This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Another one is this one: Ehrenfrid, son of Ricfrid. Hein Jongbloed argues it is the same person.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 16:33, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
This will need to be parsed carefully, or maybe just deleted. The article describes a man in the 800s, and then a man in the 900s (presumably the one who was son of Ehremfried). I suggest whoever solves this (if not me) should therefore look carefully at "what links here" to keep the damage to a minimum.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 18:34, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
I intend to change this article a lot.
Comments welcome.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 19:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Following draft list of "sightings" is being edited. The following list is based on things mentioned in secondary sources of course. (It is not the aim to write an article based only on primary sources. That can be avoided. The reason for this draft list is to make sure we delimit the subject matter being covered in this article, and then use the correct secondary sources which cover that.)-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 14:12, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I'll keep collecting-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 20:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC) I have started by collecting sources Jongbloed considers unallocated to the Eremfried/Immo he feels more certain about, the crafty one discussed by Widukind of Corvery. But we need to consider that because I think Jongbloed can not be considered to have created a new consensus about that matter.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 20:58, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Yes, I can see that Jongbloed's way of cutting off crafty Immo in 965 is probably never going to get many followers. (It is based on the end of his advocacy at Stavelot, but he says himself this must have happened when the man above him in that position, Bruno the Great, died.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 22:17, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
I think the article name should eventually change. The connection to the Hesbaye/Haspengouw is not one of the things all authors agree on, and even for those that do, it is only relating to a small part of his later life. According to Jean Baerten by the way, the idea to name him Emmo of Haspengouw/Hesbaye comes from a 19th century index entry which Kurth picked up and liked, and apparently Vanderkindere got it from him. Dümmler, E. and R. Köpke, Kaiser Otto der Grosse, (Leipzig 1876) 603: ‘Immo, Gr. im Haspengau’. What should the name be though? Count Emmo in Lotharingia? Emmo, tenth century Lotharingian count?-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Another one is this one: Ehrenfrid, son of Ricfrid. Hein Jongbloed argues it is the same person.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 16:33, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
This will need to be parsed carefully, or maybe just deleted. The article describes a man in the 800s, and then a man in the 900s (presumably the one who was son of Ehremfried). I suggest whoever solves this (if not me) should therefore look carefully at "what links here" to keep the damage to a minimum.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 18:34, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
I intend to change this article a lot.
Comments welcome.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 19:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Following draft list of "sightings" is being edited. The following list is based on things mentioned in secondary sources of course. (It is not the aim to write an article based only on primary sources. That can be avoided. The reason for this draft list is to make sure we delimit the subject matter being covered in this article, and then use the correct secondary sources which cover that.)-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 14:12, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I'll keep collecting-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 20:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC) I have started by collecting sources Jongbloed considers unallocated to the Eremfried/Immo he feels more certain about, the crafty one discussed by Widukind of Corvery. But we need to consider that because I think Jongbloed can not be considered to have created a new consensus about that matter.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 20:58, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Yes, I can see that Jongbloed's way of cutting off crafty Immo in 965 is probably never going to get many followers. (It is based on the end of his advocacy at Stavelot, but he says himself this must have happened when the man above him in that position, Bruno the Great, died.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 22:17, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
I think the article name should eventually change. The connection to the Hesbaye/Haspengouw is not one of the things all authors agree on, and even for those that do, it is only relating to a small part of his later life. According to Jean Baerten by the way, the idea to name him Emmo of Haspengouw/Hesbaye comes from a 19th century index entry which Kurth picked up and liked, and apparently Vanderkindere got it from him. Dümmler, E. and R. Köpke, Kaiser Otto der Grosse, (Leipzig 1876) 603: ‘Immo, Gr. im Haspengau’. What should the name be though? Count Emmo in Lotharingia? Emmo, tenth century Lotharingian count?-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)