Ida de Boulogne - Non existing person

Carl, Sharon, Alex, Job, Jeroen ... please assist

I’ve a user who has requested I perform two merges of duplicates but has stipulated only after they are disconnected from a spouse, one Ida de Boulogne, who is purportedly non-existent.

A quick review of her Geni profile indicates that her existence seems to be confirmed by the “Europäische Stammtafeln[519] shows Ida, wife [firstly] of Hermann [von Malsen] and [secondly of Conon de Montaigu], as a possible daughter of Comte Eustache II & his wife Ida. The only partial corroboration for this so far found is Orderic Vitalis who says that "Cono comes Alemannus" married "Duke Godfrey's sister"[520], in this excerpt from fmgMedlands.

Mr Nabuurs, the user requesting the merges, has stated “This profile is problematic. The person never existed. See http://www.kareldegrote.nl/Excursiones/Excursio.php?Excurs=31KdG. I suggest that the marriages of this profile are deleted and that this profile will be removed”, but the website cited clearly states “This Series showed a weak link in the form of a non-existent Ida van Boulogne who would have married Herman van Malsen around 1070. The present Series is based on data in the Excurs Lorraine-Namur-Kuijc. The reader should note that this is not hard evidence, but that it is of a hypothetical character.” (an apparent reference to Ida van Boulogne being hypothetical).

This site also refers to, as does the Geni profile for Alveradis of Chiny managed by George Homs (Aug 30, 2021),(is George back?!)
“A marriage of Herman is not found in any source. To establish the identity of his wife, one must, in the absence of sources, pursue other avenues. In connection with the fact that Herman of Kuijc gave a younger (second?) son the name Albert, Hardenberg has thought of a marriage with a daughter of Albert of Chiny. Research undertaken so far shows blood relations with members of the lineage of the Counts of Hainault, who were related to the house of Namur. In addition, the name Albert is manifest among the Counts of Namur as well as among their related families such as Laroche, Durbuy and Chiny (source: Dr J.A. Coldeweij. De heren van Kuijc 1096-1400, page 30).

Dr JA Coldeweij, based on a Google search is is prolific writer and researcher of the Kuyc/Kuijc/Cuyck family and lords, but I’m not yet able to see De herein van Kuijc.

In the first three sentences of the website van Cuyck Family History here: https://www.cuyck.eu/ , we find “The history of the van Cuyck family goes back to the 11th century. It begins with a man called Herman van Malsen. He married Ida of Boulogne, sister of the great Godfrey of Bouillon, daughter of Eustace II, Count of Boulogne, and (Saint) Ida of Lorraine.” I would point to the coat of areas in the upper left corner where we see the arms of Cuyck quartered with the arms of Boulogne, a clear indication of a familial probably a marital relationship between the families. It’s author HORST VAN CUYCK (1939-2014) has published extensively on his ancestors.

From Budde, Paul.  De geschiedenis van de familie Budde, Wietmarschen, Nordhorn, Ootmarsum / Paul Budde  Paul Budde Bucketty, N.S.W  1999
....I find “Herman married in 1067 Irmgard the daughter of Albert II, Count of Namen/Namur. His second marriage was with Ida van Boulogne, through her mother’s family (Ida of Lorraine) the van Kuyc’s were linked to the Dukes of Lotharingia, the ancestors of Charlemagne. This was one of the most thought after claims of any European nobility. Through this family link the van Cuijk also became related to the emerging Dukes of Brabant.”, but am unsure of the use of the terminology “one of the most thought after claims”.

So what I see initially is not enough evidence for me to conclude that Ida de Boulogne did not exist, it seems clear to me that she was the 4th child of Count Eustachius II of Boulogne and his wife Ida of Lorraine. But, while many sources point to her as the 2nd wife of Herman van Malsen, this appears to be debatable...”Herman van Malsen's wife must have been a daughter from the count's house in Namur”. Rootsweb WorldConnect attempts to clarify this by saying this marriage was the 1st wife, while Ida de Boulogne was the 2nd. (and BTW says Ida de Boulogne was born in Cuijck, Noord Brabant, Netherlands, as was her purported husband Herman van Malsen). I’m not sure of the basis for the hypothetical discussion on karldegrote.nl, it seems to be more focused on the unknown 1st wife.

The daughter of the count of Namur is variously recorded as Irmgard or Alveradis of Chiny (popular with GenealogieOnline). Herman van Malsen seems also to be aka Hendrik I van Kessel.

Carl, Sharon, Alex and Job, please weigh in with your assessment of these issues. Carl seems to have much of this worked out, perhaps the only issue is Hendrik I van Malsen and Herman van Malsen possibly being duplicates and what to do with Ida van Boulogne attached to Herman but not to Hendrik.

Alveradis of Chiny

Herman II, lord of Cuijk and viscount of Utrecht

Hendrick I lord of Cuijk and viscount of Utrecht

Herman I van Malsen, Heer van Cuyck

Ida de Fouron

Hi all,

I personally think that Ida de Boulogne (Ida van Boonen), sister of Godfried van Boonen (Bouillon) existed, because she would be the proof that the first crusade around 1095-1099 was mainly started by a large contingent of Flemish knights with a great military tradition (based around Boonen-Boulogne sur mer in present France) that allied with the Duchy of Lotharingy to make a mass movement for the first crusade and received a large new-built castle there in Bouillon, Belgium (named after Boulogne, France) to house their army in. - which is still there and a major tourist attraction.

Now there were many reasons that those facts could have been downplayed, hidden or changed by national authorities in later centuries.

- The duchy of Lotharingia was not a state like any other, it was the original imperial territory before Emperor Otto founded the 'Holy Roman German Empire', from that side it was important not to emphasise any heroism from Lotharingia;

- The French kings wanted the glory of the crusade for themselves, it was a bit embarrassing that the hard work was done by the Flemish knights, who had an iron-strong military reputation since their aid to William the conqueror in 1066;

- When Belgium in 1830 became independent, it was important for the new state to emphasize that Godfried van Bouillon - Godefroid de Bouillon, the later king of Jeruzalem, was Belgian and nothing else. They made a large equestrian statue on the King's square (Koningsplein) in Brussels, right before the Royal private church Sint-Jacob-op-den-Koudenberg-(Saint Jacques sur Coudenberg), connected to the central Royal palace with the inscription:

Godefroid de Bouillon - Godevaart van Bullioen

trying in this way to hide the link with Boulogne, France although that had always been known.
[I used to pass there 2 to 4 times a day for 30 years or so...., it's a very known place in Brussels.]

It is obvious that the female family members of a warlord of this size could have been destinated to make alliances to secure the lands around the big army base in Bouillon near Chiny, mainly around the Meuse valley:

Chiny, Namur, Cuijck, Emmerik, Malsen... all strategic military or commercial points in a region where the clerical landowners of Liège tried to moderate the wide-spread military rule in that region.

In all likelyhood, further research will inevitably lead to better understanding of the 11th century diplomatic relations...

Kind regards,
CGV

Dank u wel Willem!

Willem,
You make many points and I want to respond to a few, not to downplay your position but to highlight the fact that differences of opinion not only occur but are import to genealogical research. Particularly with respect to medieval Europe, where we’re not going to find birth certificates and equally similar proof of existence. We will find chartularies, charters, medieval manuscripts and the like that require an intuitive and logical approach. We will find through prosopography and onomastics and such new research tools as well as just plain deep digging information that will allow us in some instances where required to rely on a preponderance of evidence to reach conclusions. This is ok provided we document our work through discussion and cite our sources.

Several post follow...

1. You say...
“With respect to Horst van Cuijk, that guy has made up a whole lot of nonsense and cannot be trusted. I have seen his work and it is definitely not reliable.” You also say “I prefer to follow researchers who document their sources and who stay away from turning hypotheses into facts.”

...and yet, on every page of his work Mr Cuijk cites his bibliography, for example for the early generations of Cuijk we have this:

[1] L.A.J.W. Baron SLoet, Oorkondenboek der Graafschappen Gelre en Zutfen tot op den Slag van Woeringen, 5 juni 1288, I (’s Gravenhage, 1872) p. 195. E. de Marneffe, Cartulaire de l’abbaye d’Afflighem et des monastères qui en dépendaient (Leuven, 1901) 13.
[2] E. Varenbergh, ‘Cuyck (André de), évêque d’Utrecht’, in: Biographie Nationale, IV (Brussels, 1873), 597. A.J. van der Aa, ‘Andreas van Cuyck’, in: Biographisch woordenboek der Nederlanden, I (Haarlem 1852) 286-288.
[3] J.L. Kupper, Liège et l’église imperial XIe-XIIe siècles (Paris, 1981) 153-163. J.L. Kupper, ‘La double mort de l’évêque de Liège Frédéric de Namur (+1121)’, in: N. Fryde & D. Reitz (eds.), Bischofsmord im Mittelalter. Murder of Bishops (Göttingen, 2003) 159-170.
[4] Frère Hubert, ‘Le droit de monnaie de l'évêque de Liège’, in: Revue numismatique, 6e série, tome 8 (1966) 70-88. J. Van Heesch & P. Ilisch, ‘Le trésor monétaire de Comblain-au-Pont (Liège): deniers et oboles du XIIe siècle’, in: Revue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie, 148 (2002) 101-129.
[5] R.R. Post, Geschiedenis der Utrechtsche bisschopsverkiezingen tot 1535 (Utrecht, 1933). R.R. Post, Kerkgeschiedenis van Nederland, I (Utrecht-Antwerp, 1957) 119-121. A.L.P. Buitelaar, De Stichtse ministerialiteit en de ontginningen in de Utrechtse Vechtstreek, (Hilversum, 1993).
[6] B.J.P. Van Bavel, Goederenverwerving en goederenbeheer van de abdij Mariënweerd (1129-1592) (Hilversum, 1993) 112-114.
[7] A.J.A. Bijsterveld, ‘Aristocratic Identities and Power Strategies in Lower Lotharingia: The Case of the Rode Lineage (Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries)’, in: La Lotharingie en question: identités, oppositions, intégration. Lotharingische Identitäten im Spannungsfeld zwischen integrativen und partikularen Kräften. Actes des 14es Journées Lotharingiennes. 10-13 octobre 2006 (Luxemburg, 2012) 167-215.
[8] H. Verdonk, Alverade van Kuyc (1108-1131) en haar verwantschap (Lelystad, 1999).
[9] The abbey of Wedinghausen was founded in 1173 by Hendrik, count of Arnsberg, son of Godfried van Cuyck and Ida of Arnsberg. Hendrik was an impulsive and violent man. He imprisoned his own brother and let him rot to death in the dungeon. To make peace with the bishops, who were shocked by this horrible act, he promised to found the abbey of Wedinghausen near Arnsberg. In 1185 Hendrik entered the monastery as a lay brother and stayed there until his death in 1200. He was buried in the abbey church, together with his wife Ermengard.
[10] B.J.P. Van Bavel, Goederenverwerving.
[11] The abbey of Mariënweerd was abolished after the French Revolution. The domain (with the ruins of the abbey) was sold to Count van Bylandt, descendant of an old noble Dutch family. Nowadays descendants of this Count still own the property “Heerlijkheid Mariënwaerdt”.
[12] R. de Graaf, Oorlog om Holland 1000-1375 (Hilversum, 2004), 79. A.L.P. Buitelaar, De Stichtse ministerialiteit, 74.
[13] B.K.S. Dijkstra, Een stamboom in been: vier eeuwen graven en gravinnen van het Hollandse Huis (Amsterdam, 1991).
[14] E.H.P. Cordfunke & F.W.N. Hugenholtz, Gravin Petronilla van Holland. Holland in het begin van de 12e eeuw (Zutphen, 1990).

So do I presume that you’ve research all 14 of the cited sources and find them unreliable also?

In my opinion his website and the article you provided is exactly the type of evidence based scholarship that will assist our problem solving. I don’t know enough about this family to agree or disagree with his work so will keep an open mind for now.

2. You say...
“I realized that I should not only make claims, but also proof they are right.
(In reference to my discussion of Cuijk heraldry) You mentioned the coat of arms at the upper left corner of the Van Cuyk website:https://www.cuyck.eu/. This coat of arms looks nice, but it is designed by mr. Von Cuyk. No historical base for it at all. You will not find it in any contemporary coat of arms book. The Van Cuyks only started to use their coat of arms much later and in the 11th century quartered coats of arms where not used at all. This matches the term "fake news" 100%: if you don't have proof then create it and make it look real.”

First, the term “fake news” has been grossly overused in only a few short years and has become synonymous with any information with which one disagrees, hardly the basis for a scholarly discussion.
Second, With respect to the heraldry...

The arms shown by Mr. Van Cuyk were in fact designed by Mr. Van Cuyk, but they are also in fact included in several ancient armorials (without quartering), relatively contemporary having been produced in the early to mid 13th century, and the art of quartering was first used as early as 1230 and is nothing new to the Lowlands, contrary to your statement that there is “no historical base for it at all.” which is simply incorrect.

I should point out that on the page for Jan I van Cuijk on his website are two images. The first is the seal of Jan I with the coat of arms partially visible but consistent with historical representations as seen in armorials referenced below. The second is of a bronze statue, cast from the original stone statue c. 1865, in front of the Cuijk town hall, with the coat of arms clearly visible with historical tinctures.

The arms of Boulogne, or, three bezants (roundels) gules are well documented historically. The same arms are also attributed to Hendrik I van Gelre as early as 1180. And quartered arms were seen as early as 1230.

Jan van Cuijk Lord of Cuijk #123 in the Tournoi de Compiegne initially dated 1238 later revised to 1279
Tournoi de Compiegne c. 1238 or c. 1279

These were Chronicles relate the festivities given by King Philippe III to celebrate the visit of his cousin, Charles II d'Anjou, Prince of Salerno, in 1279.
Several Tournaments were held for the occasion around May 1279 in Paris, Amiens, Compiègne and Senlis, with relatives of the King attending : the Counts of Artois and Clermont, the Duke of Burgundy.
Those probably include the tournament held in Compiègne, previously dated 1238, which is known to us by a roll of arms representing the arms of 337 princes and nobles from northern France, Germany, the Low Countries and the British Isles.
Many different copies of the roll were made, including one that is part of the 15th c. Beyeren roll and the edition followed here is the one published by E. de Barthélémy in 1873, based on the Valenciennes manuscript, with some corrections to the blazon and legend.

Jan van Kuyc, Lord of Cuijk #677 in the Armorial Wijnbergen “Allemands”
Armorial Wijnbergen c. 1267 - c. 1285

The Armorial Wijnbergen, also known as the Wijnbergen Roll, is one of the oldest medieval French roll of arms.
The armorial is divided into two parts: the first, dated c.1265–1270 has 256 coats of arms of the vassals of Louis IX in Île-de-France;
the second part, dated c.1280 has 1,056 coats of arms of the vassals of Philip III in northern France, the Netherlands and the Rhineland.
The armorial is named by the Van Wijnbergen family, in whose possession the armorial was found.

While these two references refer to Jan van Cuijk Lord of Cuijk who succeeded his father Hendrik III in 1254, there is no reason to accept the supposition that the blazon he used was not hereditary or differenced. The “age of heraldry” is, even now, hotly contested.

The House of Reginar Dukes of Brabant and Lothier Dukes of Limburg used quartered arms beginning with Henry I 1190-1235.

The House of Withem Lords of Wittem Illegitimate branch issued from Jan II, Duke of Brabant and Limburg, Count of Leuven, Margrave of Antwerp and Lord of Mechelen, (1275-1312) and his mistress Catharina Corsselaar, used quartered arms beginning with Johan I Corsselaar, lord of Wittem (1310-1375)

The House of Burgundy-Brabant Dukes of Brabant and Limburg used quartered arms also beginning with Henry I 1190-1235.

Philip of Saint-Pol as Count of Saint-Pol and Ligny Younger son of Anthony, Duke of Brabant Later Philip I, Duke of Brabant used quartered arms 1404-1430.

Another representation found in The Beyeren Armorial folio 7V is shown here: https://qfc.quickgen.net/2020/04/van-cuyck-of-cuijk-culemborg-and-u.... Note: having personally redrawn all “1,096 hand colored coats of arms with annotations in Middle Dutch”, I can attest to the veracity of this image.

