Urraca d'Ivrea - Urraca doesn't exist?

@Mike Stangel

wife of Gothelo “the Great” awaits reunion with her natural family. I provided sufficient documentation of her historical and genealogical 'existence'. Having heard no responses or objections from anyone to refute it, I must assume it is time to proceed with restoring this damaged profile back to its original good health. The only significant change is the name (Junca instead of Urraca).

Curator assistance would be much appreciated, please. Thank you!

https://www.persee.fr/doc/mefr_0223-4874_1953_num_65_1_7385

It is interesting and a bit ironic that in the ancient Byzantine Empire (at one time encompassing the whole of Italy along with much of the Mediterranean coast) -- there once existed a Basilica located in Junca (Tunisia), which at the time was an important seat of power within the Roman Catholic church. (One of Junca and Gothelo's sons eventually became Pope Stephen IX).

Los 31 Gerentes y los 237 Seguidores estarán felices gracias Debra por el coraje .

"Having heard no responses or objections from anyone to refute it"

Because you didn't want to hear/read any. *There is absolutely NO contemporary or near-contemporary evidence FOR her existence, or her name, or her parentage, or her marriage.*

Debra, you are FAR too prone to take centuries-later third-hand accounts as Proven Fact - and FAR too unwilling to pay attention to what information is or isn't available from the profile's own time or near it.

We've been through this before, and you're dragging your feet *again*.

Private User there are already 4 curators engaged on this thread so tagging Geni staff is not necessary.

After 8 pages of this thread there's nothing new being said.

"Having heard no responses or objections from anyone to refute it"
This entire thread refutes it. It isn't possible to keep telling you the same thing about primary sources every few days.

https://www.geni.com/discussions/205730?msg=1360295

https://www.geni.com/discussions/205730?msg=1358177

The book cited is in the Library of the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy, which was cited here by curators as the "Bible" of Medieval Genealogy. The book is also included in the library of Stanford University (California).

https://fmg.ac/library/179-papal-genealogy-the-families-and-descend...

Sharon, the discussion has advanced past Wassebourg's book.

But FMG is not using its reference to corroborate this. There must be a reason for that. You haven't found the primary sources in it and apparantly neither has Cawley. When you do, we'll use it.
Referencing a book in its library doesn't mean it proves her existence without sources.

RE "Sharon, the discussion has advanced past Wassebourg's book." - Really it hasn't. He remains the earliest 'source' we have found, and he's 500 yrs late.
When you or the medieval historians find more primary sources, we'll use them.

Sharon Lee Doubell C
4/1/2020 at 8:30 PM
Report | Delete
The important question is what proof Richard de Wassebourg (d 1567) gives for finding or thinking that Iunca was Gozelo's (d1044) wife - and why modern historians aren't taking his word for it.

Sharon Lee Doubell C
4/1/2020 at 9:11 PM
Report | Delete
Or to put it another way - Why, if we have accounts about this family from historians who were their contemporaries - eg Wipo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wipo_of_Burgundy), Bernald of Constance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernold_of_Constance), Herimannus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A9riman_of_Tournai), is Uracca or Iunca not mentioned by them?
What sources does de Wassebourg, writing in the 15th and 16th Centuries, find that name her from 500 year ago? It isn't impossible that he did, but then why are no modern historians mentioning them, if that's the case?

Sharon Lee Doubell C
4/1/2020 at 9:21 PM
Report | Delete
If her name was known, would she not have been mentioned in The Chronicle of Hugh of Flavigny (c1085-1102) - "a local history of church reform in the dioceses most familiar to its author, Verdun" in connection with her son? (https://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/christian-muslim-rel...)

Sharon Lee Doubell C
4/1/2020 at 9:33 PM
Report | Delete
Or another way - What is the likelihood that her name would not have been known and mentioned by historians from the time if she was the daughter of the King of Italy - as the mother of a Pope?

Sharon Lee Doubell C
4/1/2020 at 9:59 PM
Report | Delete
So, if an Archdeacon of Verdun - which Richard de Wassebourg was - thinks/ believes/ finds/ finds out 500 years later that a Pope in 1057 who came from Verdun was descended from the King of Italy through his mother Iunca - and this information exists nowhere historians can find in the histories we have from the time, it is reasonable to presume that she is spurious.

"But FMG is not using its reference to corroborate this. There must be a reason for that."

Yes, there is a reason. They haven't opened the book yet. FMG has massive data omissions. There are vast expanses of genealogical history, entire families and villages (perhaps even countries) that haven't even been attempted by them yet. They're probably understaffed. I doubt anyone knows how many people are working full time on the development of that website.

Well then when Cawley, or you, or medieval historians find the primary source in that book, we'll add it.

Until then, we won't make it up.

MedLands is an excellent reference point with many good suggestions.. but are not the custodians of absolute knowledge either.

Primary or secondary sources, published official books or DIY forums: ok for the endless discussion, no problem for the warnings.. But getting to the point of "erasing", I said "ERASING!" everything that is not written in MedLands is irresponsibly unacceptable.

Apart from some main node, Italy was a disaster of abandoned blocks and bypassing cloned branches. Being the centerpiece and passage of the Middle Ages par excellence, wanting to remedy it led me to know many talented curators who manage their knots with awareness and professionalism..
..This was the first discussion that gave me intelligent life expectancy:
-https://www.geni.com/discussions/196176 "Medlands VS Wiki" (kept good Wiki & MedLands isolated)
I report that discussion as an excellent example, to summarize that it is difficult to deny MedLands but it is possible, therefore above all to say that the information not contained on MedLands does not mean that it does not exist. The fact that MedLands does not list a pair of children, especially Daughters, is completely normal.

The profile was removed on the basis of there being no primary sources at all to validate it.

If you're using internet searches, Medlands is a good starting point because it cites its sources. If a user brings primary sources that are not on Medlands, then an interesting and useful discussion can be had.
Google search isn't the same thing as a primary source and so far has produced no other primary sources.

As great as it would be to link this Pope's line to royalty, there is no historically valid proof for this, except for the Catholic church's hearsay 500 yrs later, which can hardly be said to disinterested.

History and genealogy require valid evidence. Right now noone here has produced any. Let's revisit this Discussion when they do.

You should have the obligation to report your doubt on the profile of the wife-mother (widely documented by official secondary sources), and leaving two lines on the info why you perform the "parents cut".
That no one could make you think that you should never have deleted completely the profile is my biggest bewilderment.

I have far exceeded all obligations as a Curator with this 8 page Discussion, linking all profiles involved. Most would have quietly effected the change in order to avoid this fiasco. And I understand why. Arguing against vanity genealogy is a fool's game.

That you are so performatively bewildered doesn't constitute an argument.
There are no secondary sources either - 500 yrs is not a secondary source.

Sharon Lee Doubell C
19/1/2020 at 8:37 AM
Report | Delete
NN is a perfectly fine way to indicate that the name of the profile in these relationships is unknown, if the relationships are undisputed.

But In the cases where not only her name but also her other relationships are unknown / disputed / spurious - this invites a mash up of trees if an unsuspecting Curator is brought in by a user with an agenda to merge this locked NN into a ready made profile connecting her back in to the spurious relationship. It is logical to avoid this happening, by leaving off the profile, and adding the assumptions about the relationships of the people we know on their profiles - not projecting them onto a profile which may not be the link that joins them at all.

While we know for sure that the Pope had a mother, and she was the wife of Gothelo; we don't know 1.whose child she was and 2. whether she was the same mother as the mother of his siblings. (Cawley presumes she is, but due to the absence of any evidence about it at all). That means that we need another (duplicate?) NN profile for this About data also attached to Berengario - which is even more contentious. It doesn't make sense.

Maven B. Helms PRO
19/1/2020 at 6:20 PM
Report
I don't know that we need any NNs attached to Berengario. Per MedLands he had three daughters for sure and a probable fourth - none of them named "Urraca" or "Iunca" or anything like that, none of them married to Gozelon I.

https://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/NORTHERN%20ITALY%20900-1100.htm#Be...

Sharon Lee Doubell C
19/1/2020 at 6:50 PM
Report | Delete
I agree. But if you want to put the Junca research on an actual profile - that's where it would have to go. If it went on the Gothelo NN woman - it would be merged back into Berengrio's line sooner or later.
Hence - avoid all NNs in this situation.

Sharon Lee Doubell C
30/12/2019 at 3:13 PM
Report | Delete
Project on Working With Sources: https://www.geni.com/projects/Working-with-sources/18201

Project on Online Medieval Resources: https://www.geni.com/projects/Medieval-Resources-Online/27118

Project on Spurious Pedigrees: https://www.geni.com/projects/Spurious-Pedigrees/10512

La discusión que comenzó el 25 de Diciembre https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navidad
1) George Brouwers says
Your source:
http://www.thepeerage.com/p392.htm is regularly cited as a source. This is not justified. Urraca is no longer on this site.
kathy@abitofhistory.net from www.abitofhistory.net/.
She did’t answer my mail !!!!!!!
URRACA D’IVREA / URRACA OF LOMBARDY / URRACA LOMBARD OF LOMBARDY
does not excist. George Brouwers, 23 de diciembre de 2019. Oisterwijk NL., Esschebaan 152, 5062BG georgebrouwers@planet.nl
2) Y que tiene por finalidad destruir: Urraca d'Ivrea fue eliminado por Sharon Lee Doubell.
28 de dic de 2019 a las 5:39 PM · https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%ADa_de_los_Santos_Inocentes
Sharon Lee Doubell C
28/12/2019 a las 5:32 PM So- pending primary sources - which do not appear to exist - I'm happy to delete Junca d'Ivrea, Princess of Italy's profile.
3) Sharon Lee Doubell C
19/1/2020 a las 2:50 PMI agree. But if you want to put the Junca research on an actual profile - that's where it would have to go. If it went on the Gothelo NN woman - it would be merged back into Berengrio's line sooner or later.
Hence - avoid all NNs in this situation. ¿ Justificacion?
4) George Brouwers
21/1/2020 a las 9:31 AM I am satisfied with the result and an experience richer in my comment "Urraca d’Ivrea doesn’t excist" December 2019.
I was introduced to the enormous efforts of people from the Team of Geni.
An unprecedented phenomenon that genealogieonline, geneanet and others can take as an example.
This resulted in the discussion about Iunca which I followed with interest. Is she going to live a life or not?
I soon intend to introduce "Barbe de Lebarten does not exist".
¿ satisfied with the result?
5) Maven B. Helms PRO
16/1/2020 a las 12:15 AM Mechanical translation is...mechanical.
Not everyone uses Google, not everyone has easy access to Google Translate (I use Firefox, which does *not* have built-in translation ability).
I can follow along in Spanish up to a point, but it's tedious to be constantly mentally translating. And some people here can't even do that much.
Para poder obtener acceso a Bibliotecas, Museos y infinidad de sitios web se necesita un buscador de Internet https://gustavoaluna.wordpress.com/los-navegadores/ y https://translate.google.com.ar/#view=home&op=translate&sl=...
6) No justifican el trabajo de: Proyectos relacionados:
Roman Catholic popes
Carolingian Dynasty
Charlemagne: Direct Descent Line
The Dark Ages - Holy Grail of History
Cleaning the lineages between FRANCUS and CHARLEMAGNE
Ancestors of Charlemagne
Global Tree Projects - Historic Tree Validation Initiative
Kings and Queens of France and Their Spouses
Locked profiles
Geni Top 10 Lists
"So You're on a Stamp?!"
People on French Stamps
The Spear of Destiny
People connected to British Zoos
Personal ”Gateway” Ancestors
German Celebrity Birthday Calendar
Charlemagne, Québec, Canada
Plantagenet, el tronco comun en la tierra prometida
People who died from Pleurisy
Famous Historical Genius IQs
Ancestors of Robert Harry Chapman - Carpenter's Son
Monarchs
Mega Merge
Historical Look At Italian Families
Gunter family tree
Ancestor of John William Webster
Military Notables other than U.S Revolution and Civil War
Miles de seguidores de estos proyectos.
Mas 238 Seguidores y 31 Gerentes del Perfil de wife of Gothelo “the Great”
Y para Finalizar
https://www.geni.com/discussions/192543?authenticity_token=kIcfmyKJ...
Esta discusión es una continuación de https://www.geni.com/discussions/178003?page=144 en donde uno de sus comisarios de vecindario amigables sugirió que creáramos una discusión como punto focal para los usuarios que soliciten ayuda (consulte https: // www .geni.com / curadores para más información sobre curadores).
El propósito de esta discusión es permitirle publicar fácilmente solicitudes de asistencia. Publicar solicitudes aquí le dará una respuesta mucho más rápida que contactarnos en privado, ya que todos los curadores pueden ver esta discusión, así como muchos otros usuarios que también pueden ayudar.
Actualmente, podemos ayudarlo con:
* Completa fusiones pendientes entre CUALQUIER par de perfiles públicos.
Le recomendamos ENCARECIDAMENTE que SIEMPRE primero intente contactar a los otros gerentes. Obtendrá mejores y más rápidos resultados de esa manera (somos el último recurso).
Si bien inicialmente nos gustaría concentrarnos en limpiar las partes compartidas del árbol histórico (como la realeza europea), podemos y asistiremos en cualquier lugar que sea necesario. Pronto también comenzaremos discusiones que son para "áreas" específicas del árbol, para un mejor enfoque.

