General Notes

GEDCOM line 57839 not recognizable or too long:
  () 2 GIVN Kuno

GEDCOM line 57840 not recognizable or too long:
  () 2 SURN of Ohningen

GEDCOM line 57841 not recognizable or too long:
  () 2 NSFX Count/Ohningen

Weis' "Ancestral Roots. . ." (241:4).

http://www.gendex.com/users/Enf_Bry/Enf_Bry/i1217.html#I14965

Richard Borthwick posted to
soc.genealogy.medieval on 24 Jan 1997:
Subject: Re: RICHILDE OF GERMANY / KUNO, Count von Oehningen Query
" I know of no scholarly discussion of this subject in English, but it has
received substantial treatment in German. The substantial articles and
essays are:
a.) Karl Schmidt "Probleme um den 'Grafen Kuno von Oehningen' in *Dorf
und Stift Oehningen* (1966) edited by Herbert Berner, pp.43-93.
b.) Armin Wolf "Were war Kuno von 'Oehningen'?" in *Deutches Archiv*,
1980 vol.36, pp.25-81.
c.) Eduard Hlawitschka "Wer waren Kuno und Richlind von Oehningen?
Kritische Ueberlegungen zu einen neuen Identifitzierungsvorschlag"
pp.1-49 of *Zeitschrift fur die Geschichte des Oberrheins* vol.128,
1980.
d.) Eduard Hlawitschka "Die Thronkandidaturen von 1002 und 1024:
Gruendeten sie im Verwandtenanspruch oder in Vorstellungen von freier
Wahl?" in *Reich und Kirche vor dem Inventiturstreit*(Sigmaringen: Jan
Thorbecke, 1985) edited by Karl Schmidt, pp.49-64
The third article is a reply to Wolf. All of these articles recite the
relevant portions of the *Genealogia Welforum* and *Historia
Welforum* and the relevant charters. The last article is the most recent
of the batch.
The present picture seems to be that Kuno (which name is a short form
variant of 'Konrad') is to be identified with Konrad (b.925/30 d.
20/8/997) duke of Swabia father of Hermann II. The problem
is Richlind. The charter in which she is mentioned is a proven fabrication
and that her mention in the GW an invention. Konrad of Swabia had a
proven wife, Judith. In the last article by Hlawitschka, he presents a
very clever and plausible reconstruction of Judith's ancestry. If he is
correct then she was indeed related to the emperor Otto I. According to
the reconstruction Judith would be Otto's 1st cousin twice removed. On
her mother's side she would be the great granddaughter of one of Otto's
paternal uncles (i.e. a brother of king Henry the Fowler). The point seems
to be that the GW etc in assigning an alleged daughter of Otto as the
wife of Kuno von Oehningen were indicating that Kuno's wife had blood
ties with the royal dynasty ('koenigsnahe') and in this these sources
were correct. What was mistaken was the name and precise relationship
to the dynasty. In any event if Kuno is identical with duke Konrad, he
would have had something that even the current Saxon dynasty did not,
koenigsnahe with the Carolingians (his mother was one such).
This is a mere sketch of what I take to be the present state of play. The
debate may of course have moved on since I researched the subject
(about 1990).
If Kuno is identical with Konrad of Swabia then it would seem that he
has an interesting array of children. Part of the problem of Kuno's
identity was that his children married into the highest levels of the
nobility which suggested that he was something more than the mere lord
of Oehningen. Kuno/Konrad would have been about 52/57 when he became
duke so he would have been known as a count in the Rheingau (949) and
lord of Oehningen."

I wish I was  sure of every name in this file & that I didnt
need to know what you think :) hey, but always refining this,
So if you spot a place where Im just flat wrong please tell
me or someone I didnt go on out with, I do this file out of fun and wanting to know, but do not
respond to the 'know it alls' , that dont have manners.I dont
consider them Kin!
Thanks and Happy Hunting!