Talk:Roger I of Sicily

message: I've just done a few cleanups on this article. When I came to the list of Roger's wives, I found the following parenthesis:
(According to Wikipedia, William, Count of Mortain, died without issue. So, how could Eremburga be his daughter?)
I felt that comment would be more appropriate on the Talk page, so I've moved it here.
But the query is valid. The "William, Count of Mortain" link took me to one William, Count of Mortain (son of Robert, Count of Mortain, William I of England's brother): this William was born in 1074, three years before Eremburga (Erembourge in French) married Roger - and so he can't possibly have been her father. As a result I have removed the link to his page.
So, who was Erembourge's father, if it wasn't him?
Some sites on the internet say that Robert, Count of Mortain, was Erembourge's father; but he is well documented, and I can rule him out with certainty. Interestingly, Robert was made Count of Mortain, according to Orderic Vitalis, after the previous count, William Guerlinc (also called "Werling", "Gerling", and other variants), was banished by Duke William in 1063 "on some trivial pretexts" and stripped of his title.  In my opinion, everything points to this William, Count of Mortain, being Erembourge's father; but since I can't verify the identification, I've not added it to the article, though French Wikipedia takes the plunge:
"Eremburge de Mortain (vers 1080), appartenant elle-aussi à la haute noblesse normande par son père Guillaume Guerlenc et par sa mère Mathilde (famille Montgommery)."
(My faith in this French entry isn't helped by their muddling up Erembourge's mother with Matilda of Montgomery, who married Robert, Count of Mortain. I've added a note about that on the Talk page concerned, albeit in garbled French.)
We do know from Guillaume de Jumièges that William Guerlinc went  to Apulia after being banished. The timing of that would certainly support his being Erembourge's father. And William's father was called Mauger, the very name Roger and Erembourge chose for their first son (Mauger, Count of Troina); the name also existed in Roger's family. All this amounts to no more than circumstantial speculation, unfortunately.
The above leaning towards William Guerlinc may seem reasonable; but if you read a discussion I started (and if you want a bad headache) on this question in soc.genealogy.medieval, you'll see that a dark horse candidate lurks in the case: a certain Robert, Count of Eu. Apparently, research has been done that finds him to be Erembourge's father. I don't buy that myself; but some people more knowledgeable than me do. If this guy were indeed her father, that would present a difficulty for the present article, which gives "Robert, Count of Eu" as the husband of Erembourge's daughter Mathilde. I know the Normans were a bit twisted, but that would be taking it too far.
I've decided to leave in place the raw identification of "William, Count of Mortain" as Erembourge's father for one reason: Geoffrey Malaterra, the Norman chronicler of Roger's reign, who lived at Catania and knew the count personally, recorded Erembourge's death in 1089 by describing her as "Eremburga filia Gulielmi comitis Mortonensis", wife of "comes Rogerius". As a contemporary witness, Malaterra is a primary source; in Wikipedia terms, he provides verification for the statement that Erembourge was the daughter of William, Count of Mortain. Bald though that statement is, it will have to suffice here for the moment.
--qp10qp 18:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Who was Eremburga's father?

message: thumb|Roger I of Sicily at the battle of Cerami, victorious against 35,000 "Saracens", in 1061.
thumb|Roger receiving the keys of Palermo.
thumb|Roger (seated), with his brother Robert Guiscard (standing). 19th century print.
Numerous important depictions of Roger have been deleted from this article. Could someone kindly reinstate them? Thank you. PHG (talk) 21:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that I (accidentally) deleted them. I have replaced the image that was there with the Cerami one, but I won't re-add the others: they aren't particularly valuable, they can be found elsewhere at Wikipedia, and the article is short. If it is expanded, then they may find a place somewhere. The historical inaccuracy of the Palermo one is only balanced by its depiction of an actual event, while the Cerami one is purely Romantic, and the print is just an artists make-believe depiction of two men, with no information to convey. It serves only, I suppose, to put Roger and Robert together visually for "visual learners": for now they can see the Guiscard article. The image which I have removed from the page is useful only to add "colour" to the list of Sicilian monarchs, where I will leave it alone. (And sorry to hear about your ArbComm restrictions, but glad to see you are abiding by them and still contributing to the project!) Srnec (talk) 00:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Srnec, I appreciate your comment! As I am rather an inclusionist (and a supporter of the view that Wikipedia should be the "sum of all knowledge"), I tend to think that known depictions of Roger I all deserve to be shown in the article, even in "gallery" form if you have issues on space. Then more content may come one day, so that we can incorporate them within the article. But just removing is I am afraid a disservice to Wikipedia. Representations of a historical figure through the ages are indeed a legitimate part of an article on that person: this is what all history books do. Best regards. PHG (talk) 08:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I am surprised to see that you also removed the 15th century portrait depiction of him. This also really has to stay don't you think? PHG (talk) 08:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I too have inclusionist leanings, but I belive in putting everything in its proper place and avoiding clutter. Surely you are not banned from creating a Commons page for Roger until this article is sufficiently long to support all these images? I think a gallery of images whose informative value is very limited is not a great service to the reader. The portrait image is available at the List of monarchs of Sicily, where it is "appropriate", I guess. The other images are available at Norman conquest of Sicily (where they are informative, more or less) and Robert Guiscard (which is long enough). None of these images is unavailable at the English Wiki, because I made sure. But if you think they all oughta be available here, I disagree, except through a Commons link or when the article is much longer. Srnec (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: Roger of Hauteville's exact date of birth is unknown, he was probably born later, around 1040, not in 1031.
*Roger II of Sicily: a ruler between East and West, Hubert Houben, Graham A. Loud, Diane Milburn (2002)
*Roger II. von Sizilien (ca. 1040-1101), Hubert Houben (in German). -- G. Calabria (talk) 23:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call. Change it! Srnec (talk) 05:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of birth

message: Judith d'Evreux's father cannot be William, Count of Evreux, as he was born too late. Her father was William d'Evreux, uncle of William, Count of Evreux and brother of Richard, Count of Evreux.  Judith's mother was Hawise de Giroie. The Foundation for Medieval Genealogy has the supporting charters on line.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.11.58 (talk) 04:37, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judith d'Evreux's Parents