Ringelheim, Amalrada of (b. , d. ?)

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (389:36): count in the Drenthe and in Salland, probably a son of Eberhard.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (389:37): Count in the Keldachgau, 913; Count in the Bonngau.

Note: Notes
ES VII:42.
Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners," (65:36).

Settipani's "La prehistoire des Capetiens" notes that "l'Art de verifier les dates" gives the wife of Otto as Ermengarde or Marguerite (!), dau. of Adalbert I of Namur, but it is clear that Settipani considers this source too unreliable to be taken seriously.

Note: Notes
Per Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (266:32) numbers him II.
Evans, in "Genealogy Magazine" (15:53-63, 21:94), calls him Hilduin III de Ramerupt.

Note: Notes
Per Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (266:33) & (397:32), who numbers him I rather than II, Count of Montdidier, seigneur de Rameru; made a pilgimage to Jerusalem in 992 and died sometime after.
Evans, in "Genealogy Magazine" (15:53-63, 21:94), numbers him II.

Note: Notes
Per Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (266:34), Countess of
Arcis-sur-Aube and Dame de Rameru.

Note: Notes
Count of Reims and Roucy.
Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (151:19) states: "He is called the 8th son of HERBERT II, Count of Vermandois (RIN 1290), but is not so given by Pere Anselme; though Anselme does give Hugh, Archbiship of Rheims, as a son of HERBERT II (Saillot, cit.)

Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (170:34) calls him Ragnvald, son of Ragnvald (Reinold), one of the Norse invaders of Burgundy who remained there; occ 924/5, who is evidently the same as Reginald (RIN 6837), but notes that ES does not accept this.

Note: Notes
Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (110:23). As Count of Poitiers, William II.

"William IV of Aquitaine, Strong-Arm ('Fierebras', interestingly enough one of the sobriquets of the legendary William of Orange), did not share his father's [William Towhead] temperate ways. His over-indulgence in the chase and in women gave offence to his spirited wife Emma, the sister of the king, Hugh Capet. The upshot was two lengthy separations and ultimately his own taking refuge from the sins of the world in the religious life, leaving his young son in Emma's care."
--- D D R Owen, *Eleanor of Aquitaine, Queen and Legend*, Oxford
(Blackwell) 1993, p 4-5.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners," (270:36): Margrave of the Bavarian Nordgau, Rodensgau, and Volkfeld.

Note: Notes
ES refers to her as "Judith of the Sulichau?".

Note: Notes
The "Dictionary of Royal Lineage" says she was the widow of LEOPOLD (RIN 3428), Duke of Bavaria and wife of the EMPORER CONRAD I (RIN 2114).

Note: Notes
Berthold, Pfalzgraf [i.e., Count Palatine] in Schwaben [i.e. Swabia] is
listed as father of Cunigunda in ES i, 9.
Richard Borthwick posted to the soc.genealogy.medieval newsgroup on 7 Oct 1996:
Subject: Re: Relatives of Cunegunde of Swabia
M Borgolte *Die Grafen Alemanniens in merowingischer und karolingischer Zeit: Eine Prosopographie* (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke,
1986), 111 gives Kunegund's brothers as counts Erchanger (II)(pp.110-11) and Berthold (V) (pp.81-82). Their father was the count
palatine Bertold and Borgolte thinks this cp Berthold is most probably to be identified with the count palatine Bertold (IV)(pp.79-80). The numberings are Borgolte's and are used merely to distinguish person's of the same name. Berthold (IV)'s ancestral line is not known, but there is a consensus that he belongs to the Alaholfing family group. The genealogical table setting out the relationships and possible relationships of the early members of this family group can be found in *Subsidia Sangallensia I* (eds. Borgolte, Geuenich and Schmid)(1986) p.305.

Note: Notes
The "Dictionary of Royal Lineage" calls him HRE, but, in fact, he was only king of Germany. The "Dictionary of Royal Lineage" also says he was the father of a daughter named CUNEGUNDE (RIN 2113), who married WERNER, COUNT OF WORMS (RIN 2112), but the current consensus is that CUNEGUNDE may have been Conrad's sister, but certainly not his daughter, and that Conrad died without issue.

Note: Notes
ES has a "?" after this entry.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners," (102:38) calls him Count in the
Grabfeld and in the Bavarian Nordgau.

Source: (Name)
Title: Monument, North Salem Lutheran Cemetary, Wyandot County, Ohio

Source: (Birth)
Title: Monument, St. Joseph Cemetary, Wyandot Cty., Ohio

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (167:36), identifies her as wife of FULK II and mother of GEOFFREY I, but does not give her parents. I have run accross two theories regarding her parentage. See notes on RATBURNS I, VC OF VIENNE (RIN 3862), one of her proposed fathers. For the other theory, see the next note.

Nat Taylor posted to soc.genealogy.medieval on 23 May 1997 (in part):
Subject: Descendants of 'Saint' William, duke of Toulouse "Ava, a sister of Wm. the Pious [and dau. of BERNARD II, COUNT OF AUVERGNE (RIN 2284)] , m. 'Geoffroi, c of Nevers/Gatinais'. Their daughter, Gerberge [this Gerberga, according to the theory], was first wife of Fulk II, 'le bon' (d. 958), count of Anjou, and mother of his children, from 2 of whom can be traced a large progeny. Unusual hypothesis--contradicts conventional wisdom on first wife of Fulk le
Bon, and I can't find any other information on this Geoffrey (not in Bouchard's _Sword, Mitre & Cloister_). This was put forward in C. Lauranson-Rosaz, _L'Auvergne et ses marges du VIIIe au XIe siecle: la fin du monde antique?_ (Le Puy, 1987), in charts at pp. 60, 93, as a possibility but with no discussion in the text. What is the origin of and best argument for this idea?"

Note: Notes
This generation and the preceeding one, which link BOSO, COUNT OF
VIENNE (RIN 2137) with GERBERGA, wife of FULK II, COUNT OF ANJOU
(RIN 1248) are from an essay by Bernard S. Bachrach on the orgins of the
countess Gerberga included in his 1995 collection, "Studies in Early
Angevin History".

Note: Notes
ES ii, 189 [rev. in iii(1)], shows Ermengarde's husband, Giselbert, Duke of Burgundy, as son of Manasses, as son of an unnamed daughter of Buvinus, Count of Metz.
Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (258:38), calls him Count of Chalons-sur -Seine, of Vergy, Auxonne, Dijon, and Baune.

Note: Notes
This generation and the following one, which link BOSO, COUNT OF VIENNE (RIN 2137) with GERBERGA, wife of FULK II, COUNT OF ANJOU (RIN 1248) are from an essay by Bernard S. Bachrach on the orgins of the countess Gerberga included in his 1995 collection, "Studies in Early Angevin History".

Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (258:38) identifies the wife of MANASSES and mother of GISELBERT as "Ermengarde, princess of Burgundy; d. 12 Apr 935; prob. dau. of BOSO, KING OF BURGUNDY [sic. KING OF PROVENCE (RIN 2137)]."

Settipani's "La prehistoire des Capetiens" identifies her father as this same BOSO (RIN 2137).

Matman posted to soc.genealogy.medieval on 20 May 1997 (in part):
Subject: Re: Wife of Manassas I, C. of Chalon
"Giselbert appears with his mother Ermengarde (I) in a charter of 924. I don't think she died in 935, but she was dead by then. Some of the confusion undoubtedly comes from the fact that GISELBERTs wife was also called ERMENGARDE (II) in a charter of 942, which also names their daughter ADELAIDE. No document or source says who the fathers of these different Ermengarde's were. But some have speculated that the name Ermengarde was introduced into these families by the marriage of BOSO to ERMENGARDE OF ITALY [RIN 2138] (dau. of LOUIS II [RIN 2139], whose mum was ERMENGARDE d.851). Thus some see Ermengarde (I) as a dau of BOSO OF PROVENCE (d.887), therefore grand-dau of BUVINUS COUNT OF METZ [RIN 4258] (and I think this theory can be found somewhere in the ES).
A old view was that Ermengarde (II) was the daughter of RICHARD THE JUSTICIAR [RIN 1238] (d.921) brother of BOSO: this was followed by Mckitterick in her book on the Carolingians (1983). But there have been other theories as well. The ES is not much help on this as it tends to plonk the various (often contradictory) theories down in different volumes, without any explanation. I wonder what Settipani says?
I think some have noted that there is yet another Ermengarde (III) who appears as the first wife of Leotold of Macon and Besancon in the charter of 935 (Cluny 432): she was a daughter of Manasses I and sister of GISELBERT (C.Bouchard 'Sword and Mitre')."

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty for Commoners" (258:39), calls him Count of Chaunois. Helped to negotiate the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle.
"Alan B. Wilson" posted to soc.genealogy.medieval on 17 May (in part):
Subject: Re: Burgundy - One more try to sum up *
" According to Schwennicke (ed.), Europaische Stammtafeln, ii, 189 [rev. in iii(1)], Manasses, the father of Giselbert, Duke of Burgundy, was son of (not husband of) an unknown daughter of Budwine, Count of Metz. Moriarty in Plantagenet Ancestry, pp. 255 and 257 mentions very speculatively that it has been suggested that Manasses was the son of Thierry II, Count in the Chaunois.
Stuart in Royalty for Commoners, line 258, seems to have put these two together and married Thierry II to the unnamed daughter of Budwine. This couple is given as the parents of Manasses."
Settipani's "La prehistoire des Capetiens", however, shows the marriage between the Hieronymids and Nibelungen one generation earlier, i.e. that Thierry I married a sister of Budwine, rather than Thierry II marrying a dau. of Budwine.

Note: Notes
Weis" "Ancestral Roots. . ." (49:18), identifies her father as Hugh, Count of Bourges, but this is now believed to be incorrect.
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (340:36), identifies her father as Hugh, Count of Bourges, but this is now believed to be incorrect.

Note: Notes
Weis" "Ancestral Roots. . ." (49:18). Does not identify his parents.
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (340:36).

Primarily from J de Petigny and Professor Launay's Historie Archeologique Du Vendome, I, pages 121-122, Academie des Inscriptions et Belle Lettres Chartes et Diplomas: Receuil Des Actes De Charles III, page xx, and Pere Anselme's (Pierre Guibors) Histoire Genealogicue et Chronilogique des Rois de France, II, pages 33-34:
Theobald, Viscount of Troyes, married RICHELDE, the daughter of HUGH AQUITAINE, COUNT OF BOURGES and his wife, ROTHAUT (the daughter of CHARLES II 'L'CHAUVE' ['THE BALD'] KING OF FRANCE and RICARDIS Buwinis Amiens, although some list her mother as ERMENTRUDE ORLEANS, but that is topic for another day...) circa 886. As a result of this marriage, Theobald (Thiabald, Thiabault, etc) became guardian of RICHELDA's younger brother, Hugh, and was given the territories of Blois and Chartres in appreciation of this service. Shortly thereafter, a marauding band of Norman pirates, who had recently taken up residence on the banks of the Seine, attacked Chartres.
These brigands, led by a certain 'ROLLON' [RIN 1312] [i.e. Rollo Duke of Normandy], were more than Theobald could handle on his own. Theobald sent messangers to his wife's cousin, KING CHARLES III 'THE SIMPLE' [RIN 1618], Conrad, Duke of Bourgogne and EBLES, COUNT OF POITERS [RIN 1424], appealing for assistance. The castle had been under seige for some time, when Joscelin, Bishop of Chartres, perched within the
castle ramparts, saw clouds of dust rising in several directions on the horizon. Help was on its way!
The counter-attack was led by KING CHARLES; the Norsemen were forced to lift the seige. KING CHARLES and the renegade ROLLON, or ROLF, had a little chit-chat and a diploma thereafter referred to as the Treaty of Saint Clair-sur-Epte was eventually drawn up, including an agreement by ROLLON to revert to Christianity and be a good boy with a
tight leash held on his followers. For these concessions he was given the area that
would later be called Normandy to govern, and the hand of the fair Princess, Giselle, daughter of KING CHARLES.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (340:37). called "le Tricheur" of "The Cheat". Count of Chartres, Viscount of Tours.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (340:37). Copunt of Chartres. He was the guardian of his grandson, THEOBALD.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (357:33).
ic posted to soc.genealogy.medieval
on 4 Dec 1996:
Subject: Re: How many Hugh's of Maine ?
"> What I'm not sure of is how many intervening HUGHs were counts of Maine in between ROGER and HERBERT. In RFC (line 357), Stuart shows three.
I have not seen RFC, fortunately so, perhaps, as it seems to cause so much confusion. ES III, 692 has:
Roger - Hugo I 900-14 - Hugo II 931-76 - Hugo III 991-1014/15 -
Herbert 1014-36 - Hugo IV 1036-51. Maine was conquered by Geoffrey Martel of Anjou (d.1060), fought over by William the Conqueror etc. Hugo V 1070-92, nephew of Hugo IV may have been only titular count, I'm not sure.
Werner (die Nachkommen, KdG IV, ..) has the same numbering but different dates:
Hugo I 900-39/55 - Hugo II 939/55-ante 92 - Hugo III 992-1014/15.
I always thought the 11th century counts were well established: the problem lies in their origins, which you have discovered, and the division of the various Count Hugo's in the 10th when sources are much scarcer and less clear.
For instance Count Hugo's appear in various sources in 900, 914, 939, 955, 960, 967, 971, 976 & 994 and 2 charters that can only be assigned to the period 968-92. The numbering of these Hugo's depends on how many different individuals you think you can identify from these sources.
RFC could have just made a mistake, as we all can.
It seems clear from indications in the Acts of the Cts of Maine (ed
Robert Latouche, 1910), that we are dealing with at least 2 different Hugo's after 955. A more difficult question is: when did Hugo II succeed Hugo I? We know that Ct Hugo son of widow Rothaus (= Rotilde dau of CB) was alive in 900 (Werner KdG, IV, 426-8). A Hugo son of Roger signs charters of Hugh the Great for St.Martin de Tours 929 & 931: he is assumed to be the same as the Count Hugo of 900. This is acceptable as Hugo would have been very young in 900 (Rotilde was born 870/7), and may have been count in name only: a count Gauslin appears 905-14, who
may have been count of Maine in this period. Roger is thus assumed to be the husband of Rothaus/Rotilde, and the same as the count Rodgar, the enemy of the Bp of Le Mans in 897, who excommunicated him, and we are told Rodgar died soon after.
So you can see that the ES may be wrong in assigning Hugo I 900-14, and Hugo II 931-76.
Incidentally this Rodgar is sometimes seen as the count Rodgar,
_nepos_ of another Count Hugo, who is mentioned by Abbo de St.Germain- des-Pres in his Poem on the Siege of Paris by the Vikings. This Hugo was killed fighting William the Pious in c.892. Sometimes he is referred to as Count of Bourges and as the ancestor of the cts of Maine: this is why there exists an alternate theory - the 'Bourges descent' we better call it. Some French historians, even good ones, still adhere to it, eg M.Bur in his
la formation de Champagne etc).
Another Hugo Ct of Maine appears as the ally of Alan II at the battle of Trans in 939. Werner thinks he was Hugo I and died sometime before 955.
Hugo II appears in 955 up to 976: he had died by 992. Hugo II is assumed to be the son of Hugo I: I don't think any source tells us for certain - the Acts are not much help: they seem to omit Hugo I/II altogether and say that the first Ct of Maine was Hugo son of David (!) father of Herbert. As you will see the Cts of Maine in the 10th century are notable for their longevity: it is possible that due to the lack of sources, historians (eg Werner) may have conflated 2 separate individuals.
> However many Hughs were Counts of Maine, can anyone supply the identity of any of their wives? Stuart shows none for any of his three Hughs.
I don't think any source mentions them, though I suspect that Hugo II probably married an Angevin, perhaps a dau of Fulk II, as he had a son Fulk who appears 967-92."

Source: (Name)
Title: Phil's Copy.FTW
Media: Other

Data:
Text: Date of Import: Apr 6, 2001

Source: (Name)
Title: Phil's Copy.FTW
Media: Other

Data:
Text: Date of Import: Apr 6, 2001

Note: Alternate ancestry for Maelgwyn

Maelgwyn ap Cadwallon 470-547
=Cadwallon Liwhir ap Einion 442-
==Einoin Yith ap Cynedda 417-
===Cunedda Wledig ap Edern 386-
====Edern ap Padarn 364-
=====Padan Beisrudd ap Tegid
======Tegid
===Gwawl verch Coel 388-
==Prawst verch Tidlet 422-
=Meddyf verch Maeldaff

Note: This [the genealogy given here from Gomer to Milesius is the best that I can deduce from the early versions (!LGE, !CPS, !CGH, !Bartrum: HB), which abound in variations. There is a distinct class of later versions (!LGE, !O'Hart, !GenTracts C 154) that seem to have rearranged and altered the pedigree, still abounding in variations, such as that of O'Clery, as follows:
Miledh m. Bile m. Breoghan m. Bratha m. Deatha m. Erchada m. Alloit m. Nuadat m. Nenuaill m. Heber Glas m. Oghnoin Finn m. Heber Gluinfinn m. Laimfhinn m. Agnamoin m. Tait m. Ogamain m. Beoumain m. Heber Scuit m. Sru m. Esru m. Goidil Glas m. Niuil m. Fenius Farsaid m. Baath m. Magog m. Japheth.
--http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2444/Japheth.htm

!LGE - Lebor Gabal Erinn (The Book of the Invasions of Ireland)
!CPS - Chronicles of the Picts and Scots, by Skene, esp. the two pedigrees of William the Lion back to Adam.
!CGH - Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae, ed. Michael A. O�Brien
!Bartrum - Early Welsh Genealogical Tracts: A Welsh Classical Dictionary. [PP] �Pedigrees of the Welsh Tribal Patriarchs�, National Library of Wales Journal, v 13, pp 93-146; v 15, pp 157-6. see also Welsh Genealogies, AD 300-1400 * and !Ford (who sent bits of it by email, with his own comments)
!O'Hart - Irish Pedigrees, 5th ed., by O�Hart. Its primeval data is mostly from the Annals of the Four Masters, MacFirbis, Linea Antiqua, and
The O�Clery Book of Genealogies (Analecta Hibernica, 18), against which it has been occasionally corrected.
!GenTracts - Genealogical Tracts, by Rafferty

Source: (Name)
Title: Phil's Copy.FTW
Media: Other

Data:
Text: Date of Import: Apr 6, 2001

Source: (Name)
Title: Phil's Copy.FTW
Media: Other

Data:
Text: Date of Import: Apr 6, 2001

Note: The source for Seddiya, who is not mentioned in Genesis or Chronicles, indicates that he was the ancestor of the Polynesian people, not including the Aboriginal Australians.
--Zhou People Locator,
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/4241/geneadm2.html

Note: Notes
Per Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (243A:15), he was murdered by his son-in-law, GUDROD.

According to Hyndla's Lay (_Corpus Poeticum Boreale ii.519.IV), he was Harald Granraud, son of Hilldis or Herbrand, son of Hodbrand, son of Hildibrand, son of Hildir, son of Halfdan the Old.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (166:41). "white leg"; King of the Uplanders of Sweden, King of Salver & Vestfold; conquered Roumarike; founded the pagan temple at Skiringssal, 8th century.

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (240:40).
According to Hyndla's Lay (_Corpus Poeticum Boreale ii.519.VI), his mother was
Hjordisar dau. of Eylim son of Hjalmther son of Egdis son of Skyli.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: Notes
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (334:38) states that he was Duke, then King, of Brittany; Count of Nantes & Vannes.
Per "The Bretons" by Galliou and Jones, the Vikings increased the intensity of their raids upon Brittany following the confusion over succession after the death of King Salomon in 874. In the late 880's Alain offered renewed resistance and defeated a Viking band at Questembert abt 888. This inaugurated a period of remission of the
raiding.

Note: Notes
Per "The Bretons", by Galliou and Jones, In the last half of the 9th century, the Vikings made sporadic raids into Brittany, but as they experienced determined resistance from CHARLES THE BALD (RIN 1620) and ROBERT THE STRONG (RIN 1210), they turned their main energies towards England.
Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (405:38) says he was Count of Rennes
887-890 and that he defeated the Norsemen at Coeson in 890.

Note: Notes
Per Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (405:39), he became Count of Rennes in 851.

Note: Notes
Per Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (405:40), he became Duke of Brittany in 851, when his father died.
Extracted from the Book, "The Bretons", by Galliou and Jones:
"The death of NOMENOE raised CHARLES THE BALD's (RIN 1620) hopes that he might re-impose mastery over the Bretons. In the summer of 851 he launched a major attack on Erispoe only to be defeated at Jengland-Besle (L-A), a bridging point over the Vilaine, in a battle which lasted over three days. It was an even more humiliating defeat than that at Bllon and CHARLES fled from the field leaving his camp to be pillaged. The consequences were momentous for the future of Brittany. For reasons about which we can only speculate, shortly after this startling victory, Erispoe agreed peace-terms in a statesmanlike move. In return for the counties of Rennes and Nantes and the vicaria of Retz (which the Bretons had already overrun) in NOMENOE's last campaigns) and a present of royal insignia, he acknowledged fealty to CHARLES . For the first time a non-Carolingian was recognized as ruler of a regnum within the empire. In 856, as a further mark of esteem, Erispoe's daughter was betrothed to LOUIS THE STAMMERER (RIN 1619). Until his death in Novembcr 857 Erispoe remained loyal to the EMPORER. The acquisition of Britannia nova, as the lands conceded in 851 were sometimes called, completely transformed the economic and social as well as the political basis of Erispoe's authority. It also smoothed the way for further significant advances in Carolingian influence. Rennes and Nantes had passed into Frankish hands in the sixth cetltury; for almost four centuries they had been advance outposts of Frankish culture and society.
Very few documents relate to the rule of Erispoe: just seven acta survive that were issued in his name, together with one charter declivered jointly With his cousin Salomon. Analysis of the witness lists reveals the presence of Erispoe's close relations (his wife MARMOHEC,
his son Conan, his uncle Rivallon), the bishops whom Nominoe had promoted in 849 (Courantgen of Vannes, Retwalatr of Alet, Anaweten of
Quimper, Clotwoion of Saint-Pol) and a large group of laymen (nobiles) who are not otherwise distinguished by rank or office. Refercnce to
counts reflects growing Carolingian administrative influence as does the fact that Salomon, like Erispoe, became an imperinl fiidelis. Possiby in 852 (though much remains mysterious about what happened and when), CHARLES THE BALD granted Salomon 'a third of Brittany', a portion that he may have held under the suzerainty of Erispoe. It may have included the counties of Rennes and Nantes. Whether it was because of this territorial division or some other matter like Erispoe's continuing good relations with CHARLES THE BALD and the marriage treaty of 856, after sharing their authority for some years, the cousins came to blows. Between 2 and 12 November 857 Salomon murdered Erispoe. The first serious Viking raids in England and Francia occured at the end of the 8th century. In 843, they took advantage of the feud between NOMENOE, his ally, Lambert, and Renaud to sack the city of Nantes. In the next few years the Loire valley became a major theatre of warfare as Viking bands, Carolingiam aristocrats, and Breton princes struggled for dominance in a confusing series of alliances.

Note: Notes
Per Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (405:41), King of Brittany, Governor under LOUIS THE PIOUS (RIN 1212) beggining in 826. Sources quoted in Moriarty are Winkhaus, Ahnen zu Karl dem Grossen und Wiederkind (1950), Brandenburg, Die Nachkommens Karl des Grossen (1935), and others. In the notes after the table, he states "Accounts of the early descent vary; the above taken from Winkhaus is the latest and best."
Turton's "Plantagenet Ancestry" calls his father Erispoe, but this may be a mistake derived from his son's name.
Extracted from the Book, "The Bretons", by Galliou and Jones:
"Although Nomenoe was a native Breton (one of the very few facts about him that can be definitely established), more important than his ethnicity was the manner in which he came to power, the way he maintained it and the legacy he left to his immediate successors.
Virtually nothing is known about him before his appointment as missus imperatouris in Brittany around 1 May 831. La Bordcrie's argument that he was already count of Vannes in 819 and 'governor' of Brittany in 826 must be rejected following a critical re-examination of acta in the cartulary of Redon which show Guy, a member of the Widonid family, as count at Vannes until January 830 at least. When appointed Nomenoe was, or certainly became, an imperial vassal (fidelis); he was probably first drawn to LOUIS' [THE PIOUS (RIN 1212)] attention during the campaigns of the 820s. Through benefices then conferred upon him or as a result of later promotion he came to possess land that once belonged to the imperial fisc as grants to Saint-Sauvetlr de Redon demonstrate. Of his own patrimony nothing is known though since he was related (probably by marriage) to Rivallon, count of Pohet in 844, this may have lain in Cornouaille. As missus the main centre of his own power was the Vannetais: two Redon documents of 832 and 834 style him comes
or princeps Velnetice civitatis. Other acta from the same source show that he exercised his authority both in that county and beyond. As missus this was extremely wide-ranging. It included ecclesiastical as well as civil, judicial and military matters, which perhaps explains his high-handed dismissal of all the Breton
bishops in 849 (below p. 154). In addition to missus, he is sometimes styled dux or magister, and described as 'ruling' (gubernans, regnans.. nominans). Contrary to normal Carolingian practice , he does not appear to have shared his missaticum with an ecclesiastic but he had several subordinate officials, also styled missi, to assist
him. The novel feature of his missaticum was that territorially it included lands which the Carolingians had never succeeded in mastering and a county (Vannes) detached from the former Frankish March. It was thus LOUIS THE PIOUS (RIN 1212) himself rather than Nomenoe who first created a union which remained fundamental to the Breton state; during his lifetime Nomenoe did not seriously betray THE EMPORER's trust.
His loyalty to the Carolingians began to waver in 843 during the civil wars between the sons of LOUIS THE PIOUS. After first supporting CHARLES THE BALD (840-77) (RIN 1620), whose share of the empire in the sequence of partitions, culminating in the treaty of Verdun (843), always included suzerainty over Brittany, Nomenoe became embroiled in quarrels over the county of Nantes. Here a scion of the Widonids, Lambert [Not our ancestor (RIN 1697) as he died in 936)], was disputing possession with Renaud, count of Herbauge. In May 843 a Breton army led by Nomenoe's son ERIPSOE and Lambert defeated Renaud at Messac (I-et-V), where the Roman road from Angers to Carhaix crosses the Vilaine. A month later, taking advantage of these divisions among the Neustrian aristocracy, the Vikings sacked Nantes. By the autumn CHARLES THE BALD, hoping to restore order in the west, was at Rennes but his campaign was a failure. In 844 Nomenoe and Lambert continued their feud with the heirs of Count Renaud and raided as far afield as Maine. After a brief truce, military
operations began again and on 22 November 845 CHARLES THE BALD was defeated at Ballon, near Redon (I-et-V), when he went to succour those opposing Nomenoe in Brittany. For a few days Lupus of Ferrieres feared CHARLES himself had been killed. Relations between Nomenoe and CHARLES were temporarily patched up in 846 when Nomenoe deserted Lambert. By now the
Viking presence was making itself felt and there are hints of a challenge to Nomenoe's own authority in Brittany. Around Christmas 846 a Breton army was ravaging the Bessin, contrary to a truce with CHARLES which Nomenoe seems personally to have kept until 849. In 847 he also suffered three reverses at the hands of the Vikings before bribing them to look elsewhere for booty. Two years Inter, however, Nomenoe was at the height of his powers. In a synod held at Coitlouh (M?) in May 849 he dismissed the five Breton bishops (Alet, Dol, Quimper,
Saint-Pol-dec-Lon and Vannes) for simony and replaced them with nominees 'of his own race and language'. A damaging schism with the Frankish church began that was to rumble on during the reigns of his two immediate successors. Then, reconciled with Count Lambert, who had returned from exile hoping to re-establish himself again at Nantes, Nomenoe launched a series of vigorous military assaults on Rennes, Nantes and Le Mans. Lupus of Ferrieres, writing on behalf of a synod of
Carolingian bishops in August 850, urged Nomenoe to repent and make peace with CHARLES but to no avail. A raid on Nantes resulted in the destruction of its walls and gates. In the depths of winter Nomenoe pressed on. Then, unexpectedly on 7 March 851 he died deep in Fankish territory at Vendome. His achievements - the establishment of personal dominance in Breton secular and religious affairs, the beginnings of an administration which united both Frankish and Breton lands - hung in the balance.
Whatever advantages his origins may have conferred (and the silence of the records is total), the career of Nomenoe as it can now be traced demonstrates how much he owed to imperial patronage as a fidelis and missus. It was this that had elevated his authority above that of other Bretons; it provided the territorial basis for his power. In seeking to extend this he acted within the political framework of the
empire by alliances with other families of the Reichsavistokratie.
Quarrels between the sons of LOUIS THE PIOUS, local disputes and the havoc caused by the Vikings furnished ideal circumstances for Nomenoe's power to grow as the transition from loyal lieutenant in the 830s to independent leader with expansionist policies after 843 shows. But there were limitations to his ambitions: despite a later tradition that after deposing the Breton bishops Nomenoe had himself crowned at Dol, which he allegedly wished to turn into a metropolitan see, there is no contemporary warrant for this."

Note: Notes
Weis" "Ancestral Roots. . ." (50:13), (140:13), (146:13), (148:13), (182:5), (190:13), (191:14).
Comments posted to GEN-MEDIEVAL by Don Stone:
. . . "Most modern authorities give Charlemagne's birth year as 747, but Settipani and Van Kerrebrouck (1993) give 748; see their detailed analysis in note 3, p. 191."

Charlemagne must be taken as the central focus of medieval European history. He is one of the handful of truly great men in world history and many volumes have been written concerning his deeds. For centuries after his death descent from him was considered as one of the chief prerequisites for legitimacy as a ruler. Even today societies exist for those who can trace their ancestry back to Charlemagne. He had a very large number of children and grandchildren and his descendants today undoubtedly number in the millions. It is not my purpose to give a complete biography here. I offer the following broad sketch for the reader who has no background in medieval history at all:
Between the fall of the Roman Empire in AD 476 and the rise of Charlemagne in the years just before AD 800, Europe was a hodgepodge of small states which originated from the settling down of the various tribes of "Barbarians" which had brought down the Empire. Charlemagne's ancestors, the Franks, had established themselves in what is today northern France and western Germany. Gradually they began to become dominant over their neighbors and their territory and influence increased. Charlemagne was able to accelerate this trend. Using his remarkable skills as a military leader and as an administrator, he was able to bring a large portion of western Europe under his control. In AD 800, on Christmas day, the Pope crowned him the Emporer of the revived Roman Empire (sometimes refered to as the "Holy Roman Empire"). This
is an enormously significant event, psychologically and symbolically, in the history of Europe. Charlemagne passed the Empire on to his son, LOUIS, but it did not survive intact for very long as it was divided between his three grandsons. European politics, however, for long afterwards revolved around just how the Empire would be divided. Charlemagne was married four times. Only his second wife, HILDEGARDE OF SWABIA, bore him any sons - four of them - Charles,
PEPIN, LOUIS, and Lothar. The other three wives produced no descendants.
We know of at least five concubines of Charlemagne. They bore him six sons and two daughters.

Note: Notes
"Colonial & Revolutionary Lineages in America" in Vol 18, pp236-238, in its genealogy from CLOVIS to CHARLEMAGNE, has Baudguise as the son of MUNDERIC's unnamed daughter and Mummolin . The Hull University
project on the Internet shows him as the son of a "SAINT GENDOLFUS,
BISHOP OF TONGRESS (b. abt 535)", who was MUNDERIC's son. The Hull University project refers to Baudguise as a legendary figure.
Weis' "Ancestral Roots" (190:7) has St. Gondolfus as his father also.

Note: Notes
Per Weis' "Ancestral Roots" (190:6), he was consecrated bishop of Tongres in 599. He was known as Saint Gondolfus. He was the brother of Bodegeisel I.

Note: Notes
Per Weis' "Ancestral Roots" (190:5), he was very young when his father was murdered in 509; revolted against Thierry I, who killed him.

Note: Notes
Weis' "Ancestral Roots" (190:4) .
He was nicknamed "the parricide" for murdering his father. He was, in turn killed by CLOVIS, king of the Salian Franks, who then became king of the Ripuarian Franks as well as of the Salian Franks.

In Stuart's "Royalty For Commoners" (171:50), Cloderic's wife and MUNDERIC's mother is given as N.N., a kinswoman of CLOTHILDA (RIN 2223*), the Burgundian queen of CLOVIS (RIN 2218*).

Note: Notes
Weis' "Ancestral Roots" (190:3).
Known by the nickname "the lame", he was one of several frankish kings, his kingdom being in the Rhineland. When CLOVIS (RIN 2218) was consolidating his power as sole king of the Franks, Sigebert was probably his most powerful rival. It appears that the two king were on friendly terms. Sigebert's son, CLODERIC, even faught with CLOVIS in his campaign against the Visigoths. As related by Edward James in his book, "The Franks" : "CLOVIS persuaded CLODERIC to kill his father as he was walking in the forest outside Cologne. While CLODERIC was selecting his reward from his father's treasure chest, one of CLOVIS' Franks split his skull with an axe. CLOVIS announced to the Rhineland Franks that CLODERIC had killed his father and had in turn been killed; they clashed their shields, shouted their approval, and made CLOVIS their king."
As the Merovingian dynasty developed, the separate identities of Neustria (home of the Salian Franks) and Austrasia (home of the Ripuarian Franks) was maintained.

