Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richard pr
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
John P. Ravilious
Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richard pr
Dear Stewart, Todd, et al.,
There is a lengthy paper trail re: Tancred de Hauteville
and his wives, Muriel(la) and Fressenda/Fredesende, on SGM
and elsewhere with special emphasis on their alleged
paternity. Muriel is widely accepted (but not proven) to
have been the illegitimate daughter of a young Richard II of
Normandy, with the possibility that she was actually Richard
II's illegitimate sister also put about.
Todd had noted in 2001 concerning certain contemporaneous
(or near-contemporaneous) documents,
' One of these calls William, son of Tancred and Murielle
"nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie", while the other
says of Robert Guiscard "... inter quos nepos ipsius
Ricardi, Robertus nomine, in Appuliam precectus est".
Adding in chronology, which would seem to make the two
women of the same generation as Richard III, it would seem
to make them daughters of his father, Richard II.' [1]
I have noted a reference in the Acta of William I (the
Conqueror) that provides some food for thought on this. Among
the various grants and benefactors named, we find the
following:
' Ebremar gave forty acres of land in
Englesqueville-la-Percée, twenty acres at Cairon, two
sheaves of half the tithe of Cairon, and the tithe at
Villons-les-Buissons which he had bought from Muriel, the
sister of Richard princeps, all on behalf of his daughter
who had become a nun of the abbey.' [2]
This does not prove anything concerning a marriage or
descent to Tancred de Hauteville, but does provide an
interesting statement as to Richard 'princeps' having had a
sister Muriel. If the identification of Richard 'princeps' as
Count/Duke Richard is correct, this would in fact provide an
element of support to the (near) contemporaneous statement
that William, son of Tancred de Hauteville and Muriel, was
in fact "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie".
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] Todd A. Farmerie, <Tancred de Hauteville's wife>, SGM,
26 April 2001.
[2] David Bates, ed., Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: the
Acta of William I, 1066-1087 (Clarendon Press, 1998),
no. 59, p. 273.
URL:
http://books.google.com/books?id=SmYw6D ... PPP1285,M1
* John P. Ravilious
There is a lengthy paper trail re: Tancred de Hauteville
and his wives, Muriel(la) and Fressenda/Fredesende, on SGM
and elsewhere with special emphasis on their alleged
paternity. Muriel is widely accepted (but not proven) to
have been the illegitimate daughter of a young Richard II of
Normandy, with the possibility that she was actually Richard
II's illegitimate sister also put about.
Todd had noted in 2001 concerning certain contemporaneous
(or near-contemporaneous) documents,
' One of these calls William, son of Tancred and Murielle
"nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie", while the other
says of Robert Guiscard "... inter quos nepos ipsius
Ricardi, Robertus nomine, in Appuliam precectus est".
Adding in chronology, which would seem to make the two
women of the same generation as Richard III, it would seem
to make them daughters of his father, Richard II.' [1]
I have noted a reference in the Acta of William I (the
Conqueror) that provides some food for thought on this. Among
the various grants and benefactors named, we find the
following:
' Ebremar gave forty acres of land in
Englesqueville-la-Percée, twenty acres at Cairon, two
sheaves of half the tithe of Cairon, and the tithe at
Villons-les-Buissons which he had bought from Muriel, the
sister of Richard princeps, all on behalf of his daughter
who had become a nun of the abbey.' [2]
This does not prove anything concerning a marriage or
descent to Tancred de Hauteville, but does provide an
interesting statement as to Richard 'princeps' having had a
sister Muriel. If the identification of Richard 'princeps' as
Count/Duke Richard is correct, this would in fact provide an
element of support to the (near) contemporaneous statement
that William, son of Tancred de Hauteville and Muriel, was
in fact "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie".
Cheers,
John *
NOTES
[1] Todd A. Farmerie, <Tancred de Hauteville's wife>, SGM,
26 April 2001.
[2] David Bates, ed., Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: the
Acta of William I, 1066-1087 (Clarendon Press, 1998),
no. 59, p. 273.
URL:
http://books.google.com/books?id=SmYw6D ... PPP1285,M1
* John P. Ravilious
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
Great post, John.
Regarding the use of the word, nepos, in the period before 1250, one
has to be especially careful how the word is interpreted, as it can
mean either nephew, grandson, or kinsman.
Here are two examples of where it clearly means nephew:
1. Stubbs, Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Houedene 4 (Rolls Ser. 51)
(1871): 140 (sub A.D. 1200: "Henricum de Boum, nepotem Willielmi regis
Scotiæ" [Henry de Bohun, nephew of William [the Lion] King of
Scotland).
2. Rymer, FOEdera 1(1) (1816): 28-29, 87-88, 93, 104, 108, 114
(instances of Otto, King of the Romans, styled "nephew" [nepos] of
King John.
Here are two examples of where it clearly means kinsman:
1. Monumenta Germaniæ Historica, 27 (1925): 110 (Ex Gestis Henrici II.
et Ricardi I.: Heinrich, Duke of Saxony, styled "kinsman" [nepos] of
Emperor Friedrich I. Barbarossa).
2. Monumenta Germaniæ Historica: Diplomata Regum et Imperatorum
Germaniæ 10(1) (1975): 259-260, 332-335 (instances of Heinrich, Duke
of Saxony and Bavaria, styled "kinsman" ["nepotem nostrum"/"nepos
noster"] by Emperor Friedrich I. Barbarossa).
This doesn't negate your interpretation that William son of Tancred de
Hauteville and his wife Muriel was "nephew" [nepos] to Richard II,
Duke of Normandy. It just means you have to be careful how you
interpret the word nepos.
Having said that, I see that you've dredged up a most interesting
record which refers to Muriel the sister of Richard the prince
["Richard princeps"]. I assume, like you, that Richard, Duke of
Normandy, is the one intended in this document. If so, this is good
evidence to support that Duke Richard had a sister named Muriel. For
what it is worth, I recently encountered an acknowledgement dated 1470
in which John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, was styled "the highe and
myghti prynce." [Reference: Fourth Report Hist. MSS. Comm. (1874): 461-
462]. While this is a much later record, it certainly is an example
of a duke being called a prince.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
<From: "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com>
<Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:12:36 -0800 (PST)
<Local: Thurs, Nov 29 2007 6:12 am
<Subject: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richard
princeps'
<Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
<Dear Stewart, Todd, et al.,
< There is a lengthy paper trail re: Tancred de Hauteville
<and his wives, Muriel(la) and Fressenda/Fredesende, on SGM
<and elsewhere with special emphasis on their alleged
<paternity. Muriel is widely accepted (but not proven) to
<have been the illegitimate daughter of a young Richard II of
<Normandy, with the possibility that she was actually Richard
<II's illegitimate sister also put about.
