Urraca d'Ivrea - Urraca doesn't exist?

Juan Carlos, you are being rude in conducting a Spanish-only conversation. If you *intend* it to be just between you and George Brouwers, please take it to Genimail.

Sharon Lee Doubell C
4/1/2020 at 9:59 PM

So, if an Archdeacon of Verdun - which Richard de Wassebourg was - thinks/ believes/ finds/ finds out 500 years later that a Pope in 1057 who came from Verdun was descended from the King of Italy through his mother Iunca - and this information exists nowhere historians can find in the histories we have from the time, it is reasonable to presume that she is spurious.

It's not just that there is no evidence for this profile's name; it's that there is no evidence for her existence as the one man's daughter or the other man's wife.
When historians track down that evidence we can use it.
There are plenty of reasons why noble ascent benefits people to fabricate.

"There are plenty of reasons why noble ascent benefits people to fabricate."

Then it is equally beneficial for others to dismantle pedigrees.

"there is no evidence"

"when historians track down that evidence we can use it"

I shouldn't bother tracking down "that" evidence (presumably evidence you would approve), if in your mind it doesn't exist.

Both Richard de Wassebourg and James Anderson D.D. were published historians, scholars, and genealogists. Their very rare and precious texts have long been housed in the greatest libraries both public and private.

I trust those sources, although I'm currently exploring the more ancient texts, anyway. The good that has come out of this conflict over Urraca, is that it inspires me to learn more about history, effective communication, and languages, :D . I hope others will be equally inspired to do the same.

If corruption and self-interest was a problem in their times, just imagine how much worse it is today, enabled with the aid of technology.

By the way, "je trouve" Juan, Ulf, and Livio (among others not mentioned here) a genuine pleasure to read. Thank you.

And I truly appreciated George when he stepped forward to shed more light on the subject, although sadly we still disagree.

I hope that everyone has a very good day.

Is it always really spurious=fake or is it more a case of suspicious=low trust, if the original sources now gone? You can look at it in this way, if the author is known for making errors, have a lot of faults in his or hers work, then the credibility is affected negatively, if not, we can assume that the work are genuine done even if some people lack sources.

We had a big fire in Stockholm 1697, wherein three quarters of the swedish national archive got lost in the disaster. Unfortunately, we had taken a lot of documents from our enemies during many earlier wars and conflicts, thus affecting other nations history aswell. Suddenly sweden was in a state of being without its earlier history and a big work started trying to recover as much as possible.

In this work, the few surving books became helpful, especially works of books that summarized events and relationships, all documents regarding taxes, enrollments, purchases and sales became important to recreate as much as possible.

In fact, almost evrything before 1700 in the swedish history is affected by work of reenactment, so we now have a long tradition of evaluating, to weigh information against other in order to unearthing the truth, reliability is what we seek but we will always have some cases where we just have to put our trust completely in both the second and or third hand sources.

It is therefore decisive which motive was behind the authors works because we know that the original sources no longer exist in order to be able to evaluate and assess the credibility. Maybe this is also the main reason why I accept a degree of plausible relationships in the tree, as long as they are not contradicted, I am Swedish after all.

Ulf, 13-1-2010 7:23 AM. The text on page 406 of the issue of 21-12-1549 by Antiquitez de la Gaule Belgique… by M. Richard de Wassebourg is exactly the same as on page 438 of the issue of 13-11-1549 cited by Debra Denman 25-12-2019 7:30.
The text Je "trouve que" in French in this context means "assuming" and not "find that". Uncertain / sure. Something for language experts.
I don’t have a problem whitch Iunca but a ? behind her name is on his place.

I think the term is "low confidence" rather than "low trust".

Evidently none of the near-contemporary sources for Gozelon I, Godefroi II or Frederick/Pope Stephen (I)X bothered to mention the name of Gozelon's wife/Godefroi and Stephen's mother. This is, sadly, very often the case.

The family was Germanic in origin, deriving its ducal title from the Kings of Germany, and the names they used were all Germanic in origin.

As for the putative connection with Berengario II of Ivrea and Italy, no contemporary or near-contemporary writer mentioned any such thing. This family was Burgundian in origin and gave their children Italianized versions of Germanic names. Three daughters are known from contemporary or near-contemporary documentation (Gisla, Gilberga, and Rozala/Susanna), with a fourth probable but unconfirmed (Berta, abbess of San Sisto at Piacenza). No record of any fifth daughter, no record of any connection to the Dukes of Lower Lotharingia.

Somebody at some time in the following five hundred years seems to have thought such a connection possible, but whoever came up with it didn't bother to document it. And after a couple of repetitions it became something that "everybody knows", and the process of adding dubious details (like a Spanish/Catalan name for a Burgundian princess) began.

(The same process can be traced, rather more clearly, in the case of Macbeth. Near-contemporary records only assert that he was "nepos" to King Malcolm (II) - a word which notoriously has multiple meanings. Some centuries later Holinshed stated "authoritatively" but without evidence that he was the son of Malcolm II's daughter "Doada" - and got his father's name all wrong - and it stuck.)

Prior to. My last message sent before seeing the incoming text from this morning,

As for the question from Juan Carlos yesterday at 10:13 am:
I am real and live in Oisterwijk NL Esschebaan 152. And, as already indicated 12/01/2020 5:49, I have a pedigree at MyHeritage. https://www.myheritage.nl/site-669249361/# There is nobody who uses or responds me, respectively misused. He should read better. And is it a disaster caused by me when I want to delve into genealogy?
Aven B. Helms: When I receive text in Spanish and translate to Dutch via Google without English intervention, it is understandable.

"I don’t have a problem whitch Iunca but a ? behind her name is on his place."

George, do you know if in medieval german, there would have been a special word for a youngster, following this pattern, junge, young boy, junca, young girl?

In spanish they got nino, nina so it not that uncommon if someone else adopted it, in germanic a g could easily change over to a k, and it would at least make sense if he had used such a word, not knowing her real name, thus followed by a questionmark.

Do we have any experts here on medevil Gaul and Belgian language, please?

This is a speculation.

You can compare it with this, maybe.

Junker (Danish: Junker, German: Junker, Dutch: Jonkheer, English: Yunker, Norwegian: Junker, Swedish: Junker Georgian: იუნკერი (Iunkeri)) is a noble honorific, derived from Middle High German Juncherre, meaning "young nobleman" or otherwise "young lord" (derivation of jung and Herr). The term is traditionally used throughout the German-speaking, Dutch-speaking and Scandinavian-speaking parts of Europe.

There could have been an old source, germanic, where Junca was used in a simular way, that this Wassebourg was citing.

1. Ulf. 15/1/2020 2:31 Repeat: The text Je "trouve que" in French in this context means "assuming" and not "find that". “Uncertain / sure”. Something for language experts.
Why don't you respond to "assuming" and "find that" – “Uncertain and sure”?

2. Ulf, 15/1/2020 2:31. Repeat: I don’t have a problem whitch Iunca, but a ? behind her name is on his place.
For me, here, a “question mark” means: "Did she exist or did she not exist?"
Or is it prohibited to use a question mark in a Family Tree and other genealogical texts. Am a laymen.

? Is used variously. For me in this context it suggests "uncertainty," and most likely about her name.

The junka "young woman" speculation is interesting.

George, you're stuck with only one understanding of the meaning of that word, I'm quite clear that it meant found, used in the text as in "I found - out", J'ai trouvé.

The second part in this is another thing, the french language was under heavy development and the latin they used in this time were what we call vulgar, and the third thing is that eventual sources 400 years earlier, in this specific area might have been written in a germanic language, and even that language was not just as it is today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_German
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_German_consonant_shift

George,

Geni does not have any functionality at this point to support speculative genealogy, Geni has a binary system yes/no.

Typically a profile on Geni with Name = "Junca ?" will be taken to indicate that the person's first name is known but not their second name.

Ulf,

Your speculation about Junca being a descriptive term rather than a pronoun is plausible on the surface but proving it is just about as impossible as proving her name without a primary source.

I've found original records for people who's legal first name was Junior. Genealogists in a thousand years can argue whether that person's name was really Junior or not :)

