GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2001-08 > 0996853564
From: (Chris Bennett)
Subject: Re: Matilda, Queen of Henry I [OT]
Date: 3 Aug 2001 08:46:04 -0700
References: <Jsba7.email@example.com>, <Pine.SGI.firstname.lastname@example.org>
(John Carmi Parsons) wrote in message news:<>...
> Actually, John, there is good foundation for this usage as far as this
> particular queen is concerned. The legend on her seal does, in fact,
> proclaim her "Matilda Secunda," and I'm relatively sure Warren adopted
> this usage as a result of the thesis research on Matilda II by his student, my
> good friend and highly esteemed colleague Lois L. Huneycutt (whose monograph
> on Matilda II aka Edith-Matilda is eagerly awaited from Cambridge UP in the
> next year or so).
> I admit that at first I resisted adopting the persuasive evidence Lois had
> uncovered, but ultimately saw the value in it. Now we don't have to go to
> the lengths of writing "Edith-Matilda of Scotland" and "Matilda of Boulogne"--
> anent whom, Heather J. Tanner has a quite informative article in the Eleanor
> of Aquitaine collection I have coming out from Palgrave next year (in which,
> BTW, Heather efficiently refers to Matilda of Boulogne as Matilda III).
Very interesting. Is there any evidence that Matilda of Boulogne
referred to herself this way? Or the Empress? Or, indeed, that
either Matilda of Boulogne and the Empress saw any need to distinguish
herself from the other?
This is the earliest usage of ordinals in England that I have heard of
(though I haven't tried to research it). Do you happen to know if
Rufus was referred to as "the Second" in his lifetime?
|Re: Matilda, Queen of Henry I [OT] by (Chris Bennett)|