Cunigunda nomine de Bilstein, que fuerat uxor Gisonis
comitis ( ) predium aput Brubach ( ) dominus Ludowicus comes de Thuringia
cum uxore sua, filia predicte Cunigunde [Landau 315; Patze 195 Anm. 30]
Kunigunde von Bilstein, who was the widow of Count
Giso ( ) estate near Brubach ( ) Lord Ludwig, count of Thuringia, with
his wife, daughter of the aforementioned Kunigunde.
This is exactly what the Latin text states. With help
from others KHW has filled in the gaps.
Countess Kunigunde of Bilstein, who had been the
wife of Count Giso (is to be buried in the Abbey of Siegburg which lately
had been her refuge for the good of her soul, which institution forms
part of an) estate near Brubach. (Following the arrival of) Lord Ludwig,
count of Thuringia, with his wife, the daughter of the aforementioned
Kundigunde (the burial took place) (Landau, see above).
Kunigunde is not mentioned in the second source as the
wife of Heinrich Raspe I, but only as the widow of Giso. This source, as
Landau explains, was only put together during the term of office of
Archbishop Arnold of Cologne (1138-1151), but these events must have
happened during the time of his predecessor, Friedrich (1099-1131).
Given that Heinrich died in 1130, either he must have been Kunigunde's
husband or she his widow - neither can be true. As it is, he neither
married the widow of Giso nor was she named Hedwig [Landau 315].
This means that the Thuringian genealogies published
by Demandt and Patze are wrong. It also means Demandt's attempt to set
up Heinrich Raspe as the administrator of the estate of his alleged
stepson, Giso V, fails too. Should Heinrich have actually married some
Hedwig or other it has nothing to do with either the Graf von
Gudensberg or the position of imperial standard-bearer which came
from the Werner inheritance.
It should not be forgotten either that the Raspes as
the second-born sons were, until the end of the twelfth century, the
Thuringian trustees in Hessen and not the actual owners. They simply
ran the place.
Hedwig von Hollende, countess of Thuringia, was,
therefore, the only legitimate heir(ess).
As daughter of the last Count Giso, the Giso family
residence passed to her. Given medieval laws regarding inheritance,
this probably means that ownership actually passed to her husband who
would then have had the problem of having either church or imperial
fiefs transferred to him. If this didn't succeed as was the case for
Burg Hollende, the fief passed back to the original owner and then
was re-assigned or independently managed.
This ruling means that one can determine whether an
inheritance consisted of either feudal or non-feudal possessions. It
also shows how, and in what circumstances, acquisitions, alienation,
assignments, and donations have happened and what claims future
generations can make.