Lo que no podemos y NO haremos es:
* Haz TU trabajo por ti. Si ve duplicados en un árbol y puede apilarlos, hágalo ANTES de solicitarnos que completemos las fusiones. Haz lo máximo que puedas. Hay millones de usuarios de Geni y solo unas pocas docenas de conservadores... NECESITAMOS SU ayuda al menos tanto como usted nos necesita. Este es un esfuerzo de EQUIPO.
* Lo más importante: NO forzaremos NINGUNA decisión sobre nadie. Si tiene problemas con los otros gerentes, intente resolverlos primero. Si no se puede llegar a un acuerdo, el Servicio al Cliente de Geni tendrá que mediar.
Siéntase libre de unirse a la discusión, nos gustaría escuchar sus opiniones también.
Gracias,
El equipo de curadores Geni

All the sources M. Richard de Wassebourg used is actually named in the beginning of his book Antiquitez de la Gaule Belgique. The main problem is to connect which source that is associated with which specific text, (in this case, the wifes name), it seems almost impossible without having the originals in front of you. One thing however, is completely clear, he did use sources, therefore, his book has a value, especially if not all thoose books and sources he read, don't exist today. We have a plausible connection with this Junca, not verified by any surviving source yet to have been found, but still in the lack of contradictions, neither false nor true. Personally I would like this to be demonstrated in that profile now renamed N.N. Also, I would like that her husband, true or not, had a link in his profile so that anyone is able to see what we have.

The link to this Discussion has been on his profile from the start.

El perfil de Gothelo I "the Great", duke of Lorraine fue actualizado por Sharon Lee Doubell. acerca de mí
hace aproximadamente una hora · ver

A esta altura de los acontecimientos y considerando que:
El perfil de Urraca d'Ivrea y el de su familia sufrió gravísimos cambios y sufren aun hoy.
El Curador que inicio la discusión tiene un interés especial en la eliminación de todo lo relacionado con el mismo siendo imparcial y arbitrario, prueba de ello es que primero lo elimina y lo sigue haciendo durante todo el proceso de discusión con el solo objetivo de conformar a un (Usuario) que no tiene un álbum en Geni y en MyHeritage tiene escasa participación y quiere demostrar que otro sitio de Genealogía web está equivocado o algo por el estilo.
Por lo expuesto solicito a Geni y a quien corresponda la Intervención a los efectos de llevar al 20 de Diciembre de 2019 todos los perfiles relacionados con wife of Gothelo “the Great” y a partir de allí se nombre un Curador imparcial para que mediante una discusión seria lleve adelante los cambios que el debate produzca .

Re: Personally I would like this to be demonstrated in that profile now renamed N.N. Also, I would like that her husband, true or not, had a link in his profile so that anyone is able to see what we have.

Discussion is difficult. Geni is a chart; a Noah’s Ark of “two by two.” One could argue that’s not necessary, and it isn’t in narratives, but it is in family tree charts.

I have thousands of NN wives. It makes a great deal of difference to our viewing audience to see that research has been done for a person. And it has been the “usual practice” in many disputed origin profiles to compile & summarize the results of research into a geni profile, sometimes even a project.

We have relationship locking and curator notes to prevent spurious or unproven parent connections to be made, and we can link to the geni profiles for proposed parents within the wife profile (not the husband, because not his parents under discussion).

Cawley identifies only one wife of Gozelon; if skeptical of that (ie, could be multiple wives) that can be noted in the wife profile.

Regarding the last name IVREA ( Iooked for it in Family Search.org, without the d' stuff ( sorry my original tongue is spanish) and I found these records inscribed there. I think it would be interesting to investigate them. Here is the link:

https://www.familysearch.org/search/family-trees/results?count=20&a...

The name Adalbert Ivrea ( supposedly the King Adalberto I appears there as married to Gerberge Burgundy) These are mormon records which are usually pretty acurate. I have found lots of info about my family which has proved to be of value. Sooooo..... let's invetigate that.

And here is another link about another Ivrea
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/122565823

Sofia Eugenia Aldunate Labbé Gracias por participar ,todo es útil