Talk:Eustace II, Count of Boulogne

message: While working on some Eustace's wife, Ida, I've come across a few resources that state that Eustace II of Boulogne died in 1070, instead of 1093 as stated in article.  Could someone double-check the 1911 Brittanica article to see if it got keyed in correctly?  Here is one of the references Kenalynn 23:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The earlier date is probably correct. The Foundation for Medieval Genealogy gives a date range() of shortly after 1070 to 1087 for his death, Eustace III being known to have succeeded by the latter year. Britannica 1911 does seem to give a date of 1093, but perhaps more cartulary has emerged since 1911. I'll let you decide how to incorporate the information. Choess 02:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOUBLE-CHECK DEATH DATE? 

message: This Article says Eustace II died in 1087, but was duke of Boulogne either until 1093 of 1070.Could someone straiten this out?
:Here is another contradiction. The article says that Goda lived until 1055, and that Eustace then married Ida.  It also says that Eustace was condemned by the Pope in 1049 for his marriage within the prohibited degree of kinship. In the associated footnote is a discussion of the relationship between Eustace and Ida. This can't be relevant, as he would not marry Ida for another 6 years.  This must refer to Eustace and Goda, or an earlier unknown wife.  If the descent of Eustace from the counts of Flanders is authentic, then they would both descend from AEthelwulf of Wessex. Given that we know so little about Eustace' parentage, there might be a closer connection via Emma of Normandy. Agricolae (talk) 03:43, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact Goda died circus 1047, and Eustache married Ida about 1049. Regards, PurpleHz (talk) 10:39, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure that this is, in fact, a fact.  The dating of the marriage to Ida about 1049 is based on the assumption that it was his marriage to her that was being condemned, but this is not explicit, and there is reason to doubt that this was the case.  Speaking of the papal condemnation, Barlow wrote: "the sentence marks either the end of that union [to Godgifu] or the beginning of his marriage to Ida."  Murray quotes this and follows it with "Tanner assumes that the marriage which was condemned in 1049 was that of Eustace and Ida, although she admits that there is no surviving evidence to indicate that they were related within the seven degrees prohibited by the church. It also seems inconceivable that they should have remained married for several decades and that Ida should have been ultimately beatified if the marriage was regarded as sufficiently incestuous to warrant papal excommunication." (Alan V. Murray, The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: a Dynastic History, 1099-1125, Oxford: Unit for Prosopographical Research, 2002, pp. 156-7) Many authors place the Ida marriage in 1057.  I think we need a more nuanced account.Agricolae (talk) 00:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions 

message: The 1048 and 1052 entries to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle record how Eustace came to England to marry Edwards sister, slaughtered villagers then lied to the king bringing on the revolt by Godwin and his sons.  The truth was finally exposed and historical records show Eustace the first died in 1049.
    It is at this same time period earl Siward of Northumbria would marry a widow Godiva prior to her death.   Lowell C Armstrong (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Embarrassing history covered up