Talk:Charles the Younger

Untitled

This page said that Neustria consisted of Frisia, Saxony, Hesse, and Franconia. This is obviously wrong, but does anybody know the basis for the statement: mere confusion or did Charles' kingdom include these regions? Srnec 02:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Son Rowland of Neustria

I see the reference to Charles' possible son Rowland (or Rowlande) of Neustria was removed. While it's true there is debate about wether or not Rowland 'the Paladin' was actually Charles' son, he was claimed as an ancestor by the De Contevilles:

Charles the Younger with Juliana of Aachen
Rowland of Neustria
Godfrey of Neustria
Baldwin I/II of Blois
Baldwin II/III of Blois
Jean de Conteville
Herlevin (or Herluin) (de Burgo) de Conteville

The latter is the father of Odon de Conteville and Robert de Burgo de Mortaigne with Herleve de Falais, who was also the mother of William the Conqueror. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.46.21.47 (talk) 17:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Charles didn't leave any children, legitimate or illegitimate. Nor was he married: his father tried to arrange a marriage between Charles and King Offa's daughter, but that fell through. It's something of a mystery as to why Charlemagne didn't arrange for his son to be married and produce heirs, but I've not seen anything about Charles having any children - and if he had, I'm sure they would have been mentioned (Charlemagne is known to have provided for the children of his second son, Pepin, and even allowed Pepin's illegitimate son Bernard to inherit Italy - so if Charles had had a son, Charlemagne would have provided likewise). Michael Sanders 22:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe that Charles did have children. I don't know if the were legitimate or illegitimate, but I believe his only son was Robert the Strong. It makes perfect sense, because Robert succeedes as the next Duke of Maine. And I belive that his daughters are as follows, Maria, born 800, Liutgarde, born 802, Dhuoda, born 804, Bilechilde, born 806, and Robert the Strong born 809. And for the mother I don't really know who their mother could be, but she could be a daughter of Offa, King of the English or it could be a girl from the Frankish nobility named Juliana I don't known. I do know that all those five children up their are Charles' children. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperor00 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Michael, perhaps you should find something better to do with your life than forging a descent from Charlemagne for yourself? Choess (talk) 23:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

My name isn't Michael, its Professor Richardson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperor00 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I have excised the section above, entitled "[edit] A Theory Descent from Charles the Younger", from this article. It is unreferenced, and of marginal relevance to the life, career and historical significance of this son of Charlemagne. If there are references to support this genealogy, then perhaps it could be included in the article on Herluin de Conteville? Please note that reference citations are necessary to include these details.--Iacobus (talk) 01:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I did reference them, didn't you see those five or 6 website under the reference thing.--Emperor00 (talk) 02:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

(BrownHairedGirl, I have taken the liberty of undoing your undo to answer Emperor00). I note refs to genealogical sites, although as far as I could tell they were not footnoted to the paragraph in question. Nevertheless, I deleted the section for two other reasons.

Firstly, in the concluding paragraph you write: "The title of Baron of Tonsburgh does not really exist, but is their to emphisized that they held some sort of power. Those names may not even be their real names, their names could have been lost to history." The mights and maybes cast doubt on the genealogy. If you are not confident of the accuracy of the facts you present on Wikipedia, you should leave those facts out until you can verify them.

Secondly, the genealogy you present has no real relevance to Charles the Younger. The relevance of this claimed descent is for Herluin de Conteville. I would suggest that a much better place for this genealogy (properly referenced with footnotes) would be in the article about him. Please don't be offended if someone edits your Wikipedia contributions, it's just the nature of the WikiBeast!--Iacobus (talk) 00:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Sigh, I've wasted all that rational eloquence on a sock puppet for a blocked user.--Iacobus (talk) 00:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)