Saint Arnoul, Bishop of Metz - Wrong father?

who do you think is the father?

Why do you think he is the wrong father?

@Saint Arnoul Bishop of Metz is my 38th great grandfather Judy=Arthur Rice my father=Israel Tekarihoken Rice his father=Pierre Atawenrate Rice his father=Ignace Awennaietha Deer Rice his father=Marie Madeleine Kiatawinon Deer Rice his mother=Thomas aka Atonwa Aronhiowonen her father=Silas Rice his father=Edmund Rice his father=Samuel Rice his father=Thomasine Rice(Frost) his mother=Thomasine Frost(Belgrave) her mother=Joanna Belgrave her mother=Catherine/Johanna Strutt her mother=Sir John Scott,High Sheriff of Kent her father this is my lineage Judy Rice

@Saint Arnoul, Bishop of Metz is my 29th Great-Grandfather's wife's 6th Great-Grandfather. According to my information his father was Bodegiesel II, Duke of Aquitaine and his mother was Oda (Chrodoare), Abbess of Amay. His wife was Dode (Chotilde) de Metz

Mary, I'm not sure I understand. His parents are thought to be Bodegisel and Oda. The curator note says that's who they should be. That's who the tree shows they are.

What am I missing??

Ok,Im sorry my English may not be so good. I understood from here "Shortly after 800, most likely in Metz, a brief genealogy of the Carolingians was compiled, modelled in style after the genealogy of Jesus in the New Testament. According to this source, Arnulf's father was a certain Arnoald, who in turn was the son of a nobilissimus Ansbertus and Blithilt (or Blithilde), an alleged and otherwise unattested daughter of Chlothar I. This claim of royal Merovingian descent, at a time when the Carolingian dynasty was at the peak of its power, clearly contradicts the contemporary reference Vita Sancti Arnulfi's :
The Vita, written shortly after the saint's death, merely states that he was of Frankish ancestry, from "sufficiently elevated and noble parentage, and very rich in worldly goods",[1] without making any claims to royal blood. It should be noted, however, that due to practice of Salic Law, no children of Blithilde would be recognized as legitimate heirs to the dynasty. Therefore, the connection may or may not have been noted in relevant documentation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnulf_of_Metz That he's father is Arnoald http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnoald, but I seem to be wrong. sorry :)

I have Arnoself, Bishop of Metz as husband of Dode. I have his father as St Gonaulfis,Duke of Bodegisil.

Charlemagne
Charles Martel
Pipin/peppen 2nd. Herstal
Ansegisel
Ansegise and Begga
Arnoself and dode
St. Gonaulfus

Okay, I see parat of the problem here.

There were two men named Arnoul - Arnulf - Arnoald. The elder was probably probably father-in-law of the younger, and their wives had the same or similar names.

The elder is Arnoaldus de Metz, son of Ansbertus.

The younger is Saint Arnoul, Bishop of Metz, son of Bodegisel.

One of the problems in this area is that there is no contemporary evidence, and the later evidence is often suspicious because it looks like the family of Charlemagne was trying to puff up their ancestry by claiming connections to the former dynasty. So, the whole set of relationships depends on academic investigation and speculation.

Here is one discussion about the ancestry of the younger Arnoul:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups#!searchin/soc...

On Geni, there are so many bad merges from people who are confused that I sometimes have to lock the whole area and spend a few days sorting it out again. People get the two men confused, or they see the dating problem and make them father and son, or they confuse the three different Odas (daughter, mother, mother-in-law).

Well, Justin, I got all mu info from books I found at New England Hist Gen in Boston and it was the head reference who got me the book, that had this line in it and showed me how to use it. So I think my info is fairly acurate.Since I am at the Lynnfirld Gen room in Lynnfield Mass , I can get up off my butt and leave the computer and see if they have the same book I am refering to , since atthe moment I can't remember , which one it was that I looked at , those years ago. But I'll know it when I see it. It was under Charemagne's line.

Judi, if you can find the name of the book we can look at what sources it used, when it was compiled, and how accurate it is. When working with lines this old, it's best to rely on the specialists -- actual professors in actual universities -- and not just compilations by someone who decided to write a book. But, if a book is all you have, let's deal with that.

They didn't have it there. They didn't have a lot of the books I found in Boston or other places. Smaller room then in Boston. I think but don't quot me on this. but I think it might have been The Royal Decent of 600 Immigrants . I know that was the one I went into Boston on two diferent occasions to get info. There was another that i can't remember the name but I will try to get into town next week sometime when not working and I can go there and check it out, I've been wanting to get back in there. But hten we had the bombing in there and no one could get in there.I am only a short bus ride and subway trip from there so it's not putting me out of the way or anything. Just have to jump start my get up and go.

