Post by Hans Vogels Post by Andrew Lancaster Post by Hans Vogels Post by Andrew Lancaster Post by Hans Vogels Post by Hans Vogels Post by Andrew Lancaster
Concerning this famous couple, I see some old discussions which summarize the main things known and not known.
But I wanted to ask if anyone has see criticisms or complements concerning the proposals of Frans Droogenbroeck. In fact, he appears in some of the old discussions on this list, but the articles he has published since then, which can mostly be seen on academia.edu, have proposed a new tree for Richilde. (The idea that she was the Hainaut heiress instead of her husband seems to have been effectively made unconvincing by Vanderkindere in 1899, although MEDLANDS is not showing that.)
His ideas have started being placed into Wikipedia articles etc. At first sight they look at least as good as older proposals, but I fear they won't be seen as "proven" by everyone. So I am looking for balanced judgements.
From what I read he is unaware or sufficiently aware that near the end of the 10th century we see a 'new' phenomena of grandchildren accidentally being named with the first name and the nickname of a grandfather. In the case of the counts of Hainaut I mean the name combination Reinier langhals (Regnier Longicollus). This combination can be noticed with a Hainaut grandson Regnier III but could easily have been used for other grandsons. Van Droogenbroeck struggles with this nickname that was given to the grandfather of Richilde, in combination with the fact that Richilde married a direct Hainaut descendant.
This grandfather-grandson naming (first name + nickname) is something that is a known fact in the Low Countries in later (13th century) ages up until around 1500. The first name + nickname was also transferred from uncle to nephew and could point to a conscious awareness of descent from a (then) well-known ancestor. Regnier Longicollus is known to have a daughter who married a count Nevelung. This couple had offspring. The range of their offspring has not yet been mapped sufficiently. The counts of Valenciennes for instance and the counts of Loon could belong to their offspring.
So simply said there are Regniers en Regnier Longicollis. Every Regnier descending of Regnier I could be a longicolli but not otherwise. Van Droogenbroecks view in trying to explain the name of the supposed grandfather of countes Richilde is to limited.
Regnier I Longicolli - Regnier II - Regnier III Longicolli of Hainaut.
Regnier Longicolli - Regnier - Richilde (x Herman of Hainaut)
The lords of Florennes could also belong to the offspring of count Nevelung.
I see I am missing something: what is the connection with Florennes-Rumigny and why would they be connected to Nevelung?
Are you familiar with the paper of Hein Jongbloed on De Flamenses in de elfde eeuw. Oorsprong en ontplooiing van het Gelderse gravenhuis, in: Bijdragen en Mededelingen. Historisch jaarboek voor Gelderland, deel XCIX (2008), 27-90. ?
Or with the other papers he wrote? I can send them to you in PDF.
As you are up to date on the counts of Loon you know of the 'Balderik' factor. Count Nevelung was a brother of bishop Balderik of Utrecht. This bishop is somehow related to bishop Balderik of Loon who was related to the counts of Cambrai/Valenciennes. Arnulf of Cambrai (-967) was married to Berta a daughter of count Nivelung. They had several sons, among others a Odo and a Regnier.
Odo could possibly be the count Otto father of count Giselbert and bishop Balderik.
Brother Regnier could be the Regnier Longicolli, grandfather of countess Richilde.
From memory, I gathered that there was a connection as well between them and the Florennes-Rumigny family.
OK, now I understand part of what you are saying, but I still don't see the link with Richilde and Herman. Perhaps you are assuming that Richilde is a relative of Arnulf of Valenciennes? (I think this was proposed by Pirenne in his National Biographie article for Richilde.)
I think you are referring to the fact that Jongbloed proposes that Arnulf of Florennes' mother Alpaidis is a sister of Arnulf of Valenciennes. (And he accepts the assertion of Vanderkindere that the latter's mother was a daughter of Nevelung.)
There are a lot of strings attached to Jongbloed's construction (and of course Vanderkindere's which it is built upon), and I'm still trying to get my more detailed ideas about this out into the world. :)
In terms of the way Jongbloed connects Arnulf of Florennes to the "Verdun" families this of course involves some of the bigger public debates he was involved in. He would make Arnulf the second cousin of his wife.
My answer about Richilde's grandfather Regnier Longicolli was more an alternative for what Frans Van Droogenbroeck came up with (the unlikely Louvain road).
Yes, there is somehow a family connection but I doubt if the Jongbloed suggestion is viable. It would mean a lot of generations in a short time if I recall correctly. Perhaps the reconstruction would be better if Alpaidis was a sister of Berta instead of a daughter.
943: Bishop Balderik of Utrecht gives certain properties in lifetime use to the widow of count Nevelung and her sons Rudolf en Balderik (future bisschop of Liege/Luik 956-959); Assclon, Rura, Liethorp, Linne, Suletheim, Flothorp, Malica, Nieol en Curnilo = Asselt, Roer, Lerop, Linne, Suiltheym (omg. Heinsberg), Vlodrop, Melick, Maasniel en verm. Curla (onder Doveren).
These are all properties in the Middle Limburg that borders and overlaps the later county of Loon. This puts the children of count Nevelung already in the near surrounding of the later known county of Loon. It would not be strange to see a descendant of Nevelung popping up as an ancestor of the counts of Loon.
I think all of the identified ones are what is now Dutch Limburg, and not near Loon.
...Also Bertha died a few years after those two little boys were mentioned, supposedly her brothers, already an old lady with adult sons (multiple as argued by Aarts). Rudolf was never mentioned again until Daris (and then Vanderkindere) proposed that he had survived and created the Loon county.
The only interesting argument to connect Bertha with Arnulf of Valenciennes involves their connection to the same little pagus of Caribant in France, very far from Nevelung. Baerten avoided mentioning that this was the evidence. Bas who thought Baerten was the latest and best defense missed it, and denied any connection between Bertha and Arnulf. I think it is reasonable evidence, but it shows NO connection to Loon.
I agree with Bas and others that many of the Nevelung connections proposed by Vanderkindere, reinforced by Baerten, and universally assumed, need to be strongly questioned. I think Jongbloed agrees with that basic principle, though he and Aarts looked at different bits of it, and were in both cases always writing about this topic as an aside while looking at other families.