Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1999-01 > 0917220631

From: Jared L Olar< >
Subject: Re: Agatha Revisited
Date: 24 Jan 1999 15:30:31 -0800

On Sat, 23 Jan 1999 23:21:23 -0500 "Todd A. Farmerie" <>
> wrote:
>> An interested subscriber of THE PLANTAGENET CONNECTION has sent me a
>>small chart wherein she alleges that Agatha, wife of Edward the Exile,
>>none other than Agatha von Braunschwig, daughter of Gertude (d 1077)
>>Ludwig [Ludolv] von Braunschwig.
>This is hardly new. Up until the Jette article, it was the accepted

I finally learned of Jette's article a few months ago, and all in all I
would say that Jette's hypothesis is superior to that of de Vajay. The
only serious weakness in Jette's arguments, as far as I can tell, is that
the "kinswoman of Emperor Henry" version appears in sources somewhat
closer to the events than the sources that support the "daughter of
Ingigerd" version. But now that we know of Douglas Richardson's recent
treatment of this subject, I'll have to get to the local genealogical
library to find out the latest on this subject.



>This solution was proposed by Vajay in the 1960s (I think). In his
>article, he started with the previous claims for her parentage
>of St. Stephen, or daughter of Bruno of Augsburg, brother of Henry
>and demonstrated that they were both extremely unlikely. He then
>his analysis on the statement by Florence that Emperor Henry was the
>paternal uncle of Agatha. This could not have been Henry II, since
>Vajay had just excluded both of his siblings as the parent, but could
>have been Henry III, who was Emperor at the time of the Exile's
>The problem is that Henry III was an only son of his parents. Vajay
>recognized, however, that Henry's mother had been married twice
>and he had three half-brothers. He then reconstructed the chronology
>Gisela's marriages, and concluded that only her son Liudolf, born of
>marriage to Bruno of Brunswick, could have been old enough to be
>Agatha's father. He therefor proposed that this was Agatha's
>parentage. (A few years later, he wrote a very similar article
>addressing a previously unknown french Queen Matilda, niece of
>Henry, who he also placed as daughter of Liudolf.)
>The strength of the theory is that it harmonizes with Florence's
>statement, without forcing either a priest or a King of Hungary who
>without surviving children to have a daughter. The drawbacks are
>several-fold. First of all, Vajay had to completely rewrite the
>chronology of Gisela's marital history to get any of her sons old
>to be Agatha's father. In this, I think he was right in placing her
>marriage to Bruno first, but the chronology is still pretty tight.
>Next, Liudolf was not known to have had any daughters, let alone a
>daughter Agatha. There is no indication in this pedigree as to where
>some of the more unusual nomenclature - Agatha, Christina, Margaret,
>David, Alexander - might have come from. (I am not so hung up on
>nomenclature issue as others. With the time spent in Russia, a land
>with the bloom of conversion still on its rose of eastern orthodoxy,
>think they could have picked up a touch of eastern cultural identity,
>and the names to go with it, without the benefit of bloodlines.)
>This theory was accepted by most scholars up until a couple of years
>ago, when as you know, a new theory was proposed. It is still the
>position of the Jette skeptics.

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

This thread: