Naming convention for Regnarid or Reinier dynasty of Lower Lotharingia

+3 votes
What is the correct procedure for getting this man's dynasty assigned to Euroaristo so we can give it a consistent name? They are usually known as Regnarids or Reiniers, because they used that name many times. This was the first dynasty of Counts of Namur, Hainaut, and Louvain, and for early member of those families who are not yet clearly associated with such a county we need a dynasty name, which is also what secondary works do in this case. Here are some examples of published sources:

At the moment most of these profiles have only a project manager who I understand can not make LNAB changes either, so to fix them, what do we do?
WikiTree profile: Gilbert Regnarid
in Genealogy Help by Andrew Lancaster G2G6 Mach 9 (91.1k points)
recategorized by Darlene Athey-Hill
I see the house is listed.

I can volunteer to handle this? (And if volunteers are called for, I can maybe help with Merovingians, and Flanders?)

Some sources to help anyone who wants to chip in. These are the ones I have put in Loon-12, a relative of this line.

*Rousseau, Félix (1936) ''Actes des comtes de Namur de la première race (946-1196)'' [ link] Régnier
*Baerten (1965), "Les origines des comtes de Looz et la formation territoriale du comté", ''Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire'', 43 (2): [ link]
*Baerten, Jean (1969), ''Het Graafschap Loon (11de - 14de eeuw)'' [ link] Reinieren
*Jongbloed (2008), "Flamenses in de elfde eeuw", ''Bijdragen en Mededelingen Gelre'' Reinieren
*Kupper, Jean-Louis. (1981) ''Liège et l’Église impériale aux XIe-XIIe siècles'' [en línea]. Liége: Presses universitaires de Liège [ link]. Regnier
*Vanderkindere, Léon (1902), ''La formation territoriale des principautés belges au Moyen Age'' (PDF), 2, [ link]. Rénier


Unless someone comes with new information it looks like we should go with Reginar, which is also the name someone must have selected previously when creating the Category (which is relatively un-used).

I will try to add the category to more profiles. But also I think there should be some more sub-categories than currently, reflecting also the most common second names: Louvain (which becomes Brabant, and one branch leads to the Percys), Namur, Hainaut etc?

I think only the first few generations will have no other last name than the dynasty name, which is also the practice in secondary publications.
Another question is whether we can change Moselle-5's LNAB to Reginar. We do not know his ancestors, and his son is the first definite Reginar. Calling him graf of Maasgouw like MEDLANDS is problematic because this comes from a questioned translation of the Latin to being with. So I propose he should be in the dynasty. He often appears in trees showing the dynasty.
Maybe a mistaken category? Currently empty, and not needed.

Some parts of the Reginar House already are in sub-categories, but not some of the most important: Louvain/(early Brabant) and Hainaut

This page does exist:

2 Answers

+1 vote
Since it is generally considered a German noble family with one still existing branch as Haus Hessen, should German be the preferred language? They are generally referred to as Reginare or Haus Reginar in the German literature.
by Helmut Jungschaffer G2G6 Pilot (507k points)
I do not have a strong preference between Reinier, Reginar, Raginar. I have not seen Raginare? But why would it be a German family Helmut? There is also a branch in England by the way, but that does not make it English.

1. They start in Lower Lotharingia, and all the profiles who are not in a later branch are in the "Belgian" area, straddling the Dutch-French language boundary. The first branches are in Hainaut, Namur and Louvain, with a proposal that the house of Loon is also a branch. As they are Franks we could try to reconstruct from an old spelling?

2. Anyway, they are quite early so modern German, French and Dutch are hardly the issue. Another approach is to ask what the main literature is written in, and that would arguably be French (for example Vanderkindere). But it is hard to be sure. Certainly Dutch, English, German and French are important in this case. It is a classic case of a family in the mixed up core of European history.

3. Yet another approach is to ask whether there is an international consensus about spelling. Probably because of French scholarship, I have seen that the French names of the dynasty Reinier, and Regnier are used in other languages such as Dutch and English, and I would guess also German? But as mentioned above, I think a lot of scholars also try for a kind of archaic spelling which comes closer to the original pronunciation, the same as they call early Gilbert Giselberts or even Giselbrechts (but not modern Dutch Gijzelbrechts).

Short version: I am guessing Reginar and Raginar are both simple and recognizable, but honestly I have been seeing more spellings with Re than Ra?. Raginare surprised me. Reinier and Regnier are very common but maybe too "modern French" but they are common in the literature.

I just browsed some of the primary literature in Vanderkindere and I see that the Latin also used both Re and Ra (typically Re(g)in(h)erus or Ra(g)in(h)erus).

FWIW, although people keep saying it looks Norse Ragnar, I was recently working on Clovis I and his noble relative was named Raginchar, a king living in this same Austrasian March. Looks like the same name. I would say that the Re spellings are coming from the effect of a Dutch style "g" sound which can work like an English "y". Could Ragnar be a Frankish name originally?

The line in the now Belgian territories died out in 1355. For what it's worth, Charles Cawley uses "Graven van Maasgau" for the family and Reginar as the son of Giselbert.

As to what language to use: in the area of interest it would most likely be Old Dutch, considered a Franconian dialect, but like all these old languages largely reconstructed from newer languages. In any case Dutch or German seem more logical choices than French based on this history.

Some German sources:

  • Eduard Hlawitschka: Die Ahnen der hochmittelalterlichen deutsche Könige, Kaiser und ihrer Gemahlinnen. Ein kommentiertes Tafelwerk. Band I: 911–1137, 2 Teile, 2006
  • Karl Ferdinand Werner: Die Nachkommen Karls des Großen bis um das Jahr 1000. In: Karl der Große, Band IV: Das Nachleben. Herausgegeben von Wolfgang Braunfels und Percy Ernst Schramm, 1967
Thanks Helmut. Good ones which I recognize but have not read. Do you know of any online copies?

I am tending towards Raginar as simple, and recognizable both now and then, and in all the main academic languages. I'll spend some time looking at the sources again first.

I find Cawley's approach to Lower Lotharingian dynasty names awkward because he tries to give them all geographical titles when such things were very fluid in this period. There was a reason so many writers preferred to refer to them by their favourite personal names. BTW other similar dynasties like this one are the Balderics and the Ansfrids (once considered the same I think). For example Cawley calls the Balderics the family of Betuwe, and this has affected many online profiles including in Wikitree.

I quoted Cawley mostly for the use of Dutch (Graven van ...) for the family name. I agree that for this time period geographical names are not very helpful.

With respect to German literature I have not come across anything online except Reginare in Deutsche Biographie.

Is that form intended to be a plural perhaps? As a dynasty name? A lot of Dutch and French authors are just happy to call this family the Regniers or similar (just a plural), but if we want a word that sounds like a dynasty I think I have seen Ragnarid also?
No Regnarid seems to exist, not Ragnarid, at least googling. See the first source I gave in the original question (in English).
Reginare is a plural, the English equivalent would be Reginars. This is pretty much in line with German use for other noble houses: Merovinger, Karolinger, Ottonen, Staufer etc.
So if most sources use an Re spelling, and if we are happy to keep it simple and use just the name (with no fancy ending) then Reginar seems to be a reasonable proposal as the name for this dynasty?
Sorry, I'm coming to this conversation really late, but It's only that I've come across some profiles using the LNAB Reginar, that I've realised that it doesn't look right and is in fact really confusing because it is a first name.

Helmut is right that it should have had some ending such as Reginare or Reginarid or Regniers.
That got me confused as well, and at first I did wonder at the protected profiles with a "first name" as their last name at birth. Quite a few members of the family end up called "Reginar Reginar".
I can't see a big problem with Regnarid, except that it does not seem all that common in non wiki publications.
+1 vote
Andrew, I would be happy to have you head up getting this house in order.  I'm not sure why no one has piped in yet on it . . .  It's already part of EuroAristo, so not need for assigning it to the project.  I am going to change the title of your post in hopes of bringing it to the attention of more of our project members.  Thanks.

Darlene - Co-Leader - British Isles Royals & Aristocrats 742-1499 Project
by Darlene Athey-Hill G2G6 Pilot (346k points)
Hi Darlene. Problem is mainly just LNAB changes are needed.
Reginar, which was already a House Name Category, seems to be agreed and no problem. I've been adding that tag. LNAB changes are still needed on most
Have done lots of clean-up including categories, but LNAB changes not possible in most cases. So instead I have made clear suggestions in the message boxes, so some future person with the rights, hopefully, can do it. Feedback welcome.

I've gone in and changed several of the LNABs.  What do you want to do with Henegouwen-24?

Let me know if there are others to change . . .

Hi Darlene, personally I think it is easier to make him the last Reginar, not yet in a branch, and let his two sons take up the two branch LNABs. This is because in his generation the Reginars were still much more than just the counts of specific counties. Then they lost a war to Bruno and were expelled. His sons were building on the ruins of that so to speak, and there was a new style to the counties.
OK, done.

Related questions

+2 votes
1 answer
66 views asked Mar 5, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Antonia Reuvers G2G6 Mach 1 (17.2k points)
+6 votes
2 answers
+5 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
2 answers
162 views asked Mar 4, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Antonia Reuvers G2G6 Mach 1 (17.2k points)
+12 votes
3 answers
+2 votes
1 answer
95 views asked Mar 21, 2013 in Genealogy Help by Vic Watt G2G6 Pilot (323k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright