Jump to content

Talk:Godfrey de Saint-Omer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Review of Article 01/11/2009

[edit]

The Wiki entry for Godfrey of Saint Omer (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Godfrey_de_Saint-Omer) seems to have a number of inaccuracies in it, especially if one refers to Foundation for Medieval Genealogy which refers to source material (http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/NORTHERN%20FRANCE.htm#_Toc219106047) (Look for 'CHÂTELAINS de SAINT-OMER (FAUQUEMBERGHES)'.

1. It would seem more reasonable to refer to Godfrey as a Flemish knight, not French

2. Godfrey would appear to have been contemporary with William I Lord (Castellan) of St Omer, not his son William II who was married to Melisende de Picguiny.

3. Hugh the son of William II would not have been old enough to be on the first crusade (possibly not even born). Worth noting that Hugh's (elder) brother Hosto (de Fauquemberghes) is recorded as being a member of the Knights Templar between 1142 and 1151 (In England 1142, Catalonia 1143, Palestine 1145).

4. It is possible that Godfrey may have been a son of a Hugo, possibly a brother of William I's father. It seems likely that William's father may have been Baldwin, the previous Castellan though this is not evidenced that I have seen and some specific evidence would be required also to show Godfrey as being a son of Hugo, otherwise these relationships are only supposition.

5. What document exists to show that a William and a Hugh 'de St Omer' participated in the first Crusade? (Also for Gauthier de St Omer?)

CrackersJV (talk) 23:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FMG isn't necessarily accurate. Just because "source material" is cited doesn't always mean they know what they are doing with it (see Talk:William the Carpenter for one particular example). As is often the case I am guilty of sticking information in here without citing it, so I'll try to do that (for Godfrey and for Hugh) when I have a moment. (Hugh, of course, is pretty famous in the east right after the crusade, although I don't know if that means he was on the first journey or came later). Adam Bishop (talk) 04:26, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]