GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives
Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2007-02 > 1171160848
From: "Peter Stewart" < >
Subject: Re: Charles Constantine, Count of Vienne: identity of hismother
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 02:27:28 GMT
References: <mailman.3108.1171156125.30800.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com><42vzh.5820$sd2.2181@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
PS Reginald Lane Poole suggested that Floadoard called Charles
"Constantinus" not as a second name but as a byname to place him, indicating
that he was from Arles (occasionally, though rarely, referred to as
"Constantina urbs").
Peter Stewart
"Peter Stewart" < > wrote in message
news:42vzh.5820$ ...
>
> "Tony Hoskins" < > wrote in message
> news: ...
>> Hello Peter,
>>
>> Thanks very much for this information. I am however rather baffled by a
>> few points and would appreciate your further comments.
>>
>> > "I should add to this that the man's proper name was simply "Carolus",
>> > from his Western imperial ancestor, as shown by a diploma of his
>> > father
>> > and his own charters; he is called "Constantine" in addition to this by
>> > Flodoard copied later by Richer. If a second name had been conferred on
>> > him in order to emphasize a Byzantine ancestry, first this would most
>> > probably NOT have been "Constantinus" (since his purported Eastern
>> > imperial grandfather was named Leo"
>>
>> But his would-be uncle, of substantial fame during CC's life, was
>> Constantine Porfyrogenetos.
>
> But Anna was the daughter of Leo VI, also famous, and Charles Constantin
> was certainly born during his reign in Byzantium (Leo died in 912) since
> he was already acting in his own right as count of Vienne in 927. How many
> examples are there of a name introduced through a female connection that
> bypassed the name of her famous, and reigning, imperial father in favour
> of a brother yet to distinguish himself, when the alleged purpose was to
> underscore the dynastic link?
>
>> > "and anyway the names Constant and Constantine were common enough
>> > amongst Franks to make for a quite different set of associations in
>> > most
>> > minds locally)".
>>
>> Were they actually "common enough" among the Franks at the time? And,
>> I'm not clear what is meant by "a different set of associations in most
>> minds locally." Do you mean that "Constantine" was a name of heightened
>> significance in Vienne, or other lands associated with him?
>
> I pointed out that the name can be found in the most important cartulary
> from Vienne, in generations before and after Charles Constantin, amongst
> families who could not possibly be related to the Greek emperor. As to
> whether this name was "common enough" locally to account for one more
> occurrence, there is no recognised cut-off point but a single other
> instance might be "enough", and there are several. The local associations
> in Vienne would be with other men of property living in the vicinity
> rather than a distant figure in the East.
>
>> > "and secondly one would expect in such circumstances"
>>
>> To what circumstances do you refer?
>
> The alleged connection to Byzantium purportedly indicated by the name
> Constantine - if this were so, why would not Louis the Blind refer to his
> son with the second name, and why would Charles himself drop this in his
> own charters? What would be the circumstantial purpose of giving a name in
> order to advertise a connection and then not using it?
>
>> > "to find that the man himself and his own father would have used the
>> > dynastic name pairing rather than ommitting the second element so that
>> > this comes down to us only incidentally and from a couple of strangers
>> > writing elsewhere.
>>
>> Again, I regret I don't follow.
>
> I regret that I don't see how the point can be made any clearer. Flodoard
> got the second name from hearsay, presumably, since it does not appear in
> documents of Louis or Charles himself. Why would people speak of Charles
> with a second name that was comparatively frequent at a lower social level
> where he ruled in order to suggest an exotic link to an emperor of whom
> most Franks had probably never heard?
>
>> > "The stronger likelihood seems to me that Charles was the son of an
>> > unknown concubine, whose family used the second name Constantine (by
>> > which he could be identified as from a bastard lineage, as Richer tells
>> > us)
>>
>> You suspect a concubine mother because of the apparent insignificance
>> of CC' land holdings, or is there other evidence of this?
>
> There is no evidence that his father Louis the Blind had any wife before
> Adelais who first appears in January 915. Charles Constantine was
> certainly born years before she occurs, and her only recorded son was
> named Rodulf.
>
>> > "explaining his comparative scrap of rights from his paternal
>> > ancestry."
>>
>> Might there be other unexamined reasons for this?
>
> Yes, but the sources don't tell us, so that "unspeculated" would be more
> precise than "unexamined".
>
>> I'm most interested in your reference to Richer - does he establish
>> (something of which I am utterly unaware) that in that time and place
>> two given names was a signal of illegitimacy?
>
> No, Richer specifically says that Charles Constantin was from a royal line
> but that his ancestry was tainted with illegitimacy to the third
> generation ("Hic ex regio quidem genere natus erat sed concubinali
> stemmate usque ad triuatum sordebat"). This presumably meant on his
> mother's side, and efforts have been made to suggest that this description
> is fulfilled by the concubinage of Anna's mother Zoe Zaoutzaina before her
> marriage to Emperor Leo VI, and further ancestry through that line.
> However, such a tainted background would hardly be more remarkable to
> Richer than the imperial grandeur of it if the connections he meant were
> Byzantine, and would scarcely be remarkable at all in this context if the
> sullying illegitimacy had been terminated anyway with the marriage of
> Charles Constantin's parents.
>
>> Perhaps it would be useful for this discussion (it certainly would be
>> for me) to read and examine the precise and exact reference(s) to CC's
>> Byzantine connection.
>
> There aren't any in the sources, this is merely an older speculation that
> was taken up by Christian Settipani.
>
> Peter Stewart
>
This thread:
| Re: Charles Constantine, Count of Vienne: identity of hismother by "Peter Stewart" < > |