<
< Todd had noted in 2001 concerning certain contemporaneous
< (or near-contemporaneous) documents,
<
< ' One of these calls William, son of Tancred and Murielle
< "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie", while the other
< says of Robert Guiscard "... inter quos nepos ipsius
< Ricardi, Robertus nomine, in Appuliam precectus est".
< Adding in chronology, which would seem to make the two
< women of the same generation as Richard III, it would seem
< to make them daughters of his father, Richard II.' [1]
<
< I have noted a reference in the Acta of William I (the
< Conqueror) that provides some food for thought on this. Among
< the various grants and benefactors named, we find the
< following:
<
< ' Ebremar gave forty acres of land in
< Englesqueville-la-Percée, twenty acres at Cairon, two
< sheaves of half the tithe of Cairon, and the tithe at
< Villons-les-Buissons which he had bought from Muriel, the
< sister of Richard princeps, all on behalf of his daughter
< who had become a nun of the abbey.' [2]
<
< This does not prove anything concerning a marriage or
< descent to Tancred de Hauteville, but does provide an
< interesting statement as to Richard 'princeps' having had a
< sister Muriel. If the identification of Richard 'princeps' as
< Count/Duke Richard is correct, this would in fact provide an
< element of support to the (near) contemporaneous statement
< that William, son of Tancred de Hauteville and Muriel, was
< in fact "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie".
<
< Cheers,
<
< John *
<
<NOTES
<
< [1] Todd A. Farmerie, <Tancred de Hauteville's wife>, SGM,
< 26 April 2001.
<
< [2] David Bates, ed., Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: the
< Acta of William I, 1066-1087 (Clarendon Press, 1998),
< no. 59, p. 273.
< URL:
<
<http://books.google.com/books?id=SmYw6DKAgP8C&pg=PP325&dq=humphrey
+ad...
< * John P. Ravilious
Regarding the use of the word, nepos, in the period before 1250, one
has to be especially careful how the word is interpreted, as it can
mean either nephew, grandson, or kinsman.
Here are two examples of where it clearly means nephew:
1. Stubbs, Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Houedene 4 (Rolls Ser. 51)
(1871): 140 (sub A.D. 1200: "Henricum de Boum, nepotem Willielmi regis
Scotiæ" [Henry de Bohun, nephew of William [the Lion] King of
Scotland).
2. Rymer, FOEdera 1(1) (1816): 28-29, 87-88, 93, 104, 108, 114
(instances of Otto, King of the Romans, styled "nephew" [nepos] of
King John.
Here are two examples of where it clearly means kinsman:
1. Monumenta Germaniæ Historica, 27 (1925): 110 (Ex Gestis Henrici II.
et Ricardi I.: Heinrich, Duke of Saxony, styled "kinsman" [nepos] of
Emperor Friedrich I. Barbarossa).
2. Monumenta Germaniæ Historica: Diplomata Regum et Imperatorum
Germaniæ 10(1) (1975): 259-260, 332-335 (instances of Heinrich, Duke
of Saxony and Bavaria, styled "kinsman" ["nepotem nostrum"/"nepos
noster"] by Emperor Friedrich I. Barbarossa).
This doesn't negate your interpretation that William son of Tancred de
Hauteville and his wife Muriel was "nephew" [nepos] to Richard II,
Duke of Normandy. It just means you have to be careful how you
interpret the word nepos.
Having said that, I see that you've dredged up a most interesting
record which refers to Muriel the sister of Richard the prince
["Richard princeps"]. I assume, like you, that Richard, Duke of
Normandy, is the one intended in this document. If so, this is good
evidence to support that Duke Richard had a sister named Muriel. For
what it is worth, I recently encountered an acknowledgement dated 1470
in which John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, was styled "the highe and
myghti prynce." [Reference: Fourth Report Hist. MSS. Comm. (1874): 461-
462]. While this is a much later record, it certainly is an example
of a duke being called a prince.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
<From: "John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com>
<Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:12:36 -0800 (PST)
<Local: Thurs, Nov 29 2007 6:12 am
<Subject: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richard
princeps'
<Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
<Dear Stewart, Todd, et al.,
< There is a lengthy paper trail re: Tancred de Hauteville
<and his wives, Muriel(la) and Fressenda/Fredesende, on SGM
<and elsewhere with special emphasis on their alleged
<paternity. Muriel is widely accepted (but not proven) to
<have been the illegitimate daughter of a young Richard II of
<Normandy, with the possibility that she was actually Richard
<II's illegitimate sister also put about.
<
< Todd had noted in 2001 concerning certain contemporaneous
< (or near-contemporaneous) documents,
<
< ' One of these calls William, son of Tancred and Murielle
< "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie", while the other
< says of Robert Guiscard "... inter quos nepos ipsius
< Ricardi, Robertus nomine, in Appuliam precectus est".
< Adding in chronology, which would seem to make the two
< women of the same generation as Richard III, it would seem
< to make them daughters of his father, Richard II.' [1]
<
< I have noted a reference in the Acta of William I (the
< Conqueror) that provides some food for thought on this. Among
< the various grants and benefactors named, we find the
< following:
<
< ' Ebremar gave forty acres of land in
< Englesqueville-la-Percée, twenty acres at Cairon, two
< sheaves of half the tithe of Cairon, and the tithe at
< Villons-les-Buissons which he had bought from Muriel, the
< sister of Richard princeps, all on behalf of his daughter
< who had become a nun of the abbey.' [2]
<
< This does not prove anything concerning a marriage or
< descent to Tancred de Hauteville, but does provide an
< interesting statement as to Richard 'princeps' having had a
< sister Muriel. If the identification of Richard 'princeps' as
< Count/Duke Richard is correct, this would in fact provide an
< element of support to the (near) contemporaneous statement
< that William, son of Tancred de Hauteville and Muriel, was
< in fact "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie".
<
< Cheers,
<
< John *
<
<NOTES
<
< [1] Todd A. Farmerie, <Tancred de Hauteville's wife>, SGM,
< 26 April 2001.
<
< [2] David Bates, ed., Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: the
< Acta of William I, 1066-1087 (Clarendon Press, 1998),
< no. 59, p. 273.
< URL:
<
<http://books.google.com/books?id=SmYw6DKAgP8C&pg=PP325&dq=humphrey
+ad...
< * John P. Ravilious
-
wjhonson
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
Some of the data in my files is inherited from various Gedcoms which I
had merged in the *way back time*. I have been subsequently firming
up, casting out, and cutting off lines here and there. At any rate.
Interesting, after I went to make Muriel "possibly of Normandy" citing
this post, I discovered I already *had* a woman called Muriel of
Normandy in my database.
