval, just a modern memorial record glossing such an entry as
Delisle printed from Maubuisson and - like Delisle - making an
understandable misidentification of the sister in question.

Blanche's obit occurs in a number of necrologies, always in March,
variously on 5, 11, 12 or 14 of the month, never on 23 December or in
combination with her sister.

Queen Berengaria probably arranged for the joint memorial with her
otherwise forgotten sister Constance. Berengaria died after Constance but
BEFORE Blanche - so how could a contemporary obituarist tack on the living
sister to the dead one's obit? Pray tell us how you make that out.

Sorry, I lost my train of thought while watching the TV news - I had meant
to say that Blanche died BEFORE Berengaria, so how could a contemporary
obituarist tack on the longer-deceased sister as an afterthought to the
newly dead one's obit?

Blanche at her death was a famous lady in France where these obituary
notices originated, having ruled Champagne as regent from the infancy of her
son King Thibaud le Chansonnier; Berengaria on the other hand was a
comparative non-entity, who died as a nun.

Peter Stewart

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»