Talk:Adelaide, Countess of Vermandois

Three Last Carolingians in Three Different Wikis

Adelaide has living descendants through her daughters. I understand that from the Medieval point of view, the Carolingian house was kaput, but from a modern perspective, it was simply shoved aside due to a belief that women could not inherit. Dynasty has several meanings - and Adelaide's children went on to become powerful women and important forces in history for the next 300 years. I think the article needs to reflect this distinction between the Medieval view (which should be explained) and the modern view (which would include some notion of actual biologic descendancy).LeValley 17:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Adelaide was the last Carolingian; nobody disputes that. Her children were Capetians. The Carolingians died out with her death. Surtsicna (talk) 18:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Gotcha. Although the Wiki on various rules of succession of titles should probably explain the House issue a bit better. I still think that some small explanation of what is meant by House, such as a link to a page that explains how the French/Salic notion of House worked in the 11-12th centuries is in order. What I'm trying to say is that the word "dynasty" means something very different to me than the word "house," which is more specific. Also, the link that is on the page - to the dynasty - shows only male descendants. I understand that it's said "she was the last" but the dynastic members listed on the linked article do not mention her, and the last one mentioned in that linked article is Louis of Lower Lorraine - who, on that page, is listed as "the Last Carolingian." So, we have two "last Carolingians" on Wikipedia - one male, and one female. Since the tradition has been to include only males on the Carolingian dynasty page, which stops listing Carolingians with Louis of Lower Lorraine and not with Adelaide's father, Heribert IV of Vermandois - who is clearly a descendant of Charlemagne), perhaps the Carolingian dynasty page should be changed to be consistent with this page - as Adelaide is listed on the Dynasty page, but the designation of "last legitimate Carolingian" doesn't go to her - or even to her father. If we're going to go with non-legitimate/illegitimate people, my point was that there would be a lot more of them...so, if anyone can explain how Louis of Lower Lorraine is the "last legitimate" Carolingian, how "legitimate" is defined in this context and how being the "last Carolingian" is different from the "last legitimate Carolingian," I'd be much obliged. I'm thinking it must have to do with the fact that she was the single legitimate female to attain the title her father held, Adelaide was a legitimate descendant of the male line, but as a female, the line had to stop with her. Still, she certainly does outlive Louis of Lower Lorraine by 7 years. She is therefore anomalous (female heir to a Carolingian title), which the article mentions but should certainly explain in more detail - it's actually very interested that just before the line died out, her father made this attempt to circumvent normal Salic inheritance. LeValley 20:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Yet another last Carolingian is mentioned here (Odo, the mad man): http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Herbert_IV,_Count_of_Vermandois.LéVeillé 03:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Differences in names, between the Wiki and The Complete Peerage

Hugh's wife's name is given as Aelis de Vermandois in Jirí Louda and Michael MacLagan, Lines of Succession: Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe, 2nd edition (London, U.K.: Little, Brown and Company, 1999), table 64, so I'm confused. I do know that many naming customs could be involved here (so perhaps Adelaide is as an English equivalent for Aelis in the 11-12th centuries. The Lines of Succession is considered authoritative, but it is often not up to date as to very recent scholarly research. It does not give an English translation for Aelis, but it refers to her daughter, Isabelle, as Elizabeth, perhaps because Isabelle actually spent time in England and was an English Countess. Adelaide is also in the Compete Peerage as Aelis. Contemporary genealogical sites often give Aelis's name as Adelheid, and Jamie Allen lists Aelis, Adele and Adelaide as cognate names for the 10th century. Allen makes no mention of her ever being named Aelis (just like the Wiki) so I suspect there could be another (uncited) source for this information. I will provide the citation I have for her name, parentage and birth date.LeValley 20:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I put the citation after the part where the Court of Barons gives Adelaide's husband the title along with her (did they really give him the title - and then she got hers through marriage to him, or did they vest both of them simultaneously with her still-living brother's title? This is such an interesting subject, I'd really like a citation. What were the details of this early mental health proceeding??LeValley 21:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Years

I have reviewed the article and removed all years specified, for which we actually have no primary source. This is especially true for example, for the birth years of her children, none of which are sourced to any primary document.Wjhonson (talk) 18:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

No information should be sourced to a primary document. See WP:Primary sources. Secondary sources are preferred. Surtsicna (talk) 18:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)