On 13-Sep-17 5:49 AM, Paulo Canedo wrote: > It couldn't have been Enguerrand I the one excommunicated in 1049 he had already died at the time the Chronique de Saint Riquier records his death in 1045 and his burial at Saint Riquer. About the title Enguerrand II could easily have been joint count with his father. I suspect you found this particular misinformation in Medieval Lands, here: http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/nfraamp.htm#_ftnref472 It says: 'The Chronique de Saint Riquier records the death in 1045 of "seigneur Angelran" and his burial at Saint-Riquier'. You may have missed discussions of Medieval Lands here; suffice it to say, the website is full of rubbish, largely because Charles Cawley is incompetent. In this case he has used a translation of the chronicle into French, and failed to notice that 'seigneur Angelran' is not Enguerrand I but his namesake, the abbot of Saint-Riquier who died on 9 December 1045 and was buried in the abbey. The relevant passage in the Latin chronicle is here (pp 215-216): https://archive.org/stream/chroniquedelabb00harigoog#page/n297/mode/1up and in the translation used by Cawley here (p 228): https://archive.org/stream/chroniconcentul00harigoog#page/n317/mode/1up. Note that the chapter begins 'Sepultum vero est sancti viri corpus' (in the translation: 'Le corps du saint fut enterré') and goes on to mention his successor as abbot, Gervin ('venerabilis ejus successor, abbas Gervinus', or in French 'Le vénérable Gervin, qui lui succéda'). This kind of plain statement is too hard for Medieval Lands to get right. Please be aware that you can't rely on a single word you find there, including 'a' and 'the'. You would be far better off deleting your link to the website and forgetting it is there. Peter Stewart