• General Notes

  [MARSHALL.FTW]
  
  SOURCE NOTES:
  Baldwin, Stewart, Rollo of Normandy, posting to GEN-MEDIEVAL Mar 16 1998,
  sbald@@auburn.campus.mci.net.
  
  Baldwin, Stuart, posting to GEN-MEDIEVAL commenting on Duglas' article on
  Rollo, 12/7/96, sbald@@auburn.campus.mci.net.
  
  Evans, Charles F, The Hauteville Ancestry, The American Genealogist 52 (Jan
  1976). pp23-26.
  
  Moriarty, George Andrews, Plantagenet Ancestry of King Edward III And Queen
  Philippa.  Salt Lake: Mormon Pioneer Genealogical Society, 1985.  LDS
  Film#0441438.  nypl#ARF-86-2555.
  
  Paget, Gerald, The Lineage and Ancestry of H.R.H. Prince Charles, Prince of
  Wales.  London: Charles Skilton Ltd, 1977.  Nypl ARF+ 78-835.
  
  Schwennicke, Detlev, ed., Euroopaische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte
  der europaischen Staaten, New Series, Marburg: J.A. Stargardt, 1978-.
  
  Tapsell, R. F., Monarchs, Rulers, Dynasties and Kingdoms of the World.  New
  York: Facts on File Publications, 1983.
  
  Watney, Vernon James, The Wallop Family and their Ancestry, Oxford:John
  Johnson, 1928.  LDS Film#1696491 items 6-9.
  
  Weis, Frederick Lewis, Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists, 6th Edition,
  Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co, 1988.
  RESEARCH NOTES:
  911: Duke of Normandy [Ref: Paget p135]
  
  properly Hrolf; known from his stature as Gongu-Hrolf, 'Rolf the walker'
  because no horse could carry him [Ref: Watney #740]
  
  name: Rolf the Ganger [Ref: Tapsell p202]
  
  911-932: Duke of Normandy [Ref: Tapsell p202]
  
  Since the article by Duglas [Duglas, David, English Historical review 1942,
  p417-36] seems to be one of the main secondary sources used by many who
  support the alleged Norwegian origin of Rollo, a brief discussion of Douglas's
  article is in order.
    I agree with Duglas that the reference to Rollo as "filio Catilli" by Richer
  of Rheims can be dismissed.  Richer used the generally reliable chronicle of
  Floodoard as a framework, which he then expanded with much legendary material
  of dubious value.  This Catillus is a significant figure in Richer, but is
  apparently unknown from other sources, and his legendary nature is evident.
  The statement that Rollo was the son of Catillus is apparently an attempt by
  Richer to amplify the fame of Catillus (whose existence is doubful) by giving
  his a famous son.
    Duglas then outlines the well known saga statements regarding Rollo's
  supposed identification with Ganger-Rolf, son of Rognvald.  To support
  his claim that "Rollo" is an acceptable Latin form for "Hrolfr", Duglas
  brings forward a single charter [a charter of Richard II for St. Quen, which
  predated Dudo and the other later sources, mentions the _atavus Ralphus_ of
  the Duke] which reads "atavus Rolphus" (not Ralphus) which appears to be
  referring to Rollo (p.421).  However, as Duglas admits, the charter itself is
  not above suspicion.  Another example mentioned in a footnote is a certain
  Turstinus fillius Rolv who was apparently the same person as a Turstinus
  filius Rollonis.  This is a very small sample to make the claim that Rollo was
  a Latin form for Rolf.  Just as likely is the possibility that the names Rollo
  and Ralph were confused in a couple of manusccripts.  Since Ralph was such a
  common name in Normandy and England, we should see a large number of examples
  of "Rollo" and "Ralph" being used as the same name, if they were in fact the
  same.  Since the number of examples which Douglas was able to produce is so
  small, it is more likely that some sort of copying mistake was mde on the
  above examples, in which the uncommon name Rollo was accidently replaced by
  the extremely common (and similar) Ralph.  Important negative evidence is not
  given, for Douglas never mentions that there is a Norse name "Hrollaug" for
  which "Rollo" is an obvious Latinized form.  Since the sagas give Rognvald of
  More two clearly different sons named Hrollaug and Hrolf, it would be
  difficult to argue that Hrollaug and Hrolf are supposed to be the same name.
    The main other piece of evidence Douglas gives for accepting the saga
  account is the supposed confirmation of a saga statement about Granger-Rolf in
  the contemporary records.  The following statement by Ari is quoted: "Another
  son of Othere (he says) was Helge.  He harried in Scotland and won there as
  his booth Nithbeorg, daughter of King Beolan and of Kathleen, daughter of
  Ganger-Rolf." Duglas then reads between the lines, and states that since
  Kathleen is a Celtin name, her mother would almost certainly be a Christian.
  He then turns to the nearly contemporary "Lament for the Death of William
  Longsword", which states that William was born outside France of a Christian
  mother at a time when his father was still pagan.  He then states: "The
  suggestion of the Landnamabok is thus confirmed by an epic poem composed in
  Gaul in the tenth century.  The fact would seem to be a powerful, if not a
  conclusive, argument in favor of the identity of Rollo with Ganger-Rolf."
    The first sentence in the above quote is completely false.  There is not a
  single detail in the quote from Ari which is confirmed by the statement in
  "Lament for the death ..."  This argument used by Duglas, in which he deduces
  an additional statement not in the original, so that there is something which
  can be "confirmed" is unacceptable.  The fact that Douglas wuld refer to such
  an argument as "powerful" only serves to emphasize how weak his argument
  really is. [Ref: Stuart Baldwin 12/7/96]
  
