Talk:Raymond III, Count of Toulouse

message: This article was automatically  assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 07:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: This Raymond III of Toulouse should be Raymond IV of Toulouse, the son of Raymond III. Check the information at here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sundehul (talk • contribs) 03:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please follow this way: Raymond Pons, Count of Toulouse, died in 944; his only son from his wife Gersende de Gascogne, Raymond III took over in 944 and died in 972. Raymond III's son from his wife, Gundinildis, was Raymond IV who took over his father's role as Count of Toulouse until his death in 978 or 979. Raymond IV had a son named William III who succeeded as the Count of Toulouse around 978/979. Sundehul 18:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why?  Raymond Pons has always been numbered as Raymond III, and removing his number has no justification, but has great potential for confusion. See below. Agricolae (talk) 17:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Foundation for Medieval Genealogy

message: The problem with merging Raymond III, Count of Toulouse and Raymond, Count of Toulouse (972-978) is that these two don't represent the same 'person'. Specifically, there are two theories out there. One gives the succession Raymond Pons->Raymond III->William, the other Raymond Pons->Raymond d. 972->Raymond d. 978->William.  Thus Raymond 972-978 in one solution represents 'half' of Raymond III in the other.  What is really needed is a NPOV page that clearly indicates there is no scholarly consensus on any of this. Agricolae (talk) 03:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the idea of a Succession of Toulouse, 944–978 article. That article can explain the confusion and link to Raymond III, Count of Toulouse, which can contain all the information about the Count of Toulouse up to 972 and then, after indicating the nature of the dispute, with a link to the in-depth article, describe what is known about whomever was count in 972–78. Then we don't need two articles dealing with what might be one person and we have a full treatment of the academic dispute to reference to from both the count's article and the list of counts (and wherever else we need). Of course, a note would still have to appear in the lead of the Raymond III article to explain that some believe another person named Raymond was count after 972. Does this solution sound acceptable to you? Srnec (talk) 03:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that a stand-alone Raymond III article like the one that now exists is an inherent POV fork.  Such a name implies that there is a single coherent individual being referred to, but there isn't.  Raymond III version 2.1 is a count who ruled from 944 to 978, having married Adelais of Anjou and been father of William of Toulouse.  Raymond III version 2.2 is a count who ruled 944 to 972, having married Gunidildis, being father of Raymond X, husband of Adelais and father of William.  Raymond III version 2.3 is the same as Raymond, Count of Rouergue. And in fact, "Raymond III, Count of Toulouse" has been used for centuries to refer to Raymond Pons - that would be version 1.0.  If we go to the trouble of creating a 'Toulouse succession' article, then I would be in favor of merging/redirecting both the current Raymond III and the Raymond 972-978 articles into it because a stand-alone Raymond III would either represent just one of the POVs or it would have to repeat the content of the Toulouse Succession page, thereby being redundant. That being said I have been putting off writing it, and have been bogged down addressing various genealogycruft. Agricolae (talk) 17:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. I hadn't thought of the genealogical barriers. I was just thinking that if we know the count of Toulouse, named Raymond, did X in year Y, then we can write it into our on article on the count for that period. I'll see what I can do, but you are more qualified and have more sources available. Srnec (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can tell, these 'new' Raymonds are all genealogical constructs. The discovery of a document that showed William the son of Adelais caused people to go back to underutilized genealogical sources, the Codice de Roda, the will of Garsenda, and accounts of Adelais marrying her 4 husbands, and some scattered records naming 'count Raymond' not identified as being of Toulouse.  I don't know that there is a single charter unambiguously referring to a Raymond Count of Toulouse between Raymond Pons and Raymond the Crusader. (Cawley mentions one from 972 naming 'Count and Marquis Raymond . . . in Agde' who could be our man, but which man that is depends on the reconstruction.) Agricolae (talk) 14:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal