Talk:Ansbert (6th century)

---

The use of sources, such as Christian Settipani

This whole article is full of statements that are highly doubtful. None of the sources and quotes comes from a contemporaine source. Take for example the date of bearth of Ansbertus. The article gives 2 possible dates. However the primary source that is used gives NONE. More over that very primary source is doubtful. It is contradicted by another source. All problems concerning interpretation of the sources are given by Christian Settipani in his book Prehistoire des Capetiens. The article however adresses none of these problems and gives an account of the primary source that is rather dubious and not in line with the familytree Settipani gives in this book.

On the other hand this article sais interesting things like that Arnoald was margrave of the Scheldt. This may be true, or not, but what I would like to see is a primary source for it. You see, dear Alex, when I place a tag for additional sources this is not because I doubt, or question the fact, it is only because I think that an additional source may be useful, for example for students who need such a source, or for people that are interested and want to learn more. Placing of a tag for additional sources is NOT a negative comment on the work done by a previous editor. And I hope you are not against giving extra information? After all man is only born once, not twice and it may be interesting to see why this article gives two dates of birth. johanthon (talk) 13:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Waldrada attached to incorrect Chlothar

The Waldrada link on this page concerns Waldrada as the wife of Chlothar II. Either that reference is incorrect, or this page's contention that she is a wife of Chlothar I is incorrect. In other Wiki articles, it appears that Chlothar I was the husband of Ingund and they in turn were the parents of Blithilde, the wife of Ansbertus, the Gallo-Roman Senator.

Wstander (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

• Chlotar II was not the husband of a Waldrada. According to Gregory of Tours, Waldrada was a daughter of the Wacho, King of the Lombards some years before they invaded Italy under Alboin. She was said to have married Theudebald of Austrasia who died. Then she was seduced by Chlothar I but his bishops objected so he sent her to be the wife of his vassal, Garivald, Duke of Bavaria where she remained. (Gregory of Tours Histories IV 9) The issue is that Bilihilde was said to descend of Merovingian parents. Various scholars have tried to figure out which Merovingian parents she could conceivably have had. Apparently this story started with the alegation that she had to have been the daugther of Chlothar II until someone realized that this would make her contemporaneous with her grandchildren so a scribal error for Chlothar I was posited. This has since been challenged because Gregory meticulously listed all of Chlothar's sons and several daughters and there was no Blithilde among them.

This was not an otherwise known Merovingian name until King Theudebert II in Burgundy married a woman of that name in the first decade of the 7th century. The name was very common in the Gauzelinid Counts of Maine in the late Merovingian and early Carolingian period. There is no evidence that she was actually a Merovingian. The Merovingian princes were numerous, promiscuous and polygamous and many noble families during the Carolingian era appear to have tacked a Merovingian "princess" onto their line to give it added gravitas. There were active remnants of many other powerful Frankish and non-Frankish German familias throughout the 6th century - Franks - Ragnachar's family, Sigebrt of Cologne's family, Burgundian - Ricomer, and Gothic families from both Septimania and Hispania. It is more likely (though still mere speculation) that Bilihild was from Western Gaul of a Frankish or mixed Frankish Gothic origin. Chritian Settipani to be specific, has proposed (2002) that the "Merovingian" ancestry of the Ansbertins was not specifically "Merovingian" but Ripuarian Frankish, A rival familia or faction, through a daughter of Chloderic, the son of Sigibert of Cologne who Settipani suggested married Ansbertus' father Ferreolus.

This Ferreolus is also not "Tonantius Ferreolus senator" who would then have been of very considerable age if indeed still alive, but Ferreolus, a Gallo-roman "senator", Ferreolus of Rodez. The Senatorial title which was of debatable legal significance in the absence of Roman authority was applied to certain families that were "under Roman law" (surviving Gallo Roman nobility) that were regarded as possessing genuine senatorial ancestors in the 6th through 8th centuries by authors ranging from Gregory to Paulus Diaconus. The Ripuarians were referred to in different sources as kin or somehow related to Clovis (probably through Theodoric's mother, Clovis' unattested first wife) which appears to be a meritorious argument on onomastic grounds, but earlier writers have tended to just presume the Ripuarians to be "Merovingian"GradyEdwardLoy (talk) 11:44, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the above reference to use of Settipani for source material I note that Settipani has come out with a couple of works that address the problem of the Ferreoli, the Arnulfings, the Merovingians and possible connections since the Publication of his first work on the Capetians. He proposes fairly specifically a plausible line of descent of Arnulf from the Ripuarians with connections to the Ferreoli through a maternal line back through a branch of the Agilolfings. It is considerably more persuasive and well researched than just noting that there were no contemporary sources that told us what we needed to know. It is fairly standard in this period to have to reconstruct, carefully and conservatively what went on in the lacunae left by contemporary authors. To be quite straightfoward about it it is the case that Ansbert is not directly mentioned in a contemporary source down to the 8th century. The name was common in certain specific families where the name Arnulf was also common. So its attribution by 8th century sources even with a certain amount of known error is not implausible. By that point certain names were already established as characteristic in certain Frankish families and use of the name strongly implied ancestry. Absent the existence of Ansbertus who is the topic of this article, we do not know who was the first bearer of the name - the one to make it famous so that descendants would use it as a badge of clan identification. I think the long and short of it is that there is a strong argument that arnulf acceded 611 to what by that point was becoming according to Paulus Diaconius an increasingly important and somewhat hereditary bishopric prior to the fall of King Theodebert (613). Which strongly suggests ties to the family (agilolf/anrould) holding that see. Since that family was described as Roman in the paternal line (Paulus) Arnulf would have been connected through one of his female lines. Arnoul (whose existence independent of Arnulf is clearly attested by Paulus) was nephew of Agilolf, his predecessor. Agilolf was described as of a senatorial family by Paulus Diaconius. At the point in time when Agilolf became bishop, there were several senatorial families left in the part of Gaul controlled by the Austrasians. The area around Nimes, Arles and Marseilles held several senatorial families of whom the Ferreoli and Syagri and Desideri (arguably an artificial division of a single familia) were notable. This family was still independently powerful, independent of any connection with the Carolingians or their predecessors, well into the 8th century (cf Aristocracy in Provence) The cleric Aegidius whose participation in the ill fated revolution against Brunhilde and her son was described by Gregory was a member of this family as was Egidius of Poitiers, another Austrasian magnate. The various Ferreoli of Uzes are sufficiently described in Sidonius, Gregory of Tours, and their saint's lives to dismiss any charge of fabrication. There is a maxim that "affirmanti non neganti incumbit probatio." I think those who have posited a connection between the clan of late Roman officials (the Syagrii and Tonantii Ferreoli) and the "senatorial" roman family that held the see of Metz in almots hereditary succession in the late 6th and early 7th century were connected. We cannot say from contemporary records that the person constituting the link was named Ansbertus though the records from a century or so later that say that was the case are more persuasive than antagonists would allow. On the one hand we have had researchers from Depoin to Kelly to Settipani who have gone into the surviving material considering not just the immediate materials surrounding th person but others carrying the name, holding the post and so on and they have both been obsessive as to detail and enormously careful. Not to violate the rule against discourtesy but any who would regard either man as an over eager genealogist is a fool. I have made the aquaintance of both. Their libraries were impressive, their patience in consulting others and reaching a conclusion, legend. Part of the problem is the post roots boom has made Mr. Settipani something of a reluctant celebrity among those who still seek to trace their lineages back to Adam, Such people often quote extensively and without understanding. Equally irritated are the only slightly less (if at all) erudite who affect an air of intelligence by denying any such posited connections outright. This is largely because they resent the (other) ignorant making fairy stories (as is often the case) over ancient ancestry. There are some legitimate DFA's but they are very very tenuous and would not get anyone anywhere with the heralds. The research being done has an entirely different significance. It is to try to unlock some of the mysteries that still surround the transition from late antiquity into the middle ages. This problem is far wider than genealogy though contemporary concepts of family and clan were paramount in any discussion of transmission of tradition, culture or power. For the most part the posts are left in peace and some have tried patiently to provide referenced information about these obscure medieval clerics and war lords and their spouses - information that often is in latin and of arguable authenticity. One of the faults of Wikipedia - and it is not curable lest we throw the baby out with the bathwater - is that to protect us from fairy tales and to allow the democratic and participatory spirit that is wikipedia that brings us so many benefits, we must bow to the denials of people who if they rightly point out "there was no contemporary source" or "there was a forgery at some point in that document" in fact know little else about the situation to the detriment of the loss of information from those who really do know what they are talking about. Several editors have told me - it is a matter of careful sourcing, painstaking argument and very considerable patience. And that I accept. To paraphrase something Settipani said to me (I think I had it right) I do not care whether Ansbertus was exactly the name of the person who lived there and had these children. But such a person did live and what matters is how history progressed. How the world changed. That is what I am trying to show. What Ansbertus shows us (together with hundreds of other pieces of information) is the old classical world adapted to the new taking on Germanic names and Germanic spouses and yet still carrying some of the most enduring traditions with them into the new order. GradyEdwardLoy — Preceding unsigned comment added by GradyELoy (talk • contribs) 14:47, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Chronological Problems

"The chronological problems with the line as presented, have led modern genealogists to try to re-construct the line in various ways to fix them."

I would, and I am sure others, would like to hear more on this, as it is currently only a vague pointer to a problem. This Statement itself leads to the need of expanding it. Else it is superfluous. What are the Chronological Problems? Who has reconstructed it? And in what other ways aside from the one example? Collision-Shift (talk) 03:34, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Clodius wikilink

The Clodius link goes to a generic Clodius. Is there a specific Clodius that could be more specifically mentioned? --Stultiwikia^{text me} 12:36, 26 December 2016 (UTC)