Note: Notes
Weis' "Ancestral Roots" (190:1) calls him Frankish King of Cologne, living 420, kinsman of Clovis I.
kennwalrus@@@@aol.com (Kennwalrus) posted to GEN-MEDIEVAL-L-request@@@@rootsweb.com on 17 Feb 1998
Subject: Re: CLOVIS THE RIPARIAN
..."Clovis the Riparian, supposedly King at Koln ca. 420, can be traced back, in English, to a 1940s article by G. Andrews Moriarty in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register. (My papers are in disarray, so I speak -- this is a warning -- from memory.) He, however, was summarizing his understanding of a series of 1920s articles by a scholar named Depoin, published in a French periodical called the Revue Mabillon. What Depoin actually theorized in this article, on the basis of much later and rather confused saints' lives, was that Sigebert the Lame of Cologne (real, fl. prob. ca. 500, give or take a bit) was younger brother of his predecessor, Childebert, and that both were sons and successors of a Clovis who was not the same man as Clovis the Great of the Salic Franks.
Moriarty apparently read or remembered this incorrectly, for he made Sigebert the Lame SON of Childebert, and GRANDSON of this 'other
Clovis.' Having done so, he guessed fl.' dates for the supposed three generations, at 30 years each.
....Actually, the saint's life in question is a late and shaky document upon which to found a genealogy; while it's barely possible that the genealogy as Depoin extracted it is valid (Moriarty's would be less so, since its alteration from Depoin's version is apparently accidental), nothing even remotely contemporary documents the Riparian kings back of Sigebert of Cologne. Assuming that there were any, it seems likely that they were in some degree akin to CLOWIS THE GREAT, but impossible to specify how. (This is not for want of trying, often of an original and inventive cast, by many hands over many decades; but the original documentation being so very thin, they are unlikely to approximate the historical truth, whatever it was.)"
The next day, Kennwalrus, further expanded on his comments:
...". . . fortunately, as I've located the relevant articles. You're right: in *NEHGR* 98 (1944) 303-10, "The Origin of the Carolingians," at 309, G. A. Moriarty writes: "Siegbert the Lame ... was the son of Childebert, King of Cologne, and ... grandson of an earlier Clovis, ... King of Cologne early in the fifth century (Gregory of Tours, *op. cit.*)." There's nothing in Gregory about Siegbert's (or Sigebert's) ancestry, other than the general statement, made somewhere in G of T's *History of the Franks*, that the other Frankish kings (ca. 490? 500?) were (all?) relatives of Clovis the Great, who killed them. Moriarty apparently wrote doubly absent-mindedly at that point, for it isn't just the citation, but the proposed ancestry itself, that's reported incorrectly. Earlier in the same article he cites his source for the WHOLE lineage as M. J. Depoin, "Les Grands [*sic*] Figures Monacales ...," *Revue Mabillon*, 1921-2. The latter article says, "Il s'agit ici ["ici" being the *Legend of St. Goar*] de trois rois de Cologne dont le dernier, Sigebert le Boiteux, apparait comme successeur d'un Childebert anterieur au fils de Clotilde, et fils d'un Clovis qui etablit son pouvoir sur les Ripuaires probablement au temps de l'exil de Childeric Ier." In another article by the same man -- "Etudes merovingiennes" -- for which I can identify neither the date nor the journal (I took bad notes) -- unless it's the *Revue des Etudes Historiques*, 11, pp. 369-85 -- he says, "Le royaume des Franks austrasiens de 450 a 509 a donc eu pour titulaires:
1. Clodovie (Clovis), frere de Merovee.
2. Childibert (Childebert), fils de Clodovie.
3. Sigebert, frere cadet de Childibert.
4. Cloderic, fils de Sigebert."
In other words, Depoin analyzed a later medieval legend as meaning that a Frank named Clovis took power at Cologne in the 460s or so; and that a Childebert and a Sigebert ("the Lame") were his sons and successors, the latter being father of Cloderic the Parricide. Whether one accepts this depends on (a) one's assessment of the value of the *Legend of St. Goar* as a source for the fifth century (a subject on which I remain agnostic here), (b) Depoin's analysis of *Goar*; and (c) other sources for the period, which name no Ripuarian kings (they name precious few anybodys, as it was a dreadful period for annalists and historians, as for everybody else), but do seem to indicate that there WERE 'other' Frankish kings -- other than Childeric, fa. of Clovis, that is -- in the middle 400s.
Long story to short: Sigebert the Lame's real. He definitely doesn't descend from Clovis the Great. (He was almost certainly older than C
the G.) Plausibly, though not provably, he was of royal Frankish descent, and kin, in some unknown degree, to C the G; but the evidence for the existence of Clovis the Ripuarian is debatable, which makes Depoin's analysis of this C's genealogical bearings of secondary relevance; and Moriarty's report of Depoin's analysis is incorrect -- either misread, or (I think more likely) misremembered in the writing. (Which would indicate that Moriarty, at least sometimes, wrote from an unreliable memory, without his sources beside him, and without correcting from those sources later.)"

Note: Notes
Weis' "Ancestral Roots . . ." (190:9), identifies him as the son of ANSBERTUS and presumed father of ITTA (RIN 3665). Later research tends to reject the claim that he was ITTA's father.