General Notes

Louvain, Belgium, ca 1105At 03:02 AM 12/7/98 GMT, you wrote:>According to the Complete Peerage, she had children by WilliamD'Aubeney>who died in 1176.>But Ive run across a posting in the archives
that said thatthey never>had any children.>Does anyone have any details regarding this??>>Leslie>Dear Leslie,According to Burke's Extinct Peerage (1866) page 2 and 3.He (William) subsequently
obtained the hand of the Queen Adelizarelict ofKing Henry I, and daughter of Godfrey, Duke of Lorraine.....etc.page 3:His Lordship left by Adeliza, his wife, widow of KingHenry I, foursons and three
daughters, the eldest of whom, Alice, marriedJohn, Earl ofEwe. The eldest son, William, 2nd earl......etc.The Complete Peerage, Volume I, page 235, this only tells of themarriageand that William
(husband of Adeliza) was succeeded by his sonand heir.However, it also tells a bit more, William and Adeliza "marriedin 1138(the third year of her widowhood)" and "His wife, the QueenDowager,retired
in 1150 to a nunnery in Afflighem in South Brabant,where she diedand was buried 23 April 1151, aged about 48. He survived her 25years---"This tells us she was born about 1103, was about 35 when
shemarriedWilliam about 47 when she retired from the world. What I findstrange isthat she was married to the king for some years but had nochildren, thenbetween age 35 and 47 "may" have produced
seven children. ButHenry I wasprolific producing illegitimate offspring and why not withAdeliza? Was hetoo old, did his breath smell? We will never know---or will we?Best wishesLeo van de Pas    
From: smd49@*!*csc.canterbury.ac.nz (Suzanne Doig)Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medievalSubject: Re: Adeliza de LouvainDate: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 21:21:08 GMTOrganization: University of CanterburyLines:
26Message-ID: <366c45b9.3053572@news.canterbury.ac.nz>References:<Pine.SGI.3.95.981207073047.12798B-100000@chass.utoronto.ca>Reply-To: smd49@*!*csc.canterbury.ac.nzNNTP-Posting-Host:
smd49.tacacs.canterbury.ac.nzX-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent
1.11/32.235Path:news-master.compuserve.com!arl-news-svc-1.compuserve.com!newsfeed.enteract.com!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!203.97.37.7!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!ihug.co.
nz!news.iprolink.co.nz!canterbury.ac.nz!not-for-mailXref: news-master.compuserve.com soc.genealogy.medieval:25788On 7 Dec 1998 05:48:31 -0800, jparsons@chass.utoronto.ca (JohnCarmiParsons)
wrote:<snip>>A dear friend of mind who is presently preparing the firstscholarly>biography of Adeliza's predecessor Edith-Matilda has opined,though not in>print so far, that Henry perhaps was not
terribly serious aboutfathering >another child, but always expected, or at least hoped, that hislegitimate >daughter Matilda (the Empress) would succeed him.  This wasbecause he truly >wanted the
old Anglo-Saxon royal blood, which Matilda hadthrough her mother, >to return to the English throne.  Certainly there is plenty ofevidence that>one of the reasons Henry usually cited to justify
hersuccession to the>throne when, in the last years of his life, he repeatedly gothis barons to>swear allegiance to Matilda as his heir, was that she carriedthe blood of>the Old English kings as
well as that of the Norman conquerors.A bit off topic, but I suppose this would be one more reason whyHenryignored a potential solution, which was to make Robert, Earl ofGloucester his heir? After
all, bastardy hadn't hurt Henry'sfather'schances (but then again, William the Bastard had no legitimatesistersor properly married stepmothers).Suzanne* - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * -
* - * -Suzanne Doig - remove obvious from reply-to addresshttp://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4038/index.html
DATE 1 APR 1999