But we need not even conjecture at Horst van Cuijk’s motive since he has his own personal registered coat of arms which he uses on his website: Mr Cuijks coat of arms consists of three different elements:

• In the first and the fourth quarter, we identify the coat of arms of the Counts of Boulogne, a reference to Eustace II, Count of Boulogne and his wife St Ida, the parents of Ida of Boulogne who became the matriarch of the van Cuyck family.
• In the second and the third quarter, we can see the coat of arms of the lords of Cuijk, obviously a reference to the medieval history of the van Cuyck family.
• Above the escutcheon we see a gold crown, a reference to the comital title of the lords of Cuijk.

The coat of arms of Horst van Cuyck is registered on the roll of arms of the ‘’Münchner (Wappen) Herold’’ under No. 092/11899 and can be seen here.
Source: https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horst_van_Cuyck

3. You say...
“please read this article with sources by Horst van Cuyk himself which is available on the net and see for yourself that he himself only uses Coldeweij as source for the existence of Ida and that he does not present a single piece of further evidence for the existence of Ida and her marriage to Herman van Malsen:”

I have a different interpretation of the article. In my mind the witness list in the referenced charter of 1096 actually confirms the existence of Ida de Boulogne. The article reads “The narrative sources bring little conclusive evidence as to whether or not there were one or more daughters of Eustace and Ida. In his study of the lords of Cuijk, Coldeweij already pointed to a charter from 1096 that, according to him, might solve the mystery.17 This is a charter from Ida, countess of Boulogne, in which she, with the consent of her sons Eustaas, Godfrey, and Baudouin, donates parts of her allodia at Genappes to the abbey of Affligem; she also confirms the donation that her son Godfrey made to the abbey.18”

My reading of this is that Mr Cuijk only reports that Dr Coldeweij pointed to a charter that “according to him (Dr Coldeweij), might solve the mystery”. Mr Cuijk himself then proceeds to the witness list of the charter to make his point that the witnesses who signed the charter were there for a reason. 1) The witness list refers to Cono of Montaigu, who in turn is referred to by other sources (unnamed) as the brother-in-law of Godfrey of Bouillon. To be a brother-in-law one must marry a sister, thereby creating an inference to at least one sister of Godfrey. 2) The witness list refers to Hendrik van Cuyck, who is by all historical accounts a son of Herman van Malsen, count in Teisterbant, and a daughter of Ida de Boulogne (née de Lotharingie).
Both of these conclusions are based on onomastics which is increasingly important in genealogical discussion since its introduction by the likes of Keats-Rohan and Settipani. Problematic? Possibly.

Additionally, the reference by Oderic Vitalis in fmgMedlands “The only partial corroboration for this so far found is Orderic Vitalis who says that "Cono comes Alemannus" married "Duke Godfrey's sister"[521].
[521] Orderic Vitalis (Chibnall), Vol. V, Book IX, p. 167, the editor in footnote 5 identifying him as Conan count of Montacute.  She is not listed among the children of Eustache III Comte de Boulogne & his wife Ida of Lotharingia given in Orderic Vitalis (Chibnall), Vol. V, Book IX, p. 175. 
Oderic was known to be pro Norman, Eustache II supported William at Hastings, so it does not seem unreasonable to me that he would make reference at some point to this family in a positive light and I’ve not seen the citations you claim that say he was “out of touch with the situation”. However, while Oderic has been proven to be confused at times, but it is equally easy to dismiss him by referring to other “unnamed” researchers who disagree.

4.
My conclusions at this point, still open to further discussion, are
1. based on primary and secondary evidence and a preponderance of evidence, Ida de Boulogne did exist as the fourth child of Eustace II de Boulogne and his wife Ida de Lotharingie (de Ardennes, de Verdun), and
2. Whether or not Ida de Boulogne was married to both Cono of Montaigu and Herman van Malsen is still open to further research, and
3. Who was Ida de Fouron? Based on the above summary she was a cousin of Ida de Boulogne, she married Conon de Montaigu, not Ida de Boulogne. She had only one husband. Her Geni profile needs correcting by removing the name reference to “de Boulogne” and removal of the Boulogne coat of arms from the image box.

I find another source (albeit an unverifiable GEDCOM import) that indicates:
Ide, Ida, de Fouron (Voeren)
Dame de Voeren

• Born in 1045 - Fouron-Saint-Pierre, 3792, Limbourg, Flandre, BELGIQUE
• Deceased in 1095 - Montaigu, 02820, Aisne, Hauts-de-France, FRANCE, aged 50 years old
• Buried - Abbaye de Stavelot - Stavelot, 4970, Liège, Wallonie, BELGIQUE

Married to Kuno, Conon de Montaigu, Cte de Montaigu, sgr de Rochefort, ‭1042-1106‬

‭This Kono/Conon is shown to be married only once to Ida de Fouron, so the attachment of “(de Boulogne)” to her name may be incorrect? ‬

‭Her father was ‬
‭Lambert 1er “le Vieux” de Fouron, de Boulogne‬
‭aka: Lambert 1er de Fouron, Lambert 1er de Boulogne, Lambert 1er de Fouron de Boulogne‬
‭Comte de Aumale, seigneur de Fouron‬

• Born in 1030 - Fouron-Saint-Pierre, 3792, Limbourg, Flandre, BELGIQUE
• Deceased 12 January 1079 - Fouron-Saint-Pierre, 3792, Limbourg, Flandre, BELGIQUE, aged 49 years old
• Buried 18 January 1079 - Phalempin, 59133, Nord, Hauts-de-France, FRANCE

‭Lambert II de Fouron was a younger brother of Eustache II de Boulogne‬
Count of Boulogne from 1046 to 1087 - Count of Lens from 1054

• Born in 1020 - Boulogne-sur-Mer, 62200, Pas-de-Calais, Hauts-de-France, FRANCE
• Deceased in 1087 - Boulogne-sur-Mer, 62200, Pas-de-Calais, Hauts-de-France, FRANCE

‭ ‬
‭So by this account Ida de Fouron and Ida de Boulogne were cousins and with the same given name may have be confounded by history? I will work with the profile managers to make appropriate corrections.‬

Thank you for raising your posts, I will continue to reach out to curators and managers to see if we can reach a consensus on your concerns. I am advised that this same discussion may have taken place several years ago and the curators at that time elected to maintain the connections as they are.

Thank you David for the excellent research. The profile of Ida de Boulogne, presumed sister of Godfried van Bouillon, was temporarily disconnected from Herman van Malsen, to put it back later if necessary. There is an Ida de Boulogne, daughter of Eustache I de Boulogne , but this profile doesn't look very serious.

I suspect there is a problem with the whole family 'de Fouron'. There is really no extended family like that anywhere on Geni. Voeren, now in Flanders, did not exist as an separate entity before 1963, the year of the linguistic laws in Belgium. No one used the name 'Fouron' for what 'Voeren' is now (it was used for 2 villages in the region), This could be a very recent political fabrication. It looks like the spouse of Cono de Montaigu was really Ida de Boulogne, and someone tried to hide it because of the reasons I pointed out earlier.

It is important to debate the use of scientific hypotheses, particularly in genealogical research. One has to be conscient that without them, absolutely no progress is possible. I agree there are way too many contradictions now, but the only way to deal with them is to replace them partly, and provisionally with hypotheses. Proven data are better, they are the result of research, not the beginning. But leaving contradictions is just no science at all, they are scientifically not acceptable.

Hi Willem,

Thanks for the documentation! I just meant that there were very little profiles of that family ON GENI, (3 or 5 according to the spelling), So it would be a good idea to start to add the other ones from the existing source.

To be clear, I am not stating that a sister Ida of Godfried van Bouillon existed or didn’t exist, I am just seeking what could be the truth, like we all should. The title “Ida de Boulogne -non existing person” is somewhat misleading, because there are at least 3 Ida’s de Boulogne whose existence doesn’t seem to be doubted, but the existence of such a daughter of Eustache I (not II) seems rather bizarre when you look at the husband..

I hope we find the way to go through all the sources and thanks for your cooperation!

Carl Gustav Verbraeken

Thank you Willem,
We may not always agree but we can always discuss.

I hope that my comments were not responsible for your disillusionment with Geni medieval genealogy, we do need help.

Regarding facts, I can’t argue with your logic, my only point was that facts don’t always exist where we need them, and I personally am open to logical conclusions as long as they are documented as such and the research has been put in.

Regarding the family de Fouron, perhaps my changing the profile of Ida by eliminating the reference to “de Boulogne” will create a starting point upon which the family can be built.

As Carl points out there are a number of Ida de Boulognes, including the mother of the three sons, who in my mind should be changed to Ida de Lotharingie. GENI naming conventions are that in medieval Europe women who marry do NOT take their husbands names as surnames. She may have been know as Ida de Boulogne as an AKA, but she should forever in genealogy Ida de Lotharingie. I’ll work with the profile managers on this.

Deleted. We haven’t made a final decision yet, managers are assessing the question. Thanks for the observation.

Willem,
The curator for Ida de Fouron has approved the recommended changes, the tag “de Boulogne” and the Boulogne coat of arms has been removed from Ida de Fouron’s profile. If you want to start building the Fouron branch from her have at it...

We are still discussing how to address Ida de Boulogne. Curators have discussed her in the past so we’re trying to get the corporate knowledge on this before moving ahead. As it stands there seems to be that preponderance of evidence in her favor as existing from 1) Cawley at fmgMedlands, 2) Europäische Stammtafeln by Detlev Schwennicke, and 3) Manfred Hiebl @ http://www.manfred-hiebl.de/genealogie-mittelalter/ who also shows her married per GENI to both Conon and Herman van Malsen, so your up against three very credible sources.

Please list links to any new research you may have that may support the proposition that she did not exist, I think your argument that there are “no contemporary sources” to prove she did is weak by itself and needs further support.

Willem,
This site De Graafschap in de Middeleeuwen suggests that Herman and Kono were the husbands of Ermengard van Namen AND cites several sources a few of which have been mentioned, this may be a lead...

https://www.graafschap-middeleeuwen.nl/genealogie/getperson.php?per...

I know nothing about the credibility of this author but the fact that he lists sources is hopeful.

Let’s hold off on any changes yet, our other communication makes this a fast moving subject, we have already excluded as wife of Herman von Malsen both Ida de Boulogne and A. Van China, and may have already excluded Ermengarde van Namen also...

As I noted Hans Vogels has a presence on Academia.edu, this link should show an outline of his writings there.
https://independent.academia.edu/HansVogels1

Hello, I have been following this discussion with interest since its inception. While I, unfortunately, don't have any sources to contribute, I see a debate between the usage of primary sources and hypothetical connections emerging and I wanted to chime in to offer some clarification on how we have handled similar debates in the past on Geni. First and foremost, the Geni world tree should be based on primary sources. If there is no direct evidence for a person's existence and their relationships, then those should not be represented in the Geni tree.

I know that with medieval profiles, the sources are sparse and often conflicting and so approaches which utilize onomastics and prosopography are understandably appealing. Such theories, while interesting, do not represent genealogical proof. As such, these hypotheses can be noted in the about sections of the profiles mentioned, but should not form the basis for constructing the Geni tree. Here is an example from last year on a connection between the rulers of medieval Armenia and the Byzantine Empire: https://www.geni.com/discussions/213787?msg=1392925 Connections had been theorized between various historical figures by Settipani, but at the end of the day there was no primary source-based evidence to back it up. The theories were mentioned in the profiles and I even made a project to document the hypothesis and the possible lineages, https://www.geni.com/projects/Hypothetical-Genealogical-Connections-Between-6th-and-7th-Century-Armenia-and-Byzantium/2674386, but the connections on the Geni tree were shaped by what we could glean from primary sources.

The fact that political connections existed between two families, or the appearance of witnesses together on a document cannot provide proof for such specific genealogical connections.
If there are no contemporary sources to prove a connection, that is all that is required. The theories of genealogists, regardless of how prominent they may be in the field, are simply that, theories and should be treated as such and not represented as fact on the Geni tree.