Justin, in my records I have a folder ear marked for Charlemagne and I do have info obtained from Sewell who wrote Angevin Kings of England.
Gen : Clovis
Gen: Clildebert
Gen: Siegbert the Lame
Gen: Cloderic the Parricide
Gen: Murideric, Lord of vitrey
Gen; St. gondulfus b. c. 524
Gen.Duke Bodegisil 2nd.
Gen: St. Arnoself of Metz , also known as Arnold, Arnilf, and Arnuiph m. Clothide (Doda)
Gen: Duke Ansigise, also known as Anchises, Ansegisel, and Ansegilius m. St. Begue
Gen: Pepin of Heristal m. 1st Plectrud m. 2nd to ?
Geb: Charles martel, Charles the hammer m. 1st . Rotrou/Chrotrud m. 2nd Swanhilde or Sunnichilde
Gen, by 1st wife
Pipin the Short m. Bertha or beertrada 2nd of leon( bertha Broadfoot)
Gen: Charlemagne

Here are some likely candidates:

Roderick Stuart, Royalty for Commoners (probably the worst compilation ever made; often doesn't recognize that two people are the same, so gives different ancestry for them)

Michel Call, Royal Ancestors of Some L.D.S. Families (nice effort; no scholarship, many mistakes)

Gary Boyd Roberts, The Royal Descents of 500 Immigrants (good for its time, but dated; some very horrible mistakes in older lines)

Frederick Weis, The Magna Carta Sureties (good, but many lines have now been revised by more recent scholarship)

Frederick Weis, Ancestral Roots (also good, also many lines have now been revised by more recent scholarship)

Douglas Richardson, Plantagenet Ancestry (very good, updated versions take advantage of new scholarship, but some lines at hotly disputed by scholars)

If you're interested in these lines, you'd do well to follow the debates on soc.genealogy.medieval where the modern experts continually challenge one another and debate the details of the real source documents. If the experts there disagree with your book, then your book is wrong. As simple as that.

Sorry forgot to double check to see if everything was capitalized. Just was so glad to get through the list in one piece.

Judi, that's the line shown on Geni so you're fine. The only quibble would be that it's a wild guess that Munderic was a son of Chloderic. Munderic claimed to be of royal blood and tried to assert his claim to a share of the royal patrimony. Academic opinion ranges from thinking he was an imposter to thinking that he might have been related in one of several different ways.

The narrowest reading of the sources suggests that he would have had to be a son of Chloderic, but a broader reading shows that he could have been a cousin of Chloderic's sons. Somewhere a few days I was reading that some scholar, maybe Constance Bouchard, thought it is more likely that he belonged to one of the other Frankish royal dynasties that had been displaced.

Ya, I figured I was fine. Well, like I said according to the info I have from Sewell , Murideric, Lord of Vitrey was very young in the year 509 when his father,Cloderic the Parricide, was murdered by Clovis 1, He revolted against Teierry (1) , a son of Clovis (1) . Murideric married Perthois and they had the following sons:
St Gondulfus
Duke Bodegisil (1)

St Gondulfus had a son Duke Bodegisil 2nd.

By the way, just a note: Cloderic the Parricide married kinswoman of Clothilda, the Burgundian Princess and wife of Clovis 1.

Well, Justin this book the Angevin Kings of England by Sewell, Plantagenet Ancestry , The Magna Charta Sureties, 1215, The Oxford Illustrated History of Britain , as well as others. He appears to well researched. Judy

Yes, well-researched. Just not well-agreed ;)

This may be true but it is excepted material.

Sorry accepted material not excepted.

Judi, I don't mean to be rude but I think this is a point worth understanding clearly.

Charlemagne has 14 proven ancestors that nearly all scholars can agree about. The male line runs:

1. Arnulf of Metz, father of
2. Ansegisel, father of
3. Pepin II, father of
4. Charles Martel, father of
5. Pepin III, father of
6. Charlemagne.

That's it. Everything else is speculation and conjecture. The experts disagree.

It is not proved that Arnulf was the son of Bodegisel II.

It is not proved that Munderic was the son of Chloderic.

These connections exist of Geni because they are plausible and some users like to see them, not because they are "accepted". They aren't accepted. They are hotly disputed.

See:
http://www.geni.com/projects/Ancestors-of-Charlemagne/4914

It really doesn't matter in my case cause I get to Charrlemagne anyway. But I was just stating what this person had in his writtings.

Justin, So is this a good path?
Charles II "the Bald", Western Emperor
her father

→

Louis I 'The Pious', Emperor, son of Charlemagne & Hildegard
his father

→

Charlemagne
his father

→

Pépin III "le Bref", King of the Franks
his father

→

Charles "Martel", Prince of the Franks
his father

→

Pepin II d'Héristal, Mayor of the Palace of Austrasia
his father

→

Ansigisel de Metz, Mayor of the Palace of Austrasia
his father

And here is what I have from his fathers.

→

Saint Arnoul, Bishop of Metz
his father

→

Bodegiesel II, Duke of Aquitaine
his father

→

Saint Gondolfus, Bishop of Tongres
his father

→

Mundéric, Lord of Vitry-en-Perthois
his father

→

Clodéric "the Parricide", King of the Franks at Cologne
his father

→

Siegbert I, King of the Franks at Cologne
his father

So from what I am understanding from what Justin is saying, my line of fathers coming to Saint Arnoul Bishop of Metz is speculation and hasn't been proven? But my line coming from Saint Arnoul Bishop of Mets and descending from him is Good?

Yes, I think that sums it up nicely, but you can put Arnulf on the proven side. The break is between him and Bodegisel.

The line might also be good further back. I think it would be fair to say that Arnulf was "probably" the son of Bodegisel, etc. The line is disputed only because the actual proof is missing.

Iran, trust your gut and all the info you have until otherwise proven incorrect.

LOL. My advice is just the opposite. Trust the evidence, not your gut. My gut always prefers the older, more royal line, even when the evidence isn't there. If the evidence bothers you, you're doing it wrong ;)