Hola a tod@s hoy ha sido un gran día que me ha inspirado confianza porque sé que George existe, que tiene un pedigrí en MyHeritage desde Octubre de 2019. que es Holandés igual que mi abuelo y mis antepasados que vivieron en Ámsterdam y cruzaron el océano Atlántico para llegar a América.
Quiero agradecer a Debra y a Ulf que no hablan Español pero lo traducen e interpretan lo que quiero decir al igual que yo que traduzco y que voy a seguir comunicándome en Español porque Hay más de 400 millones de personas cuya lengua materna es el español, tratándose así del segundo idioma más hablado del mundo después del chino. El inglés sigue al español con unos 360 millones de hablantes por lo tanto quien dijo que (Juan Carlos, you are being rude in conducting a Spanish-only conversation. If you *intend* it to be just between you and George Brouwers, please take it to Genimail.) Juan Carlos, estás siendo grosero al mantener una conversación solo en español. Si * tiene la intención * de que sea solo entre usted y George Brouwers, llévelo a Genimail. Le digo lo siento hablo español el segundo idioma más hablado del mundo Je dis désolé, je parle l'espagnol, la deuxième langue la plus parlée au monde. I say sorry I speak Spanish the second most spoken language in the world . Ik zeg sorry dat ik Spaans spreek, de tweede meest gesproken taal ter wereld . https://translate.google.com.ar/?hl=es#view=home&op=translate&a...
Para finalizar les dejo esta frase El Correo de la UNESCO • 2008 • Número “La lengua es el primer instrumento del genio de un pueblo” disfrútenla y , gracias
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000158378_spa

Mechanical translation is...mechanical.

Not everyone uses Google, not everyone has easy access to Google Translate (I use Firefox, which does *not* have built-in translation ability).

I can follow along in Spanish up to a point, but it's tedious to be constantly mentally translating. And some people here can't even do that much.

¡ ¿ ¡
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signo_de_interrogaci%C3%B3n
https://verne.elpais.com/verne/2017/11/07/articulo/1510048716_68398...
De lejos, solo en la abierta llanada manchega, la larga figura de Don Quijote se encorva como un signo de interrogación: y es como un guardián del secreto español, del equívoco de la cultura española” (José Ortega y Gasset, Meditaciones del Quijote, 1914).

Ulf, 1/15/2020 2:31 AM. The first part of your answer is understandable, possible.
In the second part you don’t answer my question whether the use of a question mark is prohibited in this context. But Alex has since done so at 1:48, for which I thank him.

Too bad, that Spanish bore in our excellent discussion. He has seriously polluted the discussion I started, with the intervention of Sharon Lee Doubell, about Urraca d’Ivrea with people from the Geni Team with 5 A4; and now again.

It remains for me to ask the owner of this publication to adjust it.
https://www.genealogieonline.nl/maximum-test/I6000000004998941157.php

Geni es un programa que guarda información, datos, ext y tiene en el perfil que se está viendo una pestaña que se llama
REVISIONES( REVISIONS) a la derecha de la pantalla con la cual el Usuario puede ver cuáles fueron los cambios producidos en el mismo con fecha y horario y nombre de quien los realizo
Por EJEMPLO en el perfil de wife of Gothelo “the Great” encontré que
Ponce Urraca de Ivrea han sido fusionados en Urraca d'Ivrea por Gerard Koppen
12 de ago de 2019 a las 4:48 AM · ver
Godefroi III "le barbu", duque de Haute et de Basse-Lorraine estaba conectado con el Papa Stephan IX Frédéric von Niederlothringen, duque de Lorena como su hermano por Carl Gustav Verbraeken .
30 de mar de 2018 a las 11:20 PM
El perfil de Urraca d'Ivrea fue actualizado por Sharon Lee Doubell. nombre y apellido de nacimiento
30 de mar de 2018 a las 9:18 AM · ver
<privado> Romero Guerrero fue hecho gestor primario de Urraca d'Ivrea por Sharon Lee Doubell.
30 de mar de 2018 a las 9:17 AM
Regilinde fue agregada como Gothelo I "the Great", duque del hijo de Lorraine por Sharon Lee Doubell .
26 de jun de 2016 a las 8:49 AM
Los padres de Urraca fueron cambiados a Berengar II, king of Italy y Willa por Sharon Lee Doubell.
22 de nov de 2015 a las 4:27 PM
Solo por mencionar algo y me pregunto ¿Cuáles eran las FUENTES PRIMARIAS con que se contaban en ese momento?
Dejo abierta la inquietud abierta . He left the restlessness open.

Maybe we just have two sorts of people, the one who builds, and the ones who ruins it.

George, you wrote, "But Alex has since done so at 1:48, for which I thank him."

So what did he write, "Typically a profile on Geni with Name = "Junca ?" will be taken to indicate that the person's first name is known but not their second name."

Lets see, this has no bearing at all in this context, thread, why? Just because we have the name of the father. It's that easy.

Logic, doesn't come easy, for everyone, not analytical skills either, because it depends on the former, logic.

In the text we have something that looks like a name, Iunca, followed by a questionmark, continuing with the name of the womans father. So why did he put a ? there, we have three possible solutions;

1, Iunca seems to be very rare to be a real name, so he questioned it.
2, It wasn't a name, but a word with a meaning that was unknown for the author, thus marked with a ? following it.
3. The text was damaged, parts unreadable, so he guessed the name, thereof a ?

This is logic, and it's done by analyzing the text. So how can we go further from that?

The answer is quite simple, it's about founding out how credible the author is, by comparing other named persons in his book, did they exist, are they correct, did he use any named sources doing them too, maybe, sources or the value of bringing them in in footnotes, wasn't his strong side.

If we don't have his sources, we can still evaluate his work. Is he trustworthy or not, that's the real question.

Ulf, thanks for your comment and information.

I did not see any question mark after Iunca's name. Would someone please provide a link so that I can see it?

Also Richard Wassebourg stated that Iunca was the "name" of Gothelo's wife. Of course, that could have been her appellation or what historians called her, rather than anything official.

I heard George say that there was a question mark after her name, but I never saw it or saw any link to the text showing any such thing. I'd like to see that, please.

Did he put a question mark there? No, I don't believe so. It seems the conversation got badly diverted from the truth. I kept looking for a link to this "question mark", but never saw one. I don't believe it exists.

"Do you have supplementary information, corrections or questions with regards to Urraca?

"The author of this publication would like to hear from you."

https://www.genealogieonline.nl/maximum-test/I6000000004998941157.php

That's the only question mark I find with regard to Urraca. By the author of the above-linked website.

George said, "I don’t have a problem whitch Iunca but a ? behind her name is on his place."

You were discussing Richard Wassebourg's text right before saying that. It appeared you were referencing a question mark in Wassebourg's text, which is not so. Evidently you meant the internet genealogy website linked here.

Private User you said, "In the text we have something that looks like a name, Iunca, followed by a questionmark, continuing with the name of the womans father..."

If you are speaking of Richard Wassebourg's text, no. That is not so. There is no question mark after her name in that text or in any text that I cited as reference.

It sounds like confusion has entered the discussion, and I know the source of it, too. I noticed early on, but waited to see if it would sort itself out. But unfortunately it just grew worse. I think maybe you misunderstood George, which is understandable.

Ulf, Find your defense strong. If you are right, Berengarius II had a daughter, although not Urraca d’Ivrea but Iunca d’Ivrea. Source Richard Wassebourg.
Await responses.

Thank you!! :) Hearing it from you means a lot to me, Mr. Brouwers.

Private User No I did not claim any ? after hers name, look back and see what I wrote earlier about what I cited.

I just explained the logic about how to interpret a ? in "I don’t have a problem whitch Iunca but a ? behind her name is on his place." written by George Brouwers

in a hypotehical context that the author himself had done it and what it represents.

Today request the management of
Frederick of Lorraine, pope Stephen IX
and this is the surprise
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encyclopedia_(1913)/Pope_St...
Stephen (IX) X, Pope, born probably about the beginning of the eleventh century; died at Florence, 29 March, 1058. (Junian?) Frederick, destined to become Pope Stephen X, was the son of Gozelon, Duke of Lower Lorraine and of Junca, the daughter of Berengarius II, King of Italy.
Liber Pontificalis, II, 278, ed. DUCHESNE (Paris, 1892); De ortu et obitu just. cœnob. Cas., n. 58, ap. MAI, ScrIpt. Vet., VI, 278; P. L., CXLIII, U. ROBERT has put together all that is known of Stephen X in his Hist. du P. Etienne X (Brussels, 1892); MANN, Lives of the Popes in the Middle Ages, VI (London, 1910); 207 sq. Horace K. Mann.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esteban_IX
Nombre Federico de Lorena
Nacimiento ?
Lorena, Sacro Imperio Romano Germánico
Fallecimiento 29 de marzo de 1058
Florencia, Sacro Imperio Romano Germánico
Padres Gotelón de Lotaringia y Urraca d'Ivrea
Alma máter Abadía de Montecasino
- /!\ https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k8716691b/f450.image - " ...femme nommée Iunca fut fille de Berengier roy d'Italie: De la quelle il eut troys filz, I'vn nommé Fredericus, qui fut Pape....."