How odd is that? This one is showing as married to Baldric "the
Teuton" seigneur de Courcy. *And* it's also showing her as an
illegitimate daughter of Duke Richard.
Reviewing the notes I inherited on this case, they don't mention
Muriel at all, which is disappointing as I was hoping to find from
where they got her name. There is a ref to PA (1968), pg 85 and pg
134 so perhaps these have something, but I'm not terribly hopeful it
will pan out.
Do we have a list of the children of Tancred by Muriel and then also a
list of (if any) children by Fressende ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
had merged in the *way back time*. I have been subsequently firming
up, casting out, and cutting off lines here and there. At any rate.
Interesting, after I went to make Muriel "possibly of Normandy" citing
this post, I discovered I already *had* a woman called Muriel of
Normandy in my database.
How odd is that? This one is showing as married to Baldric "the
Teuton" seigneur de Courcy. *And* it's also showing her as an
illegitimate daughter of Duke Richard.
Reviewing the notes I inherited on this case, they don't mention
Muriel at all, which is disappointing as I was hoping to find from
where they got her name. There is a ref to PA (1968), pg 85 and pg
134 so perhaps these have something, but I'm not terribly hopeful it
will pan out.
Do we have a list of the children of Tancred by Muriel and then also a
list of (if any) children by Fressende ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
Friday, 30 November, 2007
Dear Will, Todd, Doug, et al.,
As to the use of the title 'princeps' in place of or in
addition to that of 'dux', instances in the 13th century or
beyond are not directly pertinent, but we find relevant
examples in the charters of Robert, Duke of Normandy
(d. 1035), son of Richard II and father of William the
Conqueror. For example, in a charter dated 1031x1035
confirming grants of his predecessors, he is 'ego Robertus
gratia Dei dux et princeps Normannorum', while in another of
about the same date enumerating his gifts to Fecamp he is
'ego Rotbertus filius secundi Richardi nutu Dei Northmannorum
ducis et ipse per gratiam Dei princeps et dux
Northmannorum '[1]. We also find the titles 'comes' and
'consul' on occasion: however, it is the use of the
title 'princeps' I mentioned in the Acta of William I that
is at least helpful in stating that (1) [a] Duke Richard of
Normandy had a sister Muriel, and (2) this Muriel may in
fact be the problematic 1st wife of Tancred de Hauteville.
There is also the matter of identifying the place of
Muriel (1st wife of Tancred de Hauteville) in the ducal
pedigree. Among the charters of Duke Robert we have one in
favor of Mont-St.-Michel granting lands in Guernsey and
elsewhere, in which he is called 'ego Robertus comes filius
magni Richardi gratia Dei dux et princeps Normannorum ' [2].
Clearly it was Duke Richard II being refered to as 'Richardus
magnus', a designation I have seen as well for Richard I.
Whether this was done strictly for laudatory purposes, or as
a distinction made from a son/successor Richard (Robert's
predecessor Richard III in this instance) is difficult to
say: it is evident that one cannot rely on the identification
of a Norman duke as 'Richards magnus' in a charter or other
document as being clearly identifiable without additional
reference or context.
It appears to me that we must continue to rely on
chronological evidence in this matter, given the foregoing.
I am inclined to the placement of Muriel, wife of Tancred
de Hauteville, as an illegitimate daughter of Richard I,
and a half-sister of Richard II (presumably the 'Richardi
magni ducis Normandie' cited by Todd, and the 'Richard
princeps' of the Acta of William I).
Cheers,
John
[1] Charles Homer Haskins, Norman Institutions [Vol. XXIV,
Harvard Historical Studies, Cambridge: Harvard Univ.
Press, 1918), pp. 272-274.
[2] Haskins, ibid., pp. 273-274.
On Nov 29, 8:06�pm, wjhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Dear Will, Todd, Doug, et al.,
As to the use of the title 'princeps' in place of or in
addition to that of 'dux', instances in the 13th century or
beyond are not directly pertinent, but we find relevant
examples in the charters of Robert, Duke of Normandy
(d. 1035), son of Richard II and father of William the
Conqueror. For example, in a charter dated 1031x1035
confirming grants of his predecessors, he is 'ego Robertus
gratia Dei dux et princeps Normannorum', while in another of
about the same date enumerating his gifts to Fecamp he is
'ego Rotbertus filius secundi Richardi nutu Dei Northmannorum
ducis et ipse per gratiam Dei princeps et dux
Northmannorum '[1]. We also find the titles 'comes' and
'consul' on occasion: however, it is the use of the
title 'princeps' I mentioned in the Acta of William I that
is at least helpful in stating that (1) [a] Duke Richard of
Normandy had a sister Muriel, and (2) this Muriel may in
fact be the problematic 1st wife of Tancred de Hauteville.
There is also the matter of identifying the place of
Muriel (1st wife of Tancred de Hauteville) in the ducal
pedigree. Among the charters of Duke Robert we have one in
favor of Mont-St.-Michel granting lands in Guernsey and
elsewhere, in which he is called 'ego Robertus comes filius
magni Richardi gratia Dei dux et princeps Normannorum ' [2].
Clearly it was Duke Richard II being refered to as 'Richardus
magnus', a designation I have seen as well for Richard I.
Whether this was done strictly for laudatory purposes, or as
a distinction made from a son/successor Richard (Robert's
predecessor Richard III in this instance) is difficult to
say: it is evident that one cannot rely on the identification
of a Norman duke as 'Richards magnus' in a charter or other
document as being clearly identifiable without additional
reference or context.
It appears to me that we must continue to rely on
chronological evidence in this matter, given the foregoing.
I am inclined to the placement of Muriel, wife of Tancred
de Hauteville, as an illegitimate daughter of Richard I,
and a half-sister of Richard II (presumably the 'Richardi
magni ducis Normandie' cited by Todd, and the 'Richard
princeps' of the Acta of William I).
Cheers,
John
[1] Charles Homer Haskins, Norman Institutions [Vol. XXIV,
Harvard Historical Studies, Cambridge: Harvard Univ.
Press, 1918), pp. 272-274.
[2] Haskins, ibid., pp. 273-274.
On Nov 29, 8:06�pm, wjhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Some of the data in my files is inherited from various Gedcoms which I
had merged in the *way back time*. �I have been subsequently firming
up, casting out, and cutting off lines here and there. �At any rate.
Interesting, after I went to make Muriel "possibly of Normandy" citing
this post, I discovered I already *had* a woman called Muriel of
Normandy in my database.
How odd is that? �This one �is showing as married to Baldric "the
Teuton" seigneur de Courcy. �*And* it's also showing her as an
illegitimate daughter of Duke Richard.
