File talk:Adel im Wandel194.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
@NearEMPTiness: @Wuselig: Hi! Do you think these men may be the counts of Tubingen, Montfort and Werdenberg in 1486? What are your thoughts? Should I consider reviewing the counts for this year and categorize them? Greetings, Mhmrodrigues (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Heavens no! I am afraid this won't help you much: Thomas Lirer
- Let me summarize: Thomas Lirer was a historian in the employ of the Monfort. He wrote a "Swabian Chronicle" which first appeared in 1486. These people depict some imaginary members of his past from the Tübingen, Monfort and Werdenberg families. What Lirer does want to point out is that they are from a larger interrelated family of common heritage. That is why they all have these related, but also distinctly different coats of arms. --Wuselig (talk) 22:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Mhmrodrigues: @Wuselig: By the way, I have done a bit of research about their coat of arms, and I think that the following story is quite believable: "According to a hypothesis by Hildebrecht Hommel, the three rings of the Tübingen coat of arms, as well as the fringes of the square flag and the vertical position of the flag, only find a meaningful explanation if one takes them as the adoption of a misunderstood antique coin design. The Palgrave's flag hanging on three rings, the three bibs of which run out in fringes, is very similar to a tripod depicted on the Incusen coins of Kroton. A palatine count from Tübingen presumably used the concave reverse side of this coin as a seal stamp, which was later repeatedly recut in a similar manner."[1] --NearEMPTiness (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- It is an interesting hypothesis. Does he show examples of this early seal, which was adapted from the coin? Have other scholars taken up this hypothesis? I think most scholars will still go with the Gonfalon-thesis. --Wuselig (talk) 10:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's a very interesting theory, indeed. There are many families that used the Gonfalon that may fit in the coin thesis, like the French House of Auvergne, for example. Mhmrodrigues (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- It is an interesting hypothesis. Does he show examples of this early seal, which was adapted from the coin? Have other scholars taken up this hypothesis? I think most scholars will still go with the Gonfalon-thesis. --Wuselig (talk) 10:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Wuselig: Wait, so, if I understood it right, Thomas Lirer assumed what I've assumed before: that these three branches /Tubingen, Montfort, Werdenberg) form a single family... In fact there are so many things that connect the three branches...starting with the name rule: Hugo, Rudolph, Heinrich, Georg... Mhmrodrigues (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Nobody disputes the common ancestry, but you cannot apply the Tübingen name to the succeeding families of Montfort and Werdenberg. Sure, the Tübingen Family was the trunk, but Monfort and Werdenberg were more like new sapplings, than branches. The Tübingen family became defunct with the loss of the Palatinate. There was no such thing as a House of Tübingen that the Monforts or Werdenbergs would associate with.--Wuselig (talk) 18:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- I agree. This becomes obvious, if one of the rulers has two different numbers (e.g. Hugo II. von Tübingen = Hugo I von Montfort). It is more like a spin-off in the modern sense. By the way: Who is that lady, and which role does she play? Is it de:Elisabeth von Bregenz? --NearEMPTiness (talk) 05:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- "[11r] Den dritten sun nant er auch nach der vesten Starckenberg. der nam ains herren tochter. von Vincentz aus Lamparten. Bey der het er sechs sün. vnd was gar vast mechtig. vnd gab dem ainen sun sein schlos. vnd nannt yn ain herren vom rotenfan. vnd Wolffrant was sein nam. sein schilt was weiß ain roter fan darinn. Dem andern sun gab er ain vesten die nannt er Werdenberg. sein schilt was rot vnd ain weisser fan darinn. vnd nannt yn ain herren von Werdenberg. Dem driten sun gab er Reinegk sein schilt was weiß mit aim schwartzen fan. sein nam was herr Anßhelm von Reinegk. derselb erbt den tuorn End. von seim bruoder Wartaw. der nam ains grafen tochter von Badenweiler. bei der het er vil kind. Nun gab er dem vierden sun ain vesten hieß Schellenberg. deß nam was Hainrich. sein schilt was schwartz mit aim weissen fan. Dem fünfften gab er ain gelben schilt. mit ainem roten fan. der kam an deß römischen pfaltzgrafen hof. vnd hielt sich mit so frumer riterschafft das ym der pfaltzgraff sein tochter gab hieß Benigna. vnd gab ym ain groß kastel do vil lands zuo gehört. deß namen was Tübingen. sein nam was Wilhelm. der ward gehaissen ain pfaltzgraff von Tübingen. Do nam er sein bruoder zuo ym hieß Ruoland. vnd ain herr saß nit ferr von ym auff ainer vesten hieß Herrenberg. vnd er hieß Balthaser von Herrenberg. sein fraw was aine von Klingen. bei der het er ain tochter. do bat er yn vmb dy tochter. die gab er ym. Do starb der von Herrenberg. darnach ward er genannt ain herr von Herrenberg. sein schilt was rot vnd ain gelber fan darinn. der besaß allso die herrschafft Herrenberg erblich von seinem weib." Schwäbische Chronik, 11r --Wuselig (talk) 11:36, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- I agree. This becomes obvious, if one of the rulers has two different numbers (e.g. Hugo II. von Tübingen = Hugo I von Montfort). It is more like a spin-off in the modern sense. By the way: Who is that lady, and which role does she play? Is it de:Elisabeth von Bregenz? --NearEMPTiness (talk) 05:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- Nobody disputes the common ancestry, but you cannot apply the Tübingen name to the succeeding families of Montfort and Werdenberg. Sure, the Tübingen Family was the trunk, but Monfort and Werdenberg were more like new sapplings, than branches. The Tübingen family became defunct with the loss of the Palatinate. There was no such thing as a House of Tübingen that the Monforts or Werdenbergs would associate with.--Wuselig (talk) 18:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Mhmrodrigues: @Wuselig: By the way, I have done a bit of research about their coat of arms, and I think that the following story is quite believable: "According to a hypothesis by Hildebrecht Hommel, the three rings of the Tübingen coat of arms, as well as the fringes of the square flag and the vertical position of the flag, only find a meaningful explanation if one takes them as the adoption of a misunderstood antique coin design. The Palgrave's flag hanging on three rings, the three bibs of which run out in fringes, is very similar to a tripod depicted on the Incusen coins of Kroton. A palatine count from Tübingen presumably used the concave reverse side of this coin as a seal stamp, which was later repeatedly recut in a similar manner."[1] --NearEMPTiness (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- ↑ Hildebrecht Hommel: Antike Spuren im Tübinger Wappen. Zur Frage der Verwertung und Umdeutung numismatischer Motive. Vorgelegt am 13. Juni 1981. Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse. Bericht Jg. 1981, 9.
