Talk:Baldwin II of Jerusalem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group.

	Middle Ages Portal Baldwin II of Jerusalem is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
	Crusades task force
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:

Ida of Boulogne is presented in a genealogical table in the work "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" but this person is wholely fictitious. No such daughter "Ida" off the Boulogne family at this point existed. And the mother of Hugh (Hugo) was named Jutta (Judith).

Ah, well I was using Runciman. I know he makes things up sometimes but I was not aware he invented whole people...can you give anything that has a "proper" genealogy? Runciman has his parents as Hugh of Rethel and Melisende of Montlhery, and Hugh's parents as Baldwin of Rethel and "Ida". Your additions have a Manasses and Jutta...who are they? Where do you get their names from? Adam Bishop 21:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Runciman shows Baldwin II as the son of Hugh I of Rethel, by Melisende, daughter of Bouchard of Montlhéry, Count of Corbeil, and shows Hugh I as the son of Baldwin of le Bourg, Count of Rethel, by Ida, daughter of Eustace I, Count of Boulogne. This is from the chart pedigree in "A History of the Crusades", vol. 2 (paperback edition, 1990; first published 1952). (Thanks to Chris Phillips for looking up the details on this.) Wjhonson 19:12, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Runciman is in error about this Ida however. This topic has been discussed at some length on GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com. The gist of that discussion is that no documentation for any alledged "Ida" in this point, in this family, exists, and it is unknown where Runciman picked this up from although "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" in order to force their idea of a mystical bloodline, must place Baldwin II in this same family in direct blood relation to Baldwin I in order to shore up their thesis. Wjhonson 19:18, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Wjhonson, "read the talk page you idiot"? Come on. Anyway, a discussion on a genealogy message board is not really the type of source we can cite here. If his grandmother Ida didn't really exist, is it even necessary to mention her specifically? We have already said that Baldwin's relationship to Godfrey and Baldwin I is unknown, but they were obviously related somehow. Where did Runciman get the name from? If you want to provide some useful information, go find that out. (Hint: he didn't get it from Holy Blood Holy Grail.) Adam Bishop 08:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes a discussion on a public, veted, archived board of professional and amateur historians, genealogists and experts in documentary evidence and medieval languages *is* a source we can quote here. And pointing out that Runciman made an egregious error, in order not to have other people come in to "correct" this page every week, is relevant. Without this note, other's will be misled by Runciman, et al and never know that this error is a known error. Wjhonson 20:11, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

You're right, it is a good idea to point out errors like that, especially since Runciman is so popular. I apologize for being so abrasive and defensive. However, I am still curious about where Runciman got the name...do you have any information about that? Did he really just make it up? Adam Bishop 23:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

If you are interested in the medieval period, I cannot recommend more highly the GEN-MEDIEVAL-L list or the soc-medieval message board. The two are gatewayed together, so either one will do.

Regarding your question, it was and still is not uncommon for people to back-name ancestors based on the names of the descendents. So I would suggest the possibility that he found a girl Ida, descended, alledgedly from this marriage, and hypothecized the ancestress' name. In other words, I don't know. Wjhonson 20:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] relation with predecessor

contrary to some unfounded beliefs, Baldwin II was not a brother of Baldwin I. Sources state very clearly that at death of Baldwin I, his only remaining brother, count Eustace III of Boulogne was offered the royal crown - but he never arrived to obtain it, possibly dying when travelling, or declined the offer. Baldwin II was the closest relative of Baldwin I present in Syria-Palestine at that time, and he received finally the vacant crown. (Already the fact that both guys were "Baldwin" should remind anyone that they should not be thought as brothers, as very usually brothers do not share the only first name.) 217.140.193.123 05:56, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Who ever said they were brothers? Adam Bishop 14:50, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Baldwin's Ancestors

Baldwins ancestors are hard to find they decend fromt he de Burgo family. now which part of that family i have no i dea yet, they claim his father Hugh was the son of a Baldwin who was the Son of John de Conteville who was the father of Herluin de Conteville, now if you don't beleive some of this stuff you should search up ancestors of Princess Diana and you'll find John de Conteville their and his sons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burkem (talk • contribs) 17:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

I tried using the existing picture of Baldwin II in the royalty box, but couldn't get it to size at all well. If you know more about this stuff than me, or have a good free-use picture please add it to improve the box.

I'll be adding royalty boxes for the whole lineage, so don't worry that im giving undue precedence here, jus need a few days :) Tefalstar (talk) 17:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)