Reviewing the notes I inherited on this case, they don't mention
Muriel at all, which is disappointing as I was hoping to find from
where they got her name. �There is a ref to PA (1968), pg 85 and pg
134 so perhaps these have something, but I'm not terribly hopeful it
will pan out.
Do we have a list of the children of Tancred by Muriel and then also a
list of (if any) children by Fressende ?
Thanks
Will Johnson
-
Roger LeBlanc
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
John and others,
For discussion of Fredesende and Murielle, one should perhaps also like
to refer to Stewart Baldwin's Henry Project page for Richard II of Normandy.
Roger LeBlanc
For discussion of Fredesende and Murielle, one should perhaps also like
to refer to Stewart Baldwin's Henry Project page for Richard II of Normandy.
Roger LeBlanc
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
Dear Roger,
I absolutely agree. Stewart's website, dealing with the ancestry
(proven, attributed and otherwise) of Henry II of England is a must in
dealing with the Dukes of Normandy, or any other issue concerning any
of his ancestors.
I had consulted the Henry Project webpage, which currently calls
both Muriel and Fressenda 'falsely attributed' daughters (both with
respect to Richard I and II). Stewart wrote in part,
' Geoffrey Malterra [as quoted in van Houts (2000), 238-9], states
that Muriella "was notable both for her birth and good character" and
that Fresenda "in birth and morals was by no means inferior to his
first wife", both of which seem unusual things to say about supposed
sisters who were allegedly a daughter of the duke of Normandy, and we
should accept the statement of van Houts [ibid., 239, n. 48] that "It
has been wrongly argued that both Moriella and Fresenda were
illegitimate daughters of Richard II" [citing Stasser and Szabolcs de
Vajay].'[1]
Obviously Stewart felt that van Houts' negative opinion as to
Muriel and Fressenda's parentage was the most valid as of that date.
I haven't heard as yet if the item I noted in the Acta of William I,
calling Muriel (possibly the same as Tancred's wife) 'sister of
Richard princeps', may perhaps alter Stewart's opinion on the matter
[re: which, my belated thanks to Doug Richardson for his reply to my
first post in this thread].
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] Stewart Baldwin, The Henry Project
URL http://sbaldw.home.mindspring.com/hproj ... cha001.htm
On Dec 1, 3:52�pm, Roger LeBlanc <lebla...@mts.net> wrote:
I absolutely agree. Stewart's website, dealing with the ancestry
(proven, attributed and otherwise) of Henry II of England is a must in
dealing with the Dukes of Normandy, or any other issue concerning any
of his ancestors.
I had consulted the Henry Project webpage, which currently calls
both Muriel and Fressenda 'falsely attributed' daughters (both with
respect to Richard I and II). Stewart wrote in part,
' Geoffrey Malterra [as quoted in van Houts (2000), 238-9], states
that Muriella "was notable both for her birth and good character" and
that Fresenda "in birth and morals was by no means inferior to his
first wife", both of which seem unusual things to say about supposed
sisters who were allegedly a daughter of the duke of Normandy, and we
should accept the statement of van Houts [ibid., 239, n. 48] that "It
has been wrongly argued that both Moriella and Fresenda were
illegitimate daughters of Richard II" [citing Stasser and Szabolcs de
Vajay].'[1]
Obviously Stewart felt that van Houts' negative opinion as to
Muriel and Fressenda's parentage was the most valid as of that date.
I haven't heard as yet if the item I noted in the Acta of William I,
calling Muriel (possibly the same as Tancred's wife) 'sister of
Richard princeps', may perhaps alter Stewart's opinion on the matter
[re: which, my belated thanks to Doug Richardson for his reply to my
first post in this thread].
Cheers,
John
NOTES
[1] Stewart Baldwin, The Henry Project
URL http://sbaldw.home.mindspring.com/hproj ... cha001.htm
On Dec 1, 3:52�pm, Roger LeBlanc <lebla...@mts.net> wrote:
John and others,
For discussion of Fredesende and Murielle, one should perhaps also like
to refer to Stewart Baldwin's Henry Project page for Richard II of Normandy.
Roger LeBlanc
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
I had expected to stay out of SGM, and do not intend to follow up on the
present post; but then I had also hoped that old errors would not be so
blithely compounded for readers, and for compilers of databases, without
even checking the sources and extensive literature on one of the more
consequential points that has come up here lately.
Rum that this has stood virtually unchallenged so far. Comments
interspersed.
"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2b8bd273-570f-459b-bfde-6cdc4d0d3c9a@o42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
This is wrong in several respects: first the sources in question are not
contemporaneous or even nearly so with the individuals under discussion, and
secondly one of them flatly does not say what is claimed at all - and this
same misreading appears likely to have been the pretext for the other.
Szabolcs de Vajay made a mess of this matter in his paper 'Mahaut de
Pouille, comtesse de Barcelone et vicomtesse de Narbonne, dans le contexte
social de son temps', _Actes du XLIIIe Congrès de la Fédération historique
du Languedoc méditerranéen et du Roussillon: Béziers et le Biterrois_
(Montpellier, 1971), and unfortunately he has been followed in this by
Thierry Stasser.
The earlier of the two narrative sources adduced by Vajay, taken from Pierre
Pithou's collection _Historiae Francorum ab anno Christi DCCCC ad annum
MCCLXXXV scriptores veteres XI_ (Frankfurt, 1596) page 84, was doubly
mistaken by him. He wrongly titled this 'Aquitanicae historiae fragmentum',
whereas the latter actually ended on page 83 of the work and his quotation
was taken from the following extract beginning on page 84. The correct title
of this is 'Fragmentum historiae Francorum a Roberto ad mortem Philippi
regis'. It is a partial version, written at Fleury, derived from the
somewhat slapdash history compiled in 1114 by Hugo de S. Maria, a monk at
the same abbey, titled 'Liber qui modernorum regum Francorum continet
actus', edited by Georg Waitz in MGH SS IX 376-395.
The version by Hugo states that a certain Norman knight named Richard, a
vigorous man of worthy birth but not of great nobility ("quidam miles
Normannus nomine Richardus, vir quidem strenuus et ingenuus, sed non magnae
nobilitatis") encouraged his countrymen to join him in winning wealth and
honour in Apulia. One of those who did was his "nepos" (i.e. nephew or
kinsman) Robert Guiscard ("Inter quos nepos prefati Richardi Rotbertus eo
profectus est"). In the later version (inaccurately) quoted by Vajay, this
has become "Ricardus quidam Normannus eo tempore in Apuliam profectus", who
made the same appeal to his fellow Normans "Inter quos nepos ipsius Ricardi
Robertus nomine profectus est". So Robert Guiscard is said in both versions
to be the "nepos" of a certain Norman named Richard, NOT of a Norman duke of
the same name.
