GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives
Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1997-10 > 0877885093
From: "Jason Cruse" < >
Subject: Re: Poppa (was: grandfather of Hugh Capet's wife)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:58:13 -0600
I'm not sure what I can add to the "historical arguments"; however, let me
give a translation of Settipani's text:
"To come back to Adelais, the final "proof" of her [birth/relationship], is
perhaps contained in a diploma of Lothaire, which confirmed a donation, in
982, that she made to a monastery, the Trinity, in Poitiers. In this act,
it is stated that Adela, wife of Duke Eblo, cousin of the King, was the
daughter of the founder of the monsatery, Adela, who had made her donation
with the consent of her son, the Marquis Wilhelm. This act was not known
until 1377, when an editor corrected, naturally, Eblo, which has no
meaning, into Hugo. {trouble here in the first part, but my best guess, in
brackets} [If we can believe these records] then we have proof that
Adelais, wife of Hugh Capet, was the daughter of Wilhelm II of Aquitaine
and Adela of Normandy, and the sister of Wilhelm IV.
C, Bouchard objects to the correction of Eblo into Hugh, and the confusion
over the document which has for principal actors Eblo and Adela, parents of
Duke Wilhem III, who were, however, dead in 982.
The objections, however, are difficult to understand. The only duke of
Aquitaine whose wife was named Adela and whi had a son named Wilhelm, is
Wilhelm III, husband of Gerloc or Adela of Normandy (the second wife of
Ebalus was also named Adela, but was not the mother of Wilhelm III).
Moreover, it is difficult to see Ebalus could have been Lothaire's cousin.
His carolingian origins are so far removed that his only common ancester
with Lothaire could only be Charlemagne. In addition, the text
distinguishes between the spouse of Adel, entitled "duke" and the count of
Poitiers Wilhelm, entitled "marquis". Finally, contrary to what Bouchard
states, the text is perfectly clear, once the name adaptation is made.
Lothaire confirms the gift by Adela, wife of the cousin of Duke Hugo, to
the Trinity order founded by Adela, with the consent of her son, Marquis
Wilhelm." (end of translation)
I can't give a really good assessment of this, but I do have a couple of
thoughts. First, from my own research, there are, as we all know, many
people who had more than one title. It is at least *possible* that
BOuchard is somewhat correct, in that the change of name is incorrect,
though one would hope that less than 400 years after the fact, the unknown
'editor' would have had some sense about him in this. I also know that in
those 400 years, French changed a great deal, so to me, a that kind of name
change (since I can read Middle French somewhat) is not terribly
surprising.
However, I don't find Settipani's argument about one reference to a duke
and another reference to a marquis and therefore they are different people
tremendously overpowering. He seems to be basing his argument on both the
982 text and the 1377 text. Settipani is convinced, obviously, that the
1377 is correct. IF it is not, he has a problem. Additionally, the
originaly author could have wanted (it has happened before) to make it
clear that this Wilhelm was BOTH duke and Marquis. This argument just
muddles everything even more, I know, but I use it to point out one thing:
Settipani's argument rests entirely on the 1377 editor. I don't know that
we can say he's right or wrong, but that he, himself, does not have
independent confirmation of the knowledge.
Hope this confusion helps.
Jason
----------
> From: Alan B. Wilson < >
> To:
> Subject: Re: Poppa (was: grandfather of Hugh Capet's wife)
> Date: Monday, October 20, 1997 11:20 PM
>
> In article < >, "Todd A. Farmerie"
> < > wrote:
>
> > Stewart Baldwin wrote:
> > >
> > > If I recall correctly, the Stewarts are descended from the stewards
of
> > > Dol, and the supposed connection to the counts of Dol is no more than
> > > a conjecture. Thus, it may not be relevant to the Stewarts.
> >
> > Yes, that's correct. I had in mind an NEHGR article from many years
> > ago. Perhaps Keets-Rohan will cover this (but then, it's been a couple
> > of years, so perhaps it has already been published somewhere)?
> >
> >
> > Back to the title of this thread, I was reading an article by Constance
> > Bouchard over the weekend on the naming patters for Medieval women (it
> > was in Medieval Prosopography, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1-?). She stated
> > that Adelaide, wife of Hugh Capet, is of unknown parentage. She was
not
> > from the Poitou/Aquitaine family, that resulting from the misreading of
> > a document. She remains unidentified (although the names Adelaide and
> > Gisela (given to her daughter, and not a Robertin name) might suggest a
> > link with the later Caroligians - this is my own speculation, not
> > Bouchard's). Thus the identity of Poppa is probably not relevant to
> > Hugh Capet's wife.
> >
> > taf
>
> Christian Settipani in "La prehistoire des Capetiens" (1993), pp.
> 415-419, discusses questions raised about the identity of Adelaide, wife
> of Hugh Capet. He explicitly comments on Bouchard's article, "Patterns
of
> women's names in royal lineages, ninth-eleventh centuries," Medieval
> prosopography, ix(1)(1988), pp. 1-32, as well as other objections by her
> and by others. He concludes, I gather, the the objections are wanting,
> and that William I of Poutou [III of Aquitaine] is Adelaide's father (as
> in ES ii, 76).
>
> A relevant paragraph (without diacritics or footnotes) reads: "Pour
> en revenir a Adelais, la 'preuve' finale de sa filiation, ainsi que l'a
> note A. Lewis, est peut-etre contenue dans un diplome de Lothaire
> confirmant en 982 une donation qu'elle aurait faite au monastere de la
> Trinite de Poitiers. Dans cet acte, il est precise qu'Adela, femme du
duc
> Eblo (sic), cousin (consobrinus) du Roi, etait la fille de la fondatrice
> de la Trinite, Adela, qui avait effectue sa donation avec le consentement
> de son fils le marquis Wilhelm. L'acte n'etant connu que par un vidimus
> de 1377, l'editeur a corrige naturellement, 'Eblo', qui n'offre aucun
sens
> ici, en 'Hugo'. Si cette emendation etait fondee, nous aurions la preuve
> finale du fait qu'Adelais, femme d'Hugues Capet, etait la fille de
Wilhelm
> III d'Aquitaine et d'Adela de Normandie, la soeur donc de Wilhelm IV. C.
> Bouchard lui a cependant objecte le caractere conjectural de la
> restitution : 'Hugh' pour 'Eblo', et la confusion du document qui aurtait
> pour principaux acteurs Eblo et Adela, parents du duc Wilhelm III,
> lesquels etaient pourtant decedes en 982. On comprend mal cette
> objection. Le seul duc d'Aquitaine, dont la femme s'appelle Adela et qui
> en eut un fils nomme Wilhelm, est Wilhelm III, epoux de Gerloc ou Adela
de
> Normandie (la seconde femme d'Ebalus etant bien surnommee Adela mais
> n'etant pas la mere de Wilhelm III). De plus, on voit mal comment Ebalus
> pouvait etre cousin de Lothaire. Sa lointaine origine carolingienne par
> les femmes ne lui donne un ancetre commun avec Lothaire qu'en la personne
> de Charlemagne. En outre le texte distingue entre l'epoux d'Adela, titre
> 'duc' et le comte de Poitiers Wilhelm, titre 'marquis'. Enfin,
> contrairement a ce que dit C. Bouchard, le texte est parfaitement
> coherent, une fois adopte la correction de nom. Lothaire confirme le don
> fait par Adela, la femme de son cousin le duc Hugo, a la Trinite fondee
> par la mere de celle-ci, Adela, avec le consentement de son fils, le
> marquis Wilhelm."
>
> I note that in his summary descent of the Robertiens, Table 11, he
> lists Hugh Capet's wife as "Adelais d'Aquitaine."
>
> I should appreciate an assessment by someone who can both read
French
> and weigh historical argument--skills in which I am sadly wanting.
>
> --
> Alan B. Wilson
>
This thread:
| Re: Poppa (was: grandfather of Hugh Capet's wife) by "Jason Cruse" < > |