  According to the Orkneying Saga (late twelfth century), Rognvald, jarl of More
  in Norway, was the father (among others) of a certain Hrolf, who became the
  first duke of Normandy, and is therefore intended to be identified with the
  historical Viking Rollo, who appears in the contemporary Frankish annals of
  the tenth century.  Those who accept this view base their argument on these
  late Icelandic sources.  In my opinion, the Icelandic sources are worthless
  for early Norman history, and should be rejected as a source for Rollo's
  parentage.  Some of the basic reasons for this opinion are as follows:
     1. The Icelandic sources are both late and foreign when it comes to Norman
  history.  Other than the very well known fact that William the Conqueror was
  descended from the dukes of Normandy, the Icelandic sources to not offer a
  single fact about early Norman history which can be corroborated in the
  contemporary continental sources.  In fact, the Icelandic sources say
  remarkably little about early Norman history, which is suspicious for a source
  which supposedly knows the origin of Rollo.
     2. The Norman sources, which are both native and considerably earlier than
  the Icelandic sources, tell a completely different story about the origin of
  Rollo, who is said to be of Danish origin.  Even though some of the early
  Norman sources (such as Dudo) have been criticized for their innacuracy (and
  for deliberate embellishment), it is still reasonable to suppose that early
  native sources would be more reliable on the matter of Rollo's origin than
  late foreign sources.
     3. Unfortunately, the early tenth century is not well covered by the
  Frankish sources.  However, even though the Norman sources have clearly
  embellished and romanticized the material on Rollo, the story of a Danish
  origin for Rollo fits quite well with what the Frankish sources for the late
  ninth century (a better covered period) say about the Danish invasions during
  that earlier period.
     4. Contrary to what has been frequently claimed, the names Hrolf and Rollo
  do not appear to be the same.  The Norse name Hrollaug, which is a different
  name (see #5), is the name which would have "Rollo" as a reasonable
  Latinization.  The claim that "Hrolf" was Latinized as "Rollo" by mistake is
  unlikely, because the Franks were quite familiar with the name, and a
  different Viking raider named Hrolf from the ninth century has his name
  correctly Latinized as "Rodulf" in the contemporary ninth century sources.
     5. Fifth, and most important, the Icelandic sources give Rognvald of More
  several sons two of whom are Hrolf, allegedly the same as the founder of
  Normandy, and Hrollaug, an early Icelandic settler.  First, this shows that
  Hrolf and Hrollaug were regarded as different names.  However, it also causes
  a big problem in the Icelandic story.  If we are to believe the Icelandic
  account, Hrolf went to Normandy, where he was then known as Rollo/Hrollaug,
  i.e., the name of Hrolf's brother.  If the Icelandic story were true, why
  would both the Frankish and Norman sources both refer to "Hrolf" by the name
  of his brother Hrollaug?  (Claiming that the Icelandic sources were almost
  right, and that Rollo of Normandy was the same as Hrollaug son of Rognvald, is
  not feasible, because Hrollaug's role as an early settler of Iceland clearly
  marks him as a different person from Rollo of Normandy.)  I would like to see
  this problem explained away by someone supporting position that Rollo was
  Rognvald's son.  By the way, this last point (#5) has, to my knowledge, not
  been mentioned before (except by me in previous postings on the same subject),
  and I therefore have an obvious personal interest in knowing if this
  particular point has been mentioned by others.  If point #5 has already been
  made somewhere else in the literature, I would be interested in having the
  reference.
     Thus, in my opinion, for the reasons given above, Rollo of Normandy was
  was probably not the son of Rognvald of More, and his parentage should be
  regarded as unknown. [Ref: Stewart Baldwin 3/16/98]
  SOURCE NOTES:
  date: 846 [Ref: Moriarty p10] abt 846 [Ref: ES II #79, Moriarty p11, Watney
  #740], parents: [Ref: Moriarty p10, Moriarty p11, Paget p135, Watney #740]
  SOURCE NOTES:
  date: [Ref: ES II #75new] 927 [Ref: Watney #740] 931 [Ref: ES II #79, Moriarty
  p10, Moriarty p11] 932 [Ref: Paget p135, Tapsell p202], note: 931 [Ref: Wurts
  p422]

Details of Rollo's family with Poppa