Vajay also misplaced the alleged sources for his argument, giving these in
reverse order of composition to emphasise his misreading of the above: he
quoted only "nepos ipsius Ricardi" (nepos of Richard himself") on the false
assumption that the text was about a Norman duke and not a simple knight.
The same misreading possibly led to the other medieval passage quoted in
support of the same proposition, written by Tolomeo of Lucca (aka Ptolomeus
de Fiandis) in the early 14th century. He used Hugo of Fleury for
information about the Franks and Normans, and apparently thought like Vajay
that his source said Robert Guiscard was "nepos" of a Richard duke of the
Normans, calling him "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandiae". On this
erroneous basis, his mother Fressendis has been made into an illegitimate
daughter of Duke Richard II, since she was too young to have been born by
the time Richard I died.
This charter of William the Conqueror and Queen Matilda was also adduced as
evidence by Vajay in his article, taking this from Ernst Friedrich Mooyer's
_Über die angäbliche Abstammung des normannischen Königsgeschlechts
Siziliens von der Herzöge der Normandie_ Minden, 1850). The resulting claim
that Tancred of Hauteville's first wife Muriel and his second wife
Fressendis were sisters is implausible in the extreme. No contemporary
source mentions anything of the kind, much less that they were closely
related to the ducal family in Normany. It is hardly credible that this kind
of unequal marriage would ever have taken place, when ducal daughters had
far greater value in the marriage market, or if it did that chroniclers
would have neglected for 300 years to mention such an interesting fact as
the immediate relationship between two Norman ducal and royal families.
However, this purported evidence is highly problematic in itself. First, the
term "princeps" was scarcely used for earlier Norman dukes by the late 11th
century, when this charter was written ca 1080/82; secondly the description
"Murier sorore Ricardi principis" is given to distinguish this lady from a
namesake "Murier de Guitot" occurring earlier in the document, not to assert
incidentally that she was a relative of Duke William; thirdly because
Tancred's wife Muriel would not have been remembered as acting in her own
right in this way, as someone's daughter, when she had long since become
someone's wife and mother of many celebrated sons; fourthly because she was
a deceased wife and mother long before anyone could have bought a tithe to
present on behalf of his daughter to an abbey that was not founded until
decades after the death of Tancred's first wife; and fifthly because the
word "princeps" in the 10th and 11th centuries was used for leading men of
different status, not just for rulers - for instance, the lords of
Montmirail and Déols consistently used it as their title - and not
exclusively in feudal terms anyway, so that it could for all we know be just
a nickname rather than a title here.
Peter Stewart
present post; but then I had also hoped that old errors would not be so
blithely compounded for readers, and for compilers of databases, without
even checking the sources and extensive literature on one of the more
consequential points that has come up here lately.
Rum that this has stood virtually unchallenged so far. Comments
interspersed.
"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2b8bd273-570f-459b-bfde-6cdc4d0d3c9a@o42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Dear Stewart, Todd, et al.,
There is a lengthy paper trail re: Tancred de Hauteville
and his wives, Muriel(la) and Fressenda/Fredesende, on SGM
and elsewhere with special emphasis on their alleged
paternity. Muriel is widely accepted (but not proven) to
have been the illegitimate daughter of a young Richard II of
Normandy, with the possibility that she was actually Richard
II's illegitimate sister also put about.
Todd had noted in 2001 concerning certain contemporaneous
(or near-contemporaneous) documents,
' One of these calls William, son of Tancred and Murielle
"nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie", while the other
says of Robert Guiscard "... inter quos nepos ipsius
Ricardi, Robertus nomine, in Appuliam precectus est".
Adding in chronology, which would seem to make the two
women of the same generation as Richard III, it would seem
to make them daughters of his father, Richard II.' [1]
This is wrong in several respects: first the sources in question are not
contemporaneous or even nearly so with the individuals under discussion, and
secondly one of them flatly does not say what is claimed at all - and this
same misreading appears likely to have been the pretext for the other.
Szabolcs de Vajay made a mess of this matter in his paper 'Mahaut de
Pouille, comtesse de Barcelone et vicomtesse de Narbonne, dans le contexte
social de son temps', _Actes du XLIIIe Congrès de la Fédération historique
du Languedoc méditerranéen et du Roussillon: Béziers et le Biterrois_
(Montpellier, 1971), and unfortunately he has been followed in this by
Thierry Stasser.
The earlier of the two narrative sources adduced by Vajay, taken from Pierre
Pithou's collection _Historiae Francorum ab anno Christi DCCCC ad annum
MCCLXXXV scriptores veteres XI_ (Frankfurt, 1596) page 84, was doubly
mistaken by him. He wrongly titled this 'Aquitanicae historiae fragmentum',
whereas the latter actually ended on page 83 of the work and his quotation
was taken from the following extract beginning on page 84. The correct title
of this is 'Fragmentum historiae Francorum a Roberto ad mortem Philippi
regis'. It is a partial version, written at Fleury, derived from the
somewhat slapdash history compiled in 1114 by Hugo de S. Maria, a monk at
the same abbey, titled 'Liber qui modernorum regum Francorum continet
actus', edited by Georg Waitz in MGH SS IX 376-395.
The version by Hugo states that a certain Norman knight named Richard, a
vigorous man of worthy birth but not of great nobility ("quidam miles
Normannus nomine Richardus, vir quidem strenuus et ingenuus, sed non magnae
nobilitatis") encouraged his countrymen to join him in winning wealth and
honour in Apulia. One of those who did was his "nepos" (i.e. nephew or
kinsman) Robert Guiscard ("Inter quos nepos prefati Richardi Rotbertus eo
profectus est"). In the later version (inaccurately) quoted by Vajay, this
has become "Ricardus quidam Normannus eo tempore in Apuliam profectus", who
made the same appeal to his fellow Normans "Inter quos nepos ipsius Ricardi
Robertus nomine profectus est". So Robert Guiscard is said in both versions
to be the "nepos" of a certain Norman named Richard, NOT of a Norman duke of
the same name.
Vajay also misplaced the alleged sources for his argument, giving these in
reverse order of composition to emphasise his misreading of the above: he
quoted only "nepos ipsius Ricardi" (nepos of Richard himself") on the false
assumption that the text was about a Norman duke and not a simple knight.
The same misreading possibly led to the other medieval passage quoted in
support of the same proposition, written by Tolomeo of Lucca (aka Ptolomeus
de Fiandis) in the early 14th century. He used Hugo of Fleury for
information about the Franks and Normans, and apparently thought like Vajay
that his source said Robert Guiscard was "nepos" of a Richard duke of the
Normans, calling him "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandiae". On this
erroneous basis, his mother Fressendis has been made into an illegitimate
daughter of Duke Richard II, since she was too young to have been born by
the time Richard I died.
I have noted a reference in the Acta of William I (the
Conqueror) that provides some food for thought on this. Among
the various grants and benefactors named, we find the
following:
' Ebremar gave forty acres of land in
Englesqueville-la-Percée, twenty acres at Cairon, two
sheaves of half the tithe of Cairon, and the tithe at
Villons-les-Buissons which he had bought from Muriel, the
sister of Richard princeps, all on behalf of his daughter
who had become a nun of the abbey.' [2]
This does not prove anything concerning a marriage or
descent to Tancred de Hauteville, but does provide an
interesting statement as to Richard 'princeps' having had a
sister Muriel. If the identification of Richard 'princeps' as
Count/Duke Richard is correct, this would in fact provide an
element of support to the (near) contemporaneous statement
that William, son of Tancred de Hauteville and Muriel, was
in fact "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie".
This charter of William the Conqueror and Queen Matilda was also adduced as
evidence by Vajay in his article, taking this from Ernst Friedrich Mooyer's
_Über die angäbliche Abstammung des normannischen Königsgeschlechts
Siziliens von der Herzöge der Normandie_ Minden, 1850). The resulting claim
that Tancred of Hauteville's first wife Muriel and his second wife
Fressendis were sisters is implausible in the extreme. No contemporary
source mentions anything of the kind, much less that they were closely
related to the ducal family in Normany. It is hardly credible that this kind
of unequal marriage would ever have taken place, when ducal daughters had
far greater value in the marriage market, or if it did that chroniclers
would have neglected for 300 years to mention such an interesting fact as
the immediate relationship between two Norman ducal and royal families.
However, this purported evidence is highly problematic in itself. First, the
term "princeps" was scarcely used for earlier Norman dukes by the late 11th
century, when this charter was written ca 1080/82; secondly the description
"Murier sorore Ricardi principis" is given to distinguish this lady from a
namesake "Murier de Guitot" occurring earlier in the document, not to assert
incidentally that she was a relative of Duke William; thirdly because
Tancred's wife Muriel would not have been remembered as acting in her own
right in this way, as someone's daughter, when she had long since become
someone's wife and mother of many celebrated sons; fourthly because she was
a deceased wife and mother long before anyone could have bought a tithe to
present on behalf of his daughter to an abbey that was not founded until
decades after the death of Tancred's first wife; and fifthly because the
word "princeps" in the 10th and 11th centuries was used for leading men of
different status, not just for rulers - for instance, the lords of
Montmirail and Déols consistently used it as their title - and not
exclusively in feudal terms anyway, so that it could for all we know be just
a nickname rather than a title here.
Peter Stewart
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
<taf@clearwire.net> wrote in message
news:54d2b23e-791c-419f-b5de-9c0a8d6ed0c0@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
I should have gone into this before - from memory, I would guess that this
figure was a conflation of Robert Guiscard's brother-in-law Richard Quarrel,
prince of Capua, and the latter's unlce Rainulf who, as a political exile
from Normandy, was the first to fetch up at the top of the feudal heap in
southern Italy - he became count of Aversa ca 1030 and duke of Gaeta in
1040, titles later assumed by his nephew Richard (whose wife Fressendis was
a full-sister to Robert Guiscard).
Peter Stewart
news:54d2b23e-791c-419f-b5de-9c0a8d6ed0c0@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 1, 6:54 pm, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
The version by Hugo states that a certain Norman knight named Richard, a
vigorous man of worthy birth but not of great nobility ("quidam miles
Normannus nomine Richardus, vir quidem strenuus et ingenuus, sed non
magnae
nobilitatis") encouraged his countrymen to join him in winning wealth and
honour in Apulia. One of those who did was his "nepos" (i.e. nephew or
kinsman) Robert Guiscard ("Inter quos nepos prefati Richardi Rotbertus eo
profectus est").
Anyone know of any of the other sources for the Apulia campaign
mentioning a leader Richard that may allow his further identification?
I should have gone into this before - from memory, I would guess that this
figure was a conflation of Robert Guiscard's brother-in-law Richard Quarrel,
prince of Capua, and the latter's unlce Rainulf who, as a political exile
from Normandy, was the first to fetch up at the top of the feudal heap in
southern Italy - he became count of Aversa ca 1030 and duke of Gaeta in
1040, titles later assumed by his nephew Richard (whose wife Fressendis was
a full-sister to Robert Guiscard).
Peter Stewart
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
"John P. Ravilious" <therav3@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ef07ef4d-5926-446a-b4e8-b547fdf452bd@b15g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
I'm sure there are others who will hope more strongly that I will not,
John - and, for different reasons, I am one of them.
The newsgroup has now lost too many valued contributors, while acquiring too
many pests and bores, to remain a forum that I want to take part in, even
occasionally.
I can't understand why the desperately lonely wannabe wisecrackers don't
just form into a private circle around the boiled-fruitcake from Hawaii, and
leave the readers of multiple groups to share their legitimate interests in
medieval genealogy, etc, but evidently these pitiful people won't help
themselves.
The tedium of their endless badinage and the foolishness of ongoing
self-promotion from a few others are deadly.
Peter Stewart
news:ef07ef4d-5926-446a-b4e8-b547fdf452bd@b15g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
I hope that you will, at least, drop in from time to time to
future SGM threads.
I'm sure there are others who will hope more strongly that I will not,
John - and, for different reasons, I am one of them.
The newsgroup has now lost too many valued contributors, while acquiring too
many pests and bores, to remain a forum that I want to take part in, even
occasionally.
I can't understand why the desperately lonely wannabe wisecrackers don't
just form into a private circle around the boiled-fruitcake from Hawaii, and
leave the readers of multiple groups to share their legitimate interests in
medieval genealogy, etc, but evidently these pitiful people won't help
themselves.
The tedium of their endless badinage and the foolishness of ongoing
self-promotion from a few others are deadly.
Peter Stewart
-
John P. Ravilious
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
Dear Peter,
Your discourse re: the sources and errors involving Tancred de
Hauteville's wives and their relations (alleged and otherwise) is much
appreciated. Having William de Hauteville as "nepos Richardi Magni
ducis Normandiae" is certainly appealing, but I think we would prefer
having this correct - no matter who 'uncle Richard' actually was. The
history leading up to this compounded error/invention will, I assume,
be reviewed by Stewart Baldwin for added notation on his 'Henry
Project' webpage.
I hope that you will, at least, drop in from time to time to
future SGM threads.
Cheers,
John
On Dec 1, 9:54 pm, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
Your discourse re: the sources and errors involving Tancred de
Hauteville's wives and their relations (alleged and otherwise) is much
appreciated. Having William de Hauteville as "nepos Richardi Magni
ducis Normandiae" is certainly appealing, but I think we would prefer
having this correct - no matter who 'uncle Richard' actually was. The
history leading up to this compounded error/invention will, I assume,
be reviewed by Stewart Baldwin for added notation on his 'Henry
Project' webpage.
I hope that you will, at least, drop in from time to time to
future SGM threads.
Cheers,
John
On Dec 1, 9:54 pm, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
I had expected to stay out of SGM, and do not intend to follow up on the
present post; but then I had also hoped that old errors would not be so
blithely compounded for readers, and for compilers of databases, without
even checking the sources and extensive literature on one of the more
consequential points that has come up here lately.
Rum that this has stood virtually unchallenged so far. Comments
interspersed.
"John P. Ravilious" <ther...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:2b8bd273-570f-459b-bfde-6cdc4d0d3c9a@o42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Dear Stewart, Todd, et al.,
There is a lengthy paper trail re: Tancred de Hauteville
and his wives, Muriel(la) and Fressenda/Fredesende, on SGM
and elsewhere with special emphasis on their alleged
paternity. Muriel is widely accepted (but not proven) to
have been the illegitimate daughter of a young Richard II of
Normandy, with the possibility that she was actually Richard
II's illegitimate sister also put about.
Todd had noted in 2001 concerning certain contemporaneous
(or near-contemporaneous) documents,
' One of these calls William, son of Tancred and Murielle
"nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie", while the other
says of Robert Guiscard "... inter quos nepos ipsius
Ricardi, Robertus nomine, in Appuliam precectus est".
Adding in chronology, which would seem to make the two
women of the same generation as Richard III, it would seem
to make them daughters of his father, Richard II.' [1]
This is wrong in several respects: first the sources in question are not
contemporaneous or even nearly so with the individuals under discussion, and
secondly one of them flatly does not say what is claimed at all - and this
same misreading appears likely to have been the pretext for the other.
Szabolcs de Vajay made a mess of this matter in his paper 'Mahaut de
Pouille, comtesse de Barcelone et vicomtesse de Narbonne, dans le contexte
social de son temps', _Actes du XLIIIe Congrès de la Fédération historique
du Languedoc méditerranéen et du Roussillon: Béziers et le Biterrois_
(Montpellier, 1971), and unfortunately he has been followed in this by
Thierry Stasser.
The earlier of the two narrative sources adduced by Vajay, taken from Pierre
Pithou's collection _Historiae Francorum ab anno Christi DCCCC ad annum
MCCLXXXV scriptores veteres XI_ (Frankfurt, 1596) page 84, was doubly
mistaken by him. He wrongly titled this 'Aquitanicae historiae fragmentum',
whereas the latter actually ended on page 83 of the work and his quotation
was taken from the following extract beginning on page 84. The correct title
of this is 'Fragmentum historiae Francorum a Roberto ad mortem Philippi
regis'. It is a partial version, written at Fleury, derived from the
somewhat slapdash history compiled in 1114 by Hugo de S. Maria, a monk at
the same abbey, titled 'Liber qui modernorum regum Francorum continet
actus', edited by Georg Waitz in MGH SS IX 376-395.
The version by Hugo states that a certain Norman knight named Richard, a
vigorous man of worthy birth but not of great nobility ("quidam miles
Normannus nomine Richardus, vir quidem strenuus et ingenuus, sed non magnae
nobilitatis") encouraged his countrymen to join him in winning wealth and
honour in Apulia. One of those who did was his "nepos" (i.e. nephew or
kinsman) Robert Guiscard ("Inter quos nepos prefati Richardi Rotbertus eo
profectus est"). In the later version (inaccurately) quoted by Vajay, this
has become "Ricardus quidam Normannus eo tempore in Apuliam profectus", who
made the same appeal to his fellow Normans "Inter quos nepos ipsius Ricardi
Robertus nomine profectus est". So Robert Guiscard is said in both versions
to be the "nepos" of a certain Norman named Richard, NOT of a Norman duke of
the same name.
Vajay also misplaced the alleged sources for his argument, giving these in
reverse order of composition to emphasise his misreading of the above: he
quoted only "nepos ipsius Ricardi" (nepos of Richard himself") on the false
assumption that the text was about a Norman duke and not a simple knight.
The same misreading possibly led to the other medieval passage quoted in
support of the same proposition, written by Tolomeo of Lucca (aka Ptolomeus
de Fiandis) in the early 14th century. He used Hugo of Fleury for
information about the Franks and Normans, and apparently thought like Vajay
that his source said Robert Guiscard was "nepos" of a Richard duke of the
Normans, calling him "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandiae". On this
erroneous basis, his mother Fressendis has been made into an illegitimate
daughter of Duke Richard II, since she was too young to have been born by
the time Richard I died.
I have noted a reference in the Acta of William I (the
Conqueror) that provides some food for thought on this. Among
the various grants and benefactors named, we find the
following:
' Ebremar gave forty acres of land in
Englesqueville-la-Percée, twenty acres at Cairon, two
sheaves of half the tithe of Cairon, and the tithe at
Villons-les-Buissons which he had bought from Muriel, the
sister of Richard princeps, all on behalf of his daughter
who had become a nun of the abbey.' [2]
This does not prove anything concerning a marriage or
descent to Tancred de Hauteville, but does provide an
interesting statement as to Richard 'princeps' having had a
sister Muriel. If the identification of Richard 'princeps' as
Count/Duke Richard is correct, this would in fact provide an
element of support to the (near) contemporaneous statement
that William, son of Tancred de Hauteville and Muriel, was
in fact "nepos Richardi Magni ducis Normandie".
This charter of William the Conqueror and Queen Matilda was also adduced as
evidence by Vajay in his article, taking this from Ernst Friedrich Mooyer's
_Über die angäbliche Abstammung des normannischen Königsgeschlechts
Siziliens von der Herzöge der Normandie_ Minden, 1850). The resulting claim
that Tancred of Hauteville's first wife Muriel and his second wife
Fressendis were sisters is implausible in the extreme. No contemporary
source mentions anything of the kind, much less that they were closely
related to the ducal family in Normany. It is hardly credible that this kind
of unequal marriage would ever have taken place, when ducal daughters had
far greater value in the marriage market, or if it did that chroniclers
would have neglected for 300 years to mention such an interesting fact as
the immediate relationship between two Norman ducal and royal families.
However, this purported evidence is highly problematic in itself. First, the
term "princeps" was scarcely used for earlier Norman dukes by the late 11th
century, when this charter was written ca 1080/82; secondly the description
"Murier sorore Ricardi principis" is given to distinguish this lady from a
namesake "Murier de Guitot" occurring earlier in the document, not to assert
incidentally that she was a relative of Duke William; thirdly because
Tancred's wife Muriel would not have been remembered as acting in her own
right in this way, as someone's daughter, when she had long since become
someone's wife and mother of many celebrated sons; fourthly because she was
a deceased wife and mother long before anyone could have bought a tithe to
present on behalf of his daughter to an abbey that was not founded until
decades after the death of Tancred's first wife; and fifthly because the
word "princeps" in the 10th and 11th centuries was used for leading men of
different status, not just for rulers - for instance, the lords of
Montmirail and Déols consistently used it as their title - and not
exclusively in feudal terms anyway, so that it could for all we know be just
a nickname rather than a title here.
Peter Stewart
-
Gjest
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
On Dec 1, 6:54 pm, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
Anyone know of any of the other sources for the Apulia campaign
mentioning a leader Richard that may allow his further identification?
taf
The version by Hugo states that a certain Norman knight named Richard, a
vigorous man of worthy birth but not of great nobility ("quidam miles
Normannus nomine Richardus, vir quidem strenuus et ingenuus, sed non magnae
nobilitatis") encouraged his countrymen to join him in winning wealth and
honour in Apulia. One of those who did was his "nepos" (i.e. nephew or
kinsman) Robert Guiscard ("Inter quos nepos prefati Richardi Rotbertus eo
profectus est").
Anyone know of any of the other sources for the Apulia campaign
mentioning a leader Richard that may allow his further identification?
taf
-
Gjest
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
On Dec 1, 7:53 pm, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
So Guiscard's uncle, Duke Richard of Normandy was neither the duke of
Normandy, nor his uncle, nor named Richard. That's accuracy for you.
taf
I should have gone into this before - from memory, I would guess that this
figure was a conflation of Robert Guiscard's brother-in-law Richard Quarrel,
prince of Capua, and the latter's unlce Rainulf who, as a political exile
from Normandy, was the first to fetch up at the top of the feudal heap in
southern Italy - he became count of Aversa ca 1030 and duke of Gaeta in
1040, titles later assumed by his nephew Richard (whose wife Fressendis was
a full-sister to Robert Guiscard).
So Guiscard's uncle, Duke Richard of Normandy was neither the duke of
Normandy, nor his uncle, nor named Richard. That's accuracy for you.
taf
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
<taf@clearwire.net> wrote in message
news:1ab99eff-be6a-42d9-ba83-0a00e4883718@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
That's gentlemen scholars for you.
Peter Stewart
news:1ab99eff-be6a-42d9-ba83-0a00e4883718@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 1, 7:53 pm, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stew...@msn.com> wrote:
I should have gone into this before - from memory, I would guess that
this
figure was a conflation of Robert Guiscard's brother-in-law Richard
Quarrel,
prince of Capua, and the latter's unlce Rainulf who, as a political exile
from Normandy, was the first to fetch up at the top of the feudal heap in
southern Italy - he became count of Aversa ca 1030 and duke of Gaeta in
1040, titles later assumed by his nephew Richard (whose wife Fressendis
was
a full-sister to Robert Guiscard).
So Guiscard's uncle, Duke Richard of Normandy was neither the duke of
Normandy, nor his uncle, nor named Richard. That's accuracy for you.
That's gentlemen scholars for you.
Peter Stewart
-
Roger LeBlanc
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
Thanks Peter for sharing your knowledge to straighten out this
confusion. Your input is always valued by this list's serious researchers.
Roger LeBlanc
confusion. Your input is always valued by this list's serious researchers.
Roger LeBlanc
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: Tancred de Hauteville, and 'Muriel, the sister of Richar
Dear Newsgroup ~
In the attempt to fashion modern ancestry tables, it seems we are
constantly faced by those who wish to overstate the evidence in order
to "prove" a connection. More than anyone, I enjoy speculating
endless possibilities, but I try to carefully delineate where the
evidence stops and the speculation begins.
In the case of the word, nepos, I note that while people are aware
that nepos can mean nephew, grandson, or kinsman before 1250, they
still insist on using the nearer meaning of nephew whenever they are
trying to determine a relationship between two parties. Just why this
is so, I can not say.
To make sure everyone understands the need for caution in rendering
the word, nepos, before 1250, I've posted below yet another instance
of "nepos" meaning kinsman in this time period. This particular
example is drawn from the book, Supplement to the Record of the House
of Gournay, by Daniel Gurney, published in 1858. On page 763, Mr.
Gurney gives the following citation:
"No. 78.- Extract from the Rotulis Misae (page 142).
Rotulus Misae. 11 John (1210).
"Die martis proxima apud Stoketonam. - Hugoni de Boves militi, nepoti
Hugonis de Gournay de dono XXX marcarum liberatarum Stephano homini
suo per regem." Duffus Hardy, p. 160." END OF QUOTE.
In the above item, Hugh de Boves, knight is called "nepoti" [i.e.,
kinsman] of Hugh de Gournay. Mr. Gurney elsewhere in his book
correctly identifies Hugh de Boves as Hugh de Gournay's cousin, not
his nephew or grandson. Even so, as an afterthought on page 763, Mr.
Gurney queries: "Whether nepos is here to be taken for nephew, or
cousin-german."
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
In the attempt to fashion modern ancestry tables, it seems we are
constantly faced by those who wish to overstate the evidence in order
to "prove" a connection. More than anyone, I enjoy speculating
endless possibilities, but I try to carefully delineate where the
evidence stops and the speculation begins.
In the case of the word, nepos, I note that while people are aware
that nepos can mean nephew, grandson, or kinsman before 1250, they
still insist on using the nearer meaning of nephew whenever they are
trying to determine a relationship between two parties. Just why this
is so, I can not say.
To make sure everyone understands the need for caution in rendering
the word, nepos, before 1250, I've posted below yet another instance
of "nepos" meaning kinsman in this time period. This particular
example is drawn from the book, Supplement to the Record of the House
of Gournay, by Daniel Gurney, published in 1858. On page 763, Mr.
Gurney gives the following citation:
"No. 78.- Extract from the Rotulis Misae (page 142).
Rotulus Misae. 11 John (1210).
"Die martis proxima apud Stoketonam. - Hugoni de Boves militi, nepoti
Hugonis de Gournay de dono XXX marcarum liberatarum Stephano homini
suo per regem." Duffus Hardy, p. 160." END OF QUOTE.
In the above item, Hugh de Boves, knight is called "nepoti" [i.e.,
kinsman] of Hugh de Gournay. Mr. Gurney elsewhere in his book
correctly identifies Hugh de Boves as Hugh de Gournay's cousin, not
his nephew or grandson. Even so, as an afterthought on page 763, Mr.
Gurney queries: "Whether nepos is here to be taken for nephew, or
cousin-german."
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah