De heren van Teijlingen

My greatgrandfather was a grandson of Jeanette van Tol, who in a long line Van Tol, descends from Floris van Tol, son of Floris van Teijlingen, who built het Huis van Tol, giving his descendants their name. There are different stories about his lineage, and when questions rose, I decided to dive in a bit.

Main Sources

I started out with this article:

Nederlandse Leeuw, 1926

Main other source is te Nederlandse Leeuw article from 1926, NL26 in short. It reference several other studies/sources which I have not all read. It references primary sources, following:

Primary source: Oorkonden van Holland en Zeeland

Primary source would be the transcriptions in Oorkonden van Holland en Zeeland, Oorkonden in short. Some might be fakes according to de Nederlandsche Leeuw.

Batavia Illustrata, 1685

I then combined it with data from Batavia Illustrata 1685, BI in short, an earlier study, that names serveral other sources: "most old chronicles" take Simon as the first lord. It then mentions Pontus Heuterus. The same in 1584 RERVM BVRGVNDICARVM.

Pontus Heuterus

In book VI of Genealogiae Praecipvarvm Aliquot E Gallia, Francica from 1583 he describes the descent following the de Sicco-legend: Arnulf van Gent had sons Dirk, who succeeded as count of Holland, and a Simon (aka Sicco), from whom successively Gerard, Gerard and Hugo descended, the latter we find in a charter (#143). Hugo would have had sons Willem, Simon and Floris, and Willem was father of brothers Willem and Dirk. He is referred to in 1667 by Petrus Scriverius in Oude en nieuwe beschrijvinge van Holland, Zeeland en Vriesland, as the author of Genealogica Teylingiorum. That work also refers to Simon van Leeuwen, author of BI, and it states that Van Teijlingen lost their lands because of the conspiracy against Floris V van Holland, that is repeated by Van Leeuwen in BI. Turns out it was the other way around: they lost their lands to the count when them male line died out in 1284 (kwade lenen), and the other families were very displeased about that, and that was likely part of the reason why they joined the conspiracy.

Other sources

Several were mentioned in NL26, I did not search, find or read all of those, just for reference/further study.

• Melis Stoke, Rijmkroniek voor Willem II
• Spaen
• ca 1480 Dirk Pauli (Paulszoon), this might be some of his work, he described the Sicco-myth.
• Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidskunde
• Bijdrage Hist. Gen. Utrecht, Maybe this one.
• Oud en Nieuw II
• T.a.p.(?), partly reprinted as Verspr(eide?). Geschr(iften?) -> Robert Fruin 1903
• author J. Craandijk, Rotterdams Jaarboekje II (1890), Wandelingen door Nederland met pen en potlood, 1875.
• author Mr. Hendrik Jacob Koenen, Willem Snikkerieme en zijne magen, Wapenheraut VII, 1904. Not found. 1906
• author D. J. M. Wüstenhoff
• location of Teijlingen and its fiefs in Lisse and Sassem are briefly described in Sporen van Six.
• Die cronycke van Hollandt, Zeelandt ende Vrieslant, met die cronike der biscoppen van Uutrecht (Divisiekroniek), 2011, Cornelius Aurelius. In chapter XV, he mentions the most important knights of "this time", and that is right after the page on the death of Floris IV in 1235. He mentions:

Willem stedehouder van Hollant; dese grave Floris broederen. Dirck, drossaet van Hollant ende heer van Bredenroede; Alfert, sijn zoen ende oec here van Brederoede; Willem, here van Teylingen, heere van der Lecke; [...]; Willem ende Dirc van Teylingen, broederen;. That would mean Dirk Drossaet was not the brother of W#202.

NL92, the article Het riddermatige geslacht Van Tol mentions in footnote 20:

• R. Fruin ('De jongere tak der Van Teylingens', in Bijdr vad gesch en oudheidk 3e R, X (1899), 78-99)
• Hans Toll (zie eerder)
• J. Craandijk ('Wat leert ons Van den Berghs Oorkondenboek van Holland en Zeeland omtrent de Teilingens in de 13de eeuw?', in Bijdr vad gesch en oudheidk 3e R, X (1899), 1-77),
• Craandijk refereert aan de Verhandeling van M.L. d'Yvoy 'Onderzoek naar den oorsprong van het geslacht der Heeren van Brederode' in Oud en Nieuw van de Vaderlandsche Geschiendenis en Letterkunde, 1847.
• H J Koenen ('De Sicconidenlegende', in De Wapenheraut 1905, 465-496 en 1906, 1-39) en
• D J M Wustenhoff ('De geslachten van Teylingen', in De Wapenheraut 1904, 265-280, 289-304, 401-416, 433-448)
• De Ned Leeuw van 1926, H Obreen, 'De heeren van Teylingen en Brederode', kol 193-207, 234-243, 258-266, 290-299, 354-361

Rijmkroniek, by Melis Stoke (1235-1305)

Mentions Willem van Teylingen, Simonszoon, who took part in conspiracy and murder on Floris V. It mentions Jan, son of the lord of Teylingen, who must be the son of Dirk Willemsz who had died in 1283 en Dirk son of Simon, who were both involved in the peace that was made after that rebellion.

Willem Procurator

1322-1332 Wilelmus Procturator, in accordance with Oorkonden. A partial translation (missing pages) by Marijke Gumbert-Hepp, 2001. Another one with missing pages. Chronicon Egmundanum has more on Teylingen (try Teijlingen and Teilingen too). There also exists a translation by A.J. Vis, haven't found it online.

The Loon War, WvT plays a part in, fighting on the side of Willem van Holland, brother of the deceased count, is described on p 93 and 105 (and likely on inaccessible odd pages in between) of the translation by Gumbert-Hepp.

Johannes de Beke

De kroniek van Jan Beke (Johannes de Beke of Beka) is in de late Middeleeuwen een van de populairste Nederlandse verhalende bronnen geweest. Beke, zeer waarschijnlijk een geestelijke van het klooster Egmond, beschreef de geschiedenis van de bisschoppen van Utrecht en van de graven van Holland (en Zeeland) en van hun territoria vanaf de Romeinen tot aan 1346. Zijn werk was voornamelijk een compilatie uit de toen bestaande annalen en kronieken, zoals de Rijmkroniek van Holland van Melis Stoke en andere auteurs.

Beke based his work mainly on the works of Procurator. After his death, his kroniek was continues by another unknown author. Soon after it was translated in Dutch. It describes Willem van Teylingen during the Loonse Oorlog in chapter LIX, p98.

Ende alse grave Willam dit vernam, makede hi Wouter van Egmonde ende Aelbert Barard hooftmans van den Kenemars, Philips van Wassenaer ende Willam van Teylinge makede hi hooftmanne van den Rijnlanders ende hi voer selver in Zeelant, daer hi alle dat ingheboren volc in sine hulpe omboet. Philips ende Willam, dese voerscreven ridders, makeden sonder merren ii vesten rnit starken wijchusen. (p100, 55)

And when count William heard of this, he made Wouter van Egmond and Albert Barard leader of the Kennemers, Philips van Wassenaar and William van Teylingen he made leaders of th e Rijnlander, and he went (sailed) himself to Zeeland, where he bade all inhabitants to assist him. Philips and William, described knights, made without ado 2 fortifications with strong shelterhouses.

On page 102, line 1116

Ende alse grave Willam dit vernam, so dede hi alle dese ghescienis in heymeliken brieven te weten Wouter van Egmonde, Aelbert Barard, Willam van Teyling ende Philips van Wassener ende bat hem oetmoedelijc also vele als hi mochte, dat si op enen benoemden dach te Leiden comen wouden mit also vele ghewapender lude als si mochten ende dat si ghenen strijt en begonsten tieghen grave Lodewike, hi ne waer daer bi.

Grave Lodewijc, die vernam dattie Zeelanders hem versetten tieghen hem ende dattie Kenemaers in die wapen liepen, quam rnit heervart binnen Leiden, opdat hi die Kenemars ierst ghemoete mit wapencracht ende daerna tieghen die Zelanders strede. Die Kenemars, die hem sere haesten hiertieghen ende liepen onsedelike elc voer anderen sonder oordinancie te stride, waerom si haeste testoert worden van denghenen die hem orlochs verstonden, ende vele dootgheslaghen. Ende die andere, die te scepe niet co- men en conden, die liepen optie brugge ende wouden hem daer van nywes (verweren) ende versamenden daer een versch heer. Mer als de brugghe so sere verladen was rnit alsoe vele wapentuers, brac si ende viel neder ende daer verdrencte ene grote menichte van den Kenemers in den Rine. Philips van Wassenaer, Wouter van Egmonde ende Albert Barard sijn snellike ghelopen overt laghe velt ende so ontgaen, mer Willam van Teyling, die den vianden wederstont so hi langste mochte, wart daer ghevanghen.

Grave Lodewijc, als hi desen zeghe ghewonnen heeft, voer hi weder tot Voerscoten in groter eren ende sloech sine tenten daer opt groene velt. In desen quam grave Willam rnit starker heercracht uut Zeelant ende sette sine pauwelioene in Tol, opdat hi des anderen daghes sonder vertrec striden mochte tieghen grave Lodewike ende verdriven verre uut sinen vaderliken erve. Grave Lodewike, die dese mare vernam, sende om den hertoghe Willam van Lymborch om te proeven, of hi enighe soene of vrede daertusschen dadinghen mochte. Mer dese selve hertoghe, die hem oorlochs verstont, quam weder zonder vrede ende sonder soene ende seide, dat hi ghesien hadde ende dat hem gheantwert was, ende gheboet sine tenten op te breken ende en woude des heers niet verbeiden, mer sonder merren rumede hi Hollant. Ende grave Lodewijc liet daer staen tenten ende pauwelioenen ende pijnde hem tutrecht te comen so hi alre haestelicste mocht, ende gaf den bisscop die ghevanghene ridders voer sijn soudie. Ende sulke van Lodewijcs ridders, die van groter haest van lopen vielen in den Zijl buten Leiden, ende verdrencten daer. Ende zom ander verdwaelden in den onweghen ende sijn vermoyt van groter moetheden dootgebleven. Ende sulke van den vlienden scoten uut haer platen, hoer pansiere ende worpen van hem hoer helme, hor scilde, ende sijn al vliende doofghesleghen of ghevanghen. Grave Willam, die den vlienden neernstelike ghevolghet is, heeft vele ridderscap ghevanghen ende ghewonnen haer pauwelioene, hoer provande ende manigherhande cleinoet. Ende aldus is grave Lodewijc van Loen uut Hollant verdreven, nemmermeer weder te keren.

And when count William heard of this, he wrote an account of all that had happened in secret letters to Wouter van Egmond, Albert Barard, Willem van Teylingen and Philips van Wassenaar and bade them as much as he could to immediately come, on the appointed day, to Leiden with as many armed men as they could and that they would not engage in battle or conflict with count Lodewijk if was not present. Count Lodewijk, who heard that the Zeelanders were resisting him and that the Kennemers were taking up arms, came to Leiden with his army by ship, in order to counter the Zeelandser with arms and would battle the Kennemers next. The Kennemers, who hurried to prevent this, went into battle in disarray, causing them to be defeated quickly by their enemies, and many were slain. The others, who did not make it back to the ships, regrouped on the bridge in order to put up resistence a new army formed. But because the bridge was so laden with so many armbearers it broke and collapsed, and a great many Kennemers drowned in the Rhine. Philips van Wasenaar, Wouter van Egmond and Albert Barard quickly withdrew over the lower fields and escaped, but Willem van Teilingen, who opposed the enemy as long as he could, was taken prisoner. Count Lodewijk, winning this battle, returned to Voorschoten with great honour, and put up his tents there in the green field. To there came count Willem, with a stronger army from Zeeland and put up his pavilions in Tol, so he could the next day could lay battle against count Lodewijk without marching, and drive him out of his fatherly inheritence. Count Lodewijk, who heared of his intent, sent for duke Willem van Limburg, to see if reconsiliation or peace were possible. But this duke, who was at war with him, returned without peace, and without reconciliation and said he that he had seen, and that had received anwwer, and told him to break camp, and unless the lord forbode, to vacate witout ado the lands of Holland. And count Lodewijk left his tents and pavilions, and urged him to come to Holland, as quickly as he could, and gave the bishop the captured knights for his ? (soudie: hostages, prisonsers, compensation, safeguard?). And such of Lodewijks knights, in they hurry to flee, fell into the Zijl outside Leiden, and drowned. Some others got lost on the area and died of fatigue. And some fleeing discarded their armor and threw away their helmets and shields, and were captured or killed on the run. Count Willem, pursuing the fleeing enemy, captured many knights, and conquered there pavilions, their provisions and other possessions. And thus count Lodewijk was driven from Holland, never to return again.

It mentions Dirk van Teijlingen in 1252 (p128, line 288).

It mentions around 1345 (caput 87b line 3) Symon en Dirk van Teylingen. That would have been the sons of Simon.

Divisiekroniek, Cornelius Gerardi Aurelius, 1517

The 2011 version describes, right after chapter XIV about the death of Floris IV in 1234, Dirck, drossaet van Hollant ende heer van Bredenroede; Alfert, sijn zoen ende oec here van Brederoede; Willem, here van Teylingen, heere van der Lecke;, the latter likely W#149, and also Willem ende Dirc van Teylingen, broederen, likely W#202 and his brother we see appaer in several charters.

W#202 and his son Dirk in chapter 21. Willem and Simon are mentioned in chapter 28, shortly after 1261.

Johannis a Leydis

Aka Jan van Leiden (Joannes a Leydis). He wrote the Kronyk van Egmond. Henrik van Wijn mentions in Huiszittend Leeven he wrote Oorsprong en Daaden der Heeren van Brederode, aka De origine et Rebus gestis Dominorum de Brederode. Part of it is disccused in De Navorscher 1894, Geslacht- en Wapenkunde, p182.

He invented a great looking stamreeks, but is not to be trusted (lightly), he also found how they descended through Pharamund from Priam of Troy and in the end of Adam and Eve. Reminds me of Snorri Sturluson, who told us how all Vikings descended of Odin, son of Thor, who was actually Troianus and a descendant of Priam. Medieval historians. Anyway.

Before Teijlingen

He starts with Adam and Eve, but I skipped ahead. Trying to identify the people he mentions.

• Chapter VII: Chilperik, king of the Franks, died 754.
• Chapter VIII: Had a son Diderick, duke of Aquitanië. Pepin (guess the Short), gave him new heraldry, that had come from Troy. Right, you can find Troy's Book of Heraldry in every library. That of Holland, from the description. Others say Floris III van Holland got its coat of arms trough his wife, who was from Scotland.
• Lived 30 more years, wife from Italy. Had a son (the above did not) called Lotharius. Lived in the times of Pepin and Charlemagne, duke of Aquitania, married the daughter of the Duke of Samson of Burgundy. Cant be this Lotharius I then. This Lotharius III had a wife from Italy This Lotharius II married a daughter of the king of Burgundy. His father wasn't Dirk, and he born 110 years after the death of Charlemagne. A Leydis seems to have been more interested in making a nice chain with famous people, than a correct one. In the end he was a descendant of Adam and Eve anyway.
• I'll skip to Sicco's father, p 608, Arnulf van Gent. Arnulphus (van Gent) had 2 sons, Dirk who succeeded him as count, en Syfridus viscount of Kennemerland (area west of Haarlemmermeer, between the castles of Brederode and Teijlingen). Afterward the first became the first lord of Bredero and Teijlingen. .... as found in ancient writings, manifests, old letters, and in memoires, of which a lot and many have been researched.
• It continues: Sifridus, his other son and Dirks brother, when he was young, and his father still live, he hit a man at court that his father loved, and his father became angry. He was banished. He left to Friesland, and ended up with Goswijn van Staveren (Stavoren, heathen Frisia holy city and seat of their kings). That must be Gosse Ludigman. He was a so called potestaat of Friesland (fake, fiction, myth).
• Goswin descended of Gondebald, that had fought for Charlemagne, and defeated the Saracens (Moors, muslims in Spain). The mythical grandson of King Radboud of Frisia, who would have established the heraldry of Friesland. Gondobaldus had a grandson Goswin Ludigman according to Frisian myths, who might have had a lot of likewise named grandsons to fill the >250 gap to the time of Sifridus.
• Well, long story short, Sigried, named after his mother's father, married Goswins daughter Tetburga, and in Friesland, he was called Sicco. They had 2 sons, Dirk and Simon.
• Then in 988 Dirk of Holland died, and Arnulf became count. Then Arnulf had his son Dirk marry Witilda, the daughter of emperor Otto van Saksen. Maybe this Otto, holy roman king, no daughter Witilda though. More likely this Otto, no Witilda though, and his children were long deceased by 988. [Some say], referencing Geni and Wikitree, she was Otehilde, daughter of Bernhard I, grandson of the legendary Billung, and Wikipedia confirms that.
• For the wedding, Arnulf lifted Sicco's banisment. At the wedding he gave Syffridus the castle of Bredero and surround villages and gold, etc, etc, and Teylingen (p 610). He became very rich. And what of that one will believe, can anyone who reads this, judge by himself. He also replaced his brother as vice-count in his absence.

Simon, first lord of Teijlingen, and his offspring

• Skip to chapter XIII, his death. His brother died 1039 and was succeeded by his son Dirk as count. Sicco was also succeeded by his son Dirk for Brederode, and Simon for Teylingen. No year.
• Dirk vB, his heraldry, Banner-heeren, sprote Van der Lecke, Aldrichem, by marriage or by bastardry, I do not know, but they carry the heraldry. Married Alverardis, daughter of Boudwijn van Heusden, had a son Willem that became heer van Lecke.
• In 1048 Dirk van Holland was defeated. No wife, no kids. Brothers Dirk and Simon returned his brother Floris of East-Frisia and made him count of Holland.
• Dirk van Brederode dies 1063, son Willem succeeds. Not much there on what happened.
• Simon, the other son of Sicco, had a son Gerrit, banner-heer, was in Egmond klooster in 1043, already an old man. He had sons Hugo, third of Teijlingen, and Willem (0) van Teijlingen, ridder.
• This Hugo won (gained, acquired, had... in Dutch landwinning, is getting land from the sea, extracting minerals is also winning) Willem (#149), fourth of Teijlingen. This fourth Willem helped the first Willem of Holland greatly against Lodewijk van Loen in the year 1203, as we can read in the Croniken van Holland.
• This Willem won Willem fifth (#202), and Dirk (Drossaard). These brothers floruit in 1252 in the times of king Willem, count of Holland, king of Rome.
• Willem 4th died 1244. Willem 5th won Dirk, 6th lord (DW), who won Willem, 7th lord (WDW)
• Dirk died 1282. Willem 7th won Simon, 8th lord, and Dirk, knight.
• Willem 7th died 1284.
• Brothers Simon and Dirk were defeated with Willem van Holland, by the Frisians in 1346.

Let's make a tree:

            Dirk II van Holland (?-988)
                   \
Otto van Saksen    Arnulf van Gent #28                      Goswin Ludigman
     \             /              \                          /
  Witilda x Dirk III (?-1039)      Sigfried (Sicco)  x Thetburga
          |                       /               \ 
   Dirk IV (-1048)   Dirk van Brederode    Simon van Teijlingen
                          (?-1063)                   |
                    x Alverardis van Heusden     Gerrit #124 (?->1043)
                             |                     /            \
                      Willem van Lecke           Hugo #143     Willem #0
                                                  |
                                                 Willem #149 (?-1244)
                                                 /           \
                                       Willem #202         Dirk Drossaard 
                                           |
                                      Dirk #413 (?-1282)
                                           |
                                     Willem (?-1284)
                                    /            \
                                 Simon, lord     Dirk, knight

(born-died) as mentioned by A Leydis, # referring to first attested in Oorkonden, see below.

A Leydis stamlijst

About the stamlist in the image above, from NL26, that was supposed to be based on A Leydis:

• Syfridus x Terburga that died in 1030. See above.
• Son Dirk, who was not Dirk Drossaard (NL26). A Leydis did not say that he was, he has Drossaard in the list as well, in the proper time. The earlier Dirk was called lord of Brederode. That is not the Teijlingen branch.
• The Willem that died 1103, was probably the Van Lecke then, and it is the Brederode, not the Teijlingen list.
• The Dirk that died 1139 might have been grandson of Dirk that died 1063. Married to Van Heusden... would that be John Ooms (2a)? Then we are 150 year off, but besides that, it fits.
• He has a son Willem, who could not have died in 1154. Three generations in 51 years? Possible, but pushing it. He is cathing up maybe. Catharina van Salm... what if she were a daugther of emperor Otto van Salm (1.2)? His daughter Sophia married Dirk VI van Holland, she is also called Van Rheineck. Could a sister Catherina have married Willem Dirkszoon van Brederdode?
• Floris that died in 1198. W#202 had a son Floris, but he was likely not yet born in 1198, let alone having become a lord and died. The Dirk that was (2a) had a son Floris (3b) with John Ooms, but a bit more than 100 year difference.
• The Willem that died in 1221 could have been W#149, he is said to have marrie Margaretha van Lippe, but he was brother not father of Dirk Drossaet. That follows.

Mweh.

Opera historica, Theodoricus Pauli Gorcomiensis

Aka ms. 17303-19. Aka Theodericus Franconi Pauli. Image 25 starts the lords of Brederode. The author is described here.

Chronica dominorum de Brederode usque ad a. 1482, Johannes Gerbrandi de Leidis, 1504

In Latin and about the lords of Brederode, who where believed to be a different branch and not sprouted from Teijlingen back then. Willem, who's might have been the same person as the son Dirk Drossaart, brother of W#202.

D'oude chronijcke ende historien van Holland, 1610, W. van Gouthoeven

His work D'oude chronijcke ende historien van Holland (met West-Vriesland) van Zeeland ende van Wtrecht was an important source for BI. Like in BI, there were lords of Brederode before Dirk, brother of W#202, and their descent from Sicco, basically the Sicco-legend, is described first. After a short section on Van der Lecke, Teylingen follows. He has Simon, Gerrit, Gerrit, Hugo, but his sons are Willem, Simon and Floris van Tol. W#149 was captured in the Loon War, married Halewijn daughter of Wouter I van Egmond and died 1244. Son and grandson Willem, latter father of Dirk that followed as lord.

John Ooms

John names severals modern sources, that name sources, etc.

• He has a familiy-tree
• He references Rijnland Geschiedenis, which in turn references Aschpotter, see Rijnland Geschiedenis above.
• And Geographische namen in Deutschland, Dieter Berger, Duden Verlag 1993
• And Verschillende genealogieën van het oude geslacht Van Teylingen on Wikipedia
• De archeologie van Teylingen en Brederode, Jaarboek 2004, Kastelenstichting Holland en Zeeland.
• De ruïnes van Teylingen en Brederode verbeeld, Jaarboek 2005, Kastelenstichting Holland en Zeeland.
• Oorlog om Holland 1000-1375, Ronald de Graaf 2004.
• Over de datering van middelleeuwse baksteen uit Holland (from slide 197), EHP Cordfunke, in Westerheem jaargang 64, nr. 4 augustus 2015. (only mentions an estimate year the castle was built)
• Ridderschap in Holland , Antheun Janse 2001.
• Teylingen, A.M. Hulkenberg 1984.

Wikipedia

names sources

• Moerman, I.W.L. De ruïne van Teylingen, Deel XXVI uit de serie Nederlandse Kastelen, Nederlandse Kastelenstichting, ANWB, 1976
• Hartog, E. den & H. Koopmanschap Teylingen Bezoekergids, Kastelenstichting Holland en Zeeland, 2004
• Robert Fruin (1903), Verspreide geschriften. Deel 8. Kritische studiën over geschiedbronnen. Deel 2. Historische schetsen en boekbeoordeelingen. Deel 1 - De jongere tak der Van Teylingens (1898).
• Coenen, J.M.A. (1996). Graaf en grafelijkheid: een onderzoek naar de graven van Holland en hun omgeving in de dertiende eeuw, proefschrift Utrecht, p. 74-76.
• Fannee, M. (2014). tlant te Waremunde, een studie over Warmond in de middeleeuwen (1100-1400), Lisse: Druno en Dekker Drukkers, p. 51 e.v., p. 83 e.v.
• Janse, A. (2009). Ridderschap in Holland, portret van een adellijke elite in de late Middeleeuwen, Adelsgeschiedenis 1, tweede herziene druk, Uitgeverij Verloren, p. 400.

Rijnland Geschiedenis

Aad van der Geest writes mainly about the archeology of the castle, but also sets the background, and discusses scenario's.

• Teylingen van het begin tot aan de brand van 1676, Aad van der Geest
• Willem van Teylingen en Agniese x Bentheim, Aad van der Geest

In the latter he describes how a first son of Hugo was supposed to be called Gerard, who might have died young, leaving a daughter that might have married Willem. It might explain the introduction of the name Willem in vT, but Hugo's wife might have had father Willem, and it might explain why there never was a Hugo afterwards: likely Gerard van Heemskerk was a son by the first W of Willem, N. Gerardsdr, who died young, maybe giving birth, and the second son, Willem, might have been preferred and fasttracked by Willem's second wife.

Oorkondenboek van Holland en Zeeland

In Oorkonden I searched for spelling variants: Teilinge, Teylinge, Teilingen, Teylingen, Teijlinge, Teijlingen, Teiling, Teyling, Teilinc, Teylinc, Theylingen, Theylinge, Theilingen, Theijlingen, Theijlinge, Thelingen, Thelinge, The-, Tei- Te- yielded also "te", too many.

No signification relation to time and spellingvariants was observed.

Results, standardized spelling, order by #, dates in d-m-yyyy

#    - date      name - role
#124 - 7-10-1143 Gerard
#143 - 1162 Hugo - witness
#149 - 3-10-1174 Willem - witness
#177 - 1198 Willem - witness
#182 - 21-8-1200 Willem - witness
#188 - 20-2-1201 Willem - witness
#202 - 1205 Willem and Dirk, brothers
#203 - 1205 Willem - witness
#208 - 21-5-1226 N.N. Thelingen and Dirk Dapifer - sign a treaty
#214 - 1207 Willem - witness
#227 - 1212-1214 Willemn - witness
#229 - 13-1-1213 Willem - witness
#235 - 21-9-1213 Willem - witness
#237 - 23-12-1213 Dirk - witness
#247 - 28-8-1215 Willem - witness
#271 - 7-1220? Willem and Dirk
#281 - 6-1223 Willem - cosigns
#283 - 22-7-1223 Gerard - witness
#321 - 2-5-1230 Dirk - witness
#333 - 1231 Willem - witness
#361 - 8-1-1237 Willem "scilicet" (named, by the name of) van Theilingen.
#380 - 5-6-1241 Willem - witness
#382 - 1241 - Willem - witness, nobilis vir (noble man)
#564 - 18-6-1252 Dirk - witness, and aparently not a ridder/milites

More Oorkonden (van den Bergh, De Fremery 1866)

There is more where that came from: Oorkondenboek van Holland en Zeeland, Volume 1-2, 1866, Laurent Philippe Charles van den Bergh, James De Fremery

Numbers seem the same in the beginning but seem to differ in the end, did not compare and I will use alt#143 to refer to this list:

#143 - 1162-08-28, graaf Floris III geeft aan Egmond de kerk te Vlaardingen terug, onder de laici: Hugo de Teylingen
#149 - 1174-10-03, getuige voor graaf Floris II: o.a. Wilehums de Theylingen
#177 - 1198, graaf Dirk VII schenkt land te Poeldijk aan zijn kapel in de St Mariakerk te Utrecht, acta sunt hec apud Lis[se], onder de getuigen: Wilhelmus de Teillinga, Arnoldus dapifer meus, Henricus, frater ejus
#182 - 1200-08-21, 188, graaf Dirk VII en zijn vrouw Alyd bevestigen een schenking aan de abdij Rijnsburg van land te Schie, Rijswijk, 's Gravesande en Warmond, door gravin Sophia gedaan; onder de getuigen: Wilhelmus de Teylinge;
#188 - 1201-02-20: zij bevestigen schenking aan het klooster door zijn vader Floris III gedaan, onder de getuigen: Willem de Teiling
#183 - 1200-11-03, verdrag tussen Brabant en Holland, onder de getuigen homines comitis: Wilhelmus de Thelinghe
#202 - 1205, Ada, markgravin van Brandenburg (zuster van Dirk VII) verkoopt aan de kerk te Rijnsburg twee hoeven in Poel, onder de getuigen: Wilhelmus de Teilinge en zijn broer Theodricus (van Brederode)
#214 - 1207, gravin Aleid schrijft over het huwelijk van haar dochter met de graaf van Loon, gesloten in tegenwoordigheid van o.a. Wilhelmus de Teylingen
#227 - 1212-1214, verklaring van graaf Willem over de dijk tussen Bergen en Schoorl, die tijdens het leven van zijn vader gemaakt is; 1e getuige: Wilhelmus de Theilinke;
#229 - 1213-01-13: getuige voor keizer Otto IV te Nijmegen: o.a. Wilhelmus de Thelinge;
#234 - 1213-09-21: Willelmus de Theylingen;
#237 - 1213-12-23: onder de getuigen Theodericus de Theilingen [van Brederode];
#247 - 1215-08-28: 1e en 2e getuige Wilhelmus de Teylinge, Theidricus dapifer (van Brederode)
#12 - 1217: testes affuerunt [...] Baldwinus comes de Bentheim, Willelmus de Teylingen, Theodericus dapifer, Hubertus de Wlvinne, Gerardus de Martem.
# 1215 Oppermann: Fontes Egmundenses p 245, Lubbert, abt van Egmond, schenkt aan Dirk, physicus de Aelsmeer en zijn vrouw Ermengardi, 2 hoed tarwe en twee hoed gerst uit zijn tienden in Sassenheim in leen, en nog land in Alesmare, bestemd tot lijftocht voor Ermegarde, uit te reiken in Sasnem in mensura ejusdem ville, per dominum Wilhelmum de Theylingh
# (? I#270 = 1274 and II#270 = 1290) 1217 v.d. Bergh II Nal no12; Bijdr Hist Gen Utrecht 1913 dl 34 p 487; v.d. Bergh I no 270, 277
# (?) 1220-02: getuige voor graaf Willem te Antwerpen: Willelmus de Teiling;
#270 1220-07: Willelmus en Theodericus [van Brederode] de Thelinghe;
# (?) 1222-10: Wilhelmus de Teylinghen en zijn broer Theodericus (van Brederode)
#281 - 1223-06, Maria, weduwe van graaf Willem schenkt 50 £ Holl aan de abdij Rijnsburg, onder de getuigen Wilhelmus de Thelingen;
#283 - 1223-07-22: getuige voor graaf Floris IV, Gerardus de Theilingen;
#287 - 1224-12-06: getuige is o.a. Theodericus de Theylinghe (van Brederode);
#294 - 1226-01-26: beweringen van de graaf onder ede bevestigd door o.a. Wilhelmus de Teylingen;
#298 - 1226-05-21: zegel van Theilingen
#13 - 122-09-21: Testes hujus facti sunt Willelmus de Theilingen, Jacobus castellanus de Leithen, Gerardus de Theilingen, Gelekinus et Symon de Riswic 
#305 1227-04-16: verdrag over Zeeland, onder de getuigen Wilhelmus de Theilinghe en zijn broer Theodericus dapifer (van Brederode);
#(?)331? 1228-11-11 v.d. Bergh II Nal no 14; v.d. Bergh I, Wilhelmus de Teilinc getuige voor de bisschop van Utrecht;
#325 1230-01-14 (1231), Arnoldus, abt van Egmond, ontslaat enige keurmedigen, onder de getuigen: Wilhelmus de Teylingen en zijn broer Theodericus
#321 1230-05-02: Theodericus de Teyling getuige voor graaf Floris IV;
#328 1231-03-30: Th de Teylingen;
#333 1231: Willelmus de Teiling
#(?) 1233-03-01: De Fremery no 70, Ghisekinus uter Liere verkoopt land in de Liere aan de abdij Marienweerd, onder de getuigen Wilhelmus de Teylinc
#344 - 1233-04-20: v.d. Bergh I en II, getuige voor graaf Floris IV o.a. dominus Willelmus de Teylinghen;
#353 - 1235-04-01: Raad W de Teylinghe, Theodoricus de Wassenaer, Jacobus burggraaf van Leiden;
#361 - 1237-01-08: schenking aan de abdij Rijnsburg, zegel o.a. van Wilhelmus de Theylingen;
#380 - 1241-06-05: Wilhelmus de Teilingen;
#382 - 1241: getuige voor Nicolaas van Putten is Wilhelmus de Teylingen;
#397 - 1243-08-17: getuige voor graaf Willem o.a. Wilhemus de Thelinga;
#413 - 1245-11-23: stadsrecht aan Haarlem, onder de getuigen Theodericus de Teilig;
#437 - 1247-05-28: getuige voor bisschop Otto o.a. Wilhelmus de Teylinghe;
#537 - 1251-02-03: getuigen voor graaf Willem: Theodericus de Brederode en Theodericus de Theylinghe; 
#564 - 1252-06-18: Theodoricus de Teylingen;
#II#13 1256-10-15 v.d. Bergh II, idem
#II#26 1257-06-06 v.d. Bergh II, Lubbert, abt van Egmond, geeft zijn monniken enige renten, sigillis virorum nobilium: o.a. Theodericus heer van Theylinghe
#II#47 1258-09-21 v.d. Bergh II, ruil van goederen tussen de abdis van Rijnsburg en Willem van Steenhusen van 10 corenvennen en 5½ akker geestland gelegen tussen Poelgeest en Oestgeest tegen tienden van Wilhelmus in Rijnsburch, die hij van heer Dirk van Teylinge in leen hield; hij wordt weer met de genoemde goederen beleend.
#II#51 1259-02-22 v.d. Bergh II, Aleid voogdes van Holland bevestigt de abdij Rijnsburg in het bezit der goederen haar vroeger door gravin Petronella en anderen geschonken, benevens de vermangeling met Dirk heer van Teilingen aangegaan.
#II#148  1266-11-19 v.d. Bergh II, S van Haerlem, baljuw van Kennemerland en Th van Teilingen, baljuw van Holland, ridders, maken het voorgaande privilegie van Delft aan de tollenaars bekend.
#II##151 1266-12-19 , Acta sunt hec apud Teylingen dominica proxima post Lucie ex consilio et amonitione nobilium virorum videlicet domini Symonis de Herlem domini Theoderici de Teylingen domini Ghiselberti de Aemstele 
#II#181 1269-02-08 v.d. Bergh II, Dirk heer van Teilingen verkoopt aan heer Willem van Brederode ten vrijen eigen het goed Gravenbroek onder Voshol, mits deze de tienden van hem en zijne erven te leen houde.
#II#182 1269? v.d. Bergh II, Symon van Teilingen verkoopt heer Willem van Brederode eenig land bij 's Gravensloot.
#II#191 1269-11-03 v.d. Bergh II,Symon van Teilingen baljuw van Noordholland, verkoopt eenige veenen onder Waddingsveen en Polien aan IJsbrand Ever c. s.
#II#202 1270-06-23 v.d. Bergh II, Testes sunt ... Verdensis electus dominus Theodoricus de Teilingen dominus Willehelmus de Bredenrodhe
#II#207 1270-12-08 v.d. Bergh II, Graaf Floris V en Dirk van Teilingen verklaren dat zeker van de abdy van Egmond gekocht land na den dood der bezitters aan de abdy zal terugkeeren.
#II#225 1272-02-17 v.d. Bergh II, Testament van Arnoldus plebuan van Haarlem ten behoeve o. a. der abdij Leeuwenhorst, presens scriptum sigillo domini Theoderici militis domini de Teilinga
#II#226 1272-02-17 v.d. Bergh II, Isti collationi interfuerunt dominus Theodericus de Theylinghe [...] Wilhelmus de Teylinghe
#II#240 1272-09-25 v.d. Bergh II, Diederik van Teilingen belooft alle hulp aan vrouwe Aleid van Henegouwen.
#II#246 1273-01-29 v.d. Bergh II, Graaf Floris V en Diederik van Teylingen doen uitspraak dat Hugo Koenraadszoon geen regt heeft op de kerkgift van Monster.
#II#289 1275-03-26 v.d. Bergh II, Testes hujus facti sunt ... dominus Theodoricus de Teilingen ... dominus Wilhelmus de Brederode milites qui presentibus sigilla sua appenderunt
#II#291 1275-04-26 v.d. Bergh II, Diederik heer van Teilingen, ontslaat vrouw Aleidis van Henegouwen van de verbintenis, hem gegeven op het bosch van Haarlem enz.
#II#303 1276-01-05 v.d. Bergh II, Dirk heer van Teilingen verklaart, dat Gheerlant van den Rijn eenig land te Koudekerk van hem te leen houdt.
#II#322 1276-11-20 v.d. Bergh II, 'Diederik heer van Teilingen bekent aan Floris van Henegouwen opgedragen en weder te leen ontvangen te hebben zijne woning te Warmond, met bekrachtiging door Floris van Henegouwen.
#II#323 1276-11-20 v.d. Bergh II, Diederik heer van Teilingen belooft trouw en hulp aan Floris van Henegouwen.
#II#407 1280-09-24 v.d. Bergh II, Graaf Floris V bevestigt den verkoop van het ambacht van Alblas, door Dirk van Teilingen aan Nicolaas van Subburgh gedaan.
#II#416 1281-03-20 v.d. Bergh II, Graaf Floris V verklaart aan Dirk heer van Teylingen verkocht te hebben het ambacht van Waddinxveen en Polien etc. met uitzondering van het hooge geregt.
#II#449 1282-04-13 v.d. Bergh II, dat van den prior, in bruine was, zeer beschadigd, even als het ridderzegel van Dirk van Teylingen in witten was.
#II#616 1287-08-12 v.d. Bergh II, Dirk heer Symonszoon van Teilingen verklaart dat de kinderen des heeren van Teilingen afstand gedaan hadden van zekere aanspraken huns vaders. 
#II#71 1287-08-12 v.d. Bergh II, Gerrit van de Wateringe, ridder, doet afstand van alle aanspraak op het land van Johan Leder, hem aangekomen van zijnen zwager, den heer van Teilingen.
#II#802 1292-02-06 v.d. Bergh II, Dirk heer Symonszoon van Teilingen blijft borg voor zijnen neef heer Dirk van Brederode.
#II#803 1292-02-06 v.d. Bergh II, Gelijke borgtogt van Jan van Teylingen.
#II#873 1294-03 v.d. Bergh II, Dieric Willems zoen hevet opgheghe ven Dieric heren Symons zoen van Teylinghe vijf morghen lands daer siins selves husinge op staen, die legghen tuisken Jan van Teylingen an die een side ende siins selves lant an die ander zide
#II#887 1294-06-25 v.d. Bergh II, Gijsbrecht heer van Aemstel belooft Jan van Teilingen schadeloos te houden wegens de som van 1000, waarvoor deze zich borg gesteld had jegens heer Lambrecht de Vriese.
#II1016 1297-10-12 v.d. Bergh II, Jan van Teylingen

Missed quite a few

Assuming that everything from 1205 to 1244 I missed and is about Willem or Dirk/Theoderic would just be W#202 or his brother. No need for additional people. Some notes.

• 1235 (#353) is interesting for my own familyhistory.
• 1245 (#413) would be the same as D#564, the son of W#202, same goes for every Dirk up to 1283.
• 1247 (#437) cannot be W#202, because he died 1244. W#202 had a son Willem, that did not succeed him (but maybe that Willem succeeded his brother Dirk).
• 1251 (#537), Dirk van Brederode would be Dirk Drossaert, Dirk van Teylingen would be son of W#202.

Still, there should be more source material from 1251 to at least 1284, with rapid successions (there is, v.d. Bergh II).

Even more Oorkonden, van den Bergh/De Fremery, 1873 edition

Even more source material, the 1873 edition (aka v.d. Bergh II) has many additions and annotations, I'll refer as frem#5. In 1282 Dirk, son of W#202 died, was succeeded by his son Willem, who died a few weeks later, in 1283. Because he had no son, the lenen returned to the count.

De Fremery Nal no 3; Bijdr Hist Gen jg 1901 p 264, 265/Reg EL 5 fol 88v, 89 lijst van lenen van Teylingen 1283:

• frem#5 Didderic heer Symonsz de tiende van Rijswikerbroec, zoals zijn vader hield;
• frem#9 Wilhelmus filius Theoderici tertiam partem decimae te Hemestede ex parte domini de Thelinghe;
• frem#42 Florentius frater domini [Wilhelmi] de Telynghe 40 sc de precaria hyemali apud Voerhout;
• frem#45 Janne zoon van de heer van Teylingen, hield van hem in leen (nu van de graaf): - ½ tiende van Warmond, behalve des papendele, - 27 (72 ?) £ per jaar uit de visserij van Warmond, - de tiende van Coudekerke, die de vrouwe van Thelinghe kocht van Ever van Lisse, - 5 hoet rogge uit de tiende van Hadewartswoude, - het land te Boschuysen, waar de steenoven op staat, 12£ per jaar [in de Boschuizerpolder onder Zoeterwoude], - de tijns te Warmond

According to NL26, in 1283 Dirk, son of W#202 dies, and his son Willem who succeeds, dies weeks after.

Need to do some drawing first: Birth* and death+ are wild guesses, # are first "vermelding", reference.

       Willem (#149) *1150-+1205
                    |
        Willem (#202) *1175-+1244
      /         /       \         \
Dirk (#562)   Symon     Florens   Willem
*1200-1282   *?-+c1280             *?-+1284
    |              \
Willem (-+1283)     \
                   Dirc
                (*?-+>1305)
                    |
                  Willem

According to NL26 (III B) Symon's son Dirc (III B 1) posseses Teylingen. Had to read several times, but the children of Symon (II 2), son of W#202, are III B 1-4, Dirc, Symon, Willem and Ada

• frem#5 is about our Dirc at the bottom.
• frem#9 tells us that Dirc had a son Willem in 1283.
• frem#42 if also 1283, dominus Willem can only be the son of Dirk that only ruled a few weeks. He did have a brother Florentius (II 3 in NL26).
• frem#45 Jan would be (III A 2) in NL26, brother of the Willem that only ruled a few weeks.

BI mentions a Sophia Dircsdr van Teilingen that marries Willem van Naaldwijk. His grandfather was Willem Boudijnsz, that would have been the son of (8). Born around 1280, his sons around 1310, grandson 1340, and Sophia ca. 1335, putting Dirc around 1300. Could have been Dirc Symonsz. Wikipedia states she is his niece. Most likely her mother was a Van Naaldwijk then.

Groesbeek collectie

J.W. Groesbeek created a cardsystem from the notes he took when studying documents. He used the same source material, but his notes are valuable as well.

• 18-9-993, Arnulfus comes peremptus est in bello, sepultus in Egmundensi monasterio; anderen genoemd: zijn vrouw Lutgardis, filia regis Grecorum, Hugo Arnulfi, en Lutgairda dochter van Theodericus et Syfridus Sicco, zijn vrouw Thetburga (after #27 and before #28) [1]
• 1030<, Sifridus, cognomento Sicco, frater comitis Theoderici IV, dedit sancto Adalberto pro anime sue remedio terram super Gheest, nominatam Northorpe, Smithe, Adgeringelant, Hildebrandislant, Siccurdingeland, 5 fiertelen Lantlosamade, in Ekerslato 12 libras, in Banez [onder Assendelft] 2 libras; door graaf Dirk V op 1083-07-26 bevestigd. Goederenlijst abdij Egmond 1083-1105~: de Gheest in Northorpe 8£ 2 sol; Smithen 17£; Gestichin 10 uncias; Athelhilt 10 uncias; Brocchingelant 7 uncias; Adgeringelant 2£; Magchanchelant 8 uncias; Tiegerdesmade 3 uncias; in Quinque fiertelen 2£ 6 uncias; in Lantlosmade 3£ 6 uncias
• 5-6-1030, Sifridus Sicco preses, filius Arnulfi et Lutgarde comitisse stierf 5 juni is in het Egmondse klooster begraven, met conjuge Thetburga (after #28 and before #30)
• #124 7-10-1143, wijding van de kerk te Egmond, aanwezig viris clarissimis o.a. Gerhardus de Teilinc
• #143 28-8-1162, graaf Floris III geeft aan Egmond de kerk te Vlaardingen terug, onder de laici: Hugo de Teylingen
• 1167 annales Egmundenses: slag bij Schoorl, ex his nobiles et probi milites corruerunt: o.a. Gerardis dapifer [van Teylingen ?]
• #149 3-10-1174, getuige voor graaf Floris II: o.a. Wilehums de Theylingen
• #177 1198, graaf Dirk VII schenkt land te Poeldijk aan zijn kapel in de St Mariakerk te Utrecht, acta sunt hec apud Lis[se], onder de getuigen: Wilhelmus de Teillinga, Arnoldus dapifer meus, Henricus, frater ejus

A blank of 113 years between 1030 and 1143. 1167 Gerard dapifer, that is after Hugo 1162. BI had a Gerard and a Gerrit, could be two different people.

There is a lot more, also after 1252. Symon is mentioned in 1269. Dirk died before 18-11-1281.

De Navorscher 1904

by Hans Toll, I'll refer as NV04. Part 1 p434-450. Part 2 p473-533

• I. Sicco in 1083, brother of Dirk III
• II. His son Simon, no contemporary source
• III. Gerrit 1143 (#124)
• IV. Hugo 1162 (#143)
• V. Willem 1174 (#149). Father of Dirk and Willem
• VI. Willem found from 1198 to 1235 (#353). "Must have" died before 1236. A Willem 2.5 then?
• VII. Willem found 1236-1247. Not sure why Willem after 1235 (#361, #380, #382, #397) is a different person than before. Lives after 1244, assumed dead because of #413 (but Willem lives 1247, #437). "Must have" died before 1257 (II#26) because Dirc is lord.
• VIII. Dirc, found 3-2-1251. Seems to contradict the previous 1257. Mentioned as ridder first 21-9-1258 (II#47) and last 13-4-1282. Two sons, Willem (IX) and Jan (X), but no Florentius. Willem, found 17-2-1272, 20-11-1276 and 3-5-1283 (not in my list).
• XI. Simon son of Willem (VII), brother of Dirk.
• XII. Dirk son of Simon. Often confused with VIII.

Now the interesting bit (p 436).

• XIII. Simon, son of Hugo (IV). Would be a brother of W#149. That's a new one. He died on crusade before Coeverden in 8-1237. No kids mentioned.
• XIV. Floris van Teilingen (de Tolne), son of Willem 1236-1247 (VII). He is the "frater domini".
• XV. Floris I van Toll, ridder, leenman of Holland and Teijlingen (so that would have to be before the death of Willem son of Dirk). Found 1284-1306. x Marcelia van Rijn.
• XVI. Dirk van Brederode "de oude", dapifer, brother of Willem (1213, 1215), ridder (1224). Sometimes confused with a Dirk Drossaet "de jonge". They are not the same person because: "a) de oude is already ridder in 1224 (#287), de jonge is baljuw, not yet schildknaap, in 1251 (#537), and schildknaap in 1256 (frem#130), b) de oude died before 1252, was never lord of Teijlingen, because during his live it belonged to his father W(V, #149), brother W(VI, #202) and his nephew W(VI, ?). De jonge succeeds W(VI) and was lord.". x Alveradis van Heusden.

Van Brederode follow.

The Willem that has sons Dirc, Simon and Floris, W#202 in my lineage, but here that Willem had another son Willem, and he was the father of the other three. Could be. He would be mentioned in 1274 as Florentius de Tolne (#282), together with Dirk. Then he is identified with 'Florentius frater domini' from frem#42. Brother of the lord. This author dates it 1280. Dirk was lord then, and son of Willem. In 1280 the brother of the lord would be Dirk a son of W#202 (or his son W 2.5). Dirk died 1282, his son Willem died 1283, and because he had no heir, the lordship return to the count.

The article mentions Melis Stoke, who mentioned Sicco, as stamvader van Teijlingen. He is not convised, because the descendants of Sicco could have made claims, and they didn't. There is no mention that Sicco had a son Simon. There is no mention Simon had a father Sicco. Gerrit is the first found in a chater of 1134 (#124) mentioned by Van Leiden. No proof for Van der Lecke. Falsifications at the time of Pontus Heuterus. He mentions that M. Koenen hypothesized that W#149 might have been a bastard son of Willem I van Holland. The author is not convinced. He does mention: "En 1222 une charte de Floris IV : Parmi les témoins : Willem et son père Theodericus van Teilingen. Pourquoi ne les nomme-t-il pas: fratres mei"?" There was a mention in 1222 I haven't been able to put a number on yet, but there they were brothers. What Dirk had an adult son in 1222 then?

By p447 he described Ponterus Heuterus, who gave 3 sons to Hugo (#143): W(#149), Simon (XIII) and Floris van Teijlingen genaamd Van Toll. That's the same as in BI, and in Russisch Alg. Wapenboek according to Groesbeek. BI and the author both point to Gouthoven, who apparently messed things up, and then Hugo de Sluter, gatekeeper?, of Teilingen enters again, as Groesbeek mentioned, but over 100 years later. Not the same Hugo, and probably not the same Floris. A mistake made by a Van Leeuwen in BI p740? BI followed Heuterus, but made mistakes itself aswell about Hugo and Floris. With Procurator, Ada Simonsdr called Floris her uncle, but that Ada was not a sister of the older Simon so Floris had been as brother to the younger Simon. Dirk Willemsz was their brother. Frater domini. Just like Jan was son of the same lord, Dirk Willemsz.

Part 2

Hans Toll references

• M.M. Craandijk, "Wat leert ons Van den Berghs Oorkondenboek van Holland en Zeeland omtrent de Teilingens in de 13de eeuw?", (Fruin : Bijdragen. Derde reeks, tiende deel, pag. b. 61-77.)
• Fruin, "De jongere tak der Van Teylingens" (ibid. 1899, pag. 78-99)
• Muller Hzn, "Het oude Register van Graaf Florens" (Bijdragen van het Historisch Genootschap, Amsterdam 1901, XXII, pag. 90-357)

He praises Procurator, and says he revealed that the Willem that was 'parent' (cognatus) to Ada in 1203, was named Teijlingen. I'd say he was a relative, surely not her father.

On p477

Je place la mort du dernier nommé a l'année 1311, date, qu'avec confusion de personnes, Gouthoven et d'autres inscrivent pour un autre Dirc van Teilingen et qu'ils n'ont pas pu indiquer sans motif. Qu'on ne s'étonne pas que „l'erfzoen" pour sa mort ne fut payé qu'en 1326 et 1329 ! Ou voit de l'assassinat de Wolfert van Borselen ^* et de la vengeance, faite a Vere, qu'il était possible de faire ce payement après un délai beaucoup plus long. Après ce qui a été dit, on sera naturellement libre de juger s'il faut référer a Dirc, fils de Simon van Teilingen ^** les chartes suivantes : en 1330 comme tuteur des enfants de Langerak ; en 1333 l'installation d'un „bewaardrechter" dans l'ambacht de ce nom de la part de Dirc van Teilingen. Enfin on a le loisir de choisir entre eux et Dirc heer Simonsz. van Teilingen, quand it est question d'une copie faite par Margriete de Haghenstein ^*** pour : „Dierike, onzen neve" 2).

Nous arrivons maintenant a la branche ainée de Teilingen. Je rencontre dans les registres de M. Muller deux fils naturels de Willem Dirkz,van Teilingen,a savoir 1) Willem de Gouwe ^****. Ce nom ne m'a pas été inconnu, mais je n'y avais pas fait beaucoup d'attention, comme le siècle qui a été désigné 3) ne parait pas avoir été exact. Ii a eu une fille qu'on rencontre dans une charte de 1336: Machteld Willem des Gouwersdr. 2) Hugo de Gouwer van Coudekerk *****. Ce n'est pas fondé. Celui-ci est issu de la famille van Voorn et a eu entre autres une fille, Justine {marriage with Jan Aelman (3rd, cause he remarried?)}, mariée en secondes noces a Dirk van Cuyck ******, burgrave de Leide. 4 ) J'espère être en état d' en parler plus en detail à une autre place.

1. ^* "werd hij in augustus 1299 gelyncht in Delft"
2. ^** Simon had a brother and a grandson Dirk, maybe also a son
3. ^*** Castle H belonged to Uten Goye, and Ghiselbert (7) had a daughter Margriet (8a), that married Jacob van Lichtenberg (3). Her brother Wouter was lord of Langerak, unclear how she would have related to vT
4. ^**** footnote 1 in NL14, unclear what Willem vT. The WSvT involved in the conspiracy against F5vH might have had children. He survived. Fruin explicitly calls him a bastard son of WDW, the main branch. Adult in 1306, alive in 1321
5. ^***** son of Jan van Renesse according to some. "Jan III was rond 1280 getrouwd met de erfdochter Sophie van der Goude († 1299). Ze hadden een dochter, Margriet"
6. ^****** possibly 7b, son of Hendrik, no offspring says JO, @geni a bastard son Simon

Pardon my French.

DSvT died 1311, given that Gouthoven and other authors put the date on another Dirk, but do not give a reason. The erfzoen (son, or compensation) wasn't paid till 1326-9, he wouldn't have been able to make the payment because of the murder of WvB, and the vengenance (reconsiliation/compensation?) in Vere, he wasn't able to make the payment until after a very long delay. That said, one is of course free to decide for oneself, if Dirc is a reference to the son of SvT: in 1330, in 1333. In the end one awaits the task to decide between those and DSvT, concerning a copy made by MvH, calling him "our cousin" (or nephew). We now arrive at the elder branch of vT. I find in the registers of M. Muller 2 natural sons of WDvT: 1)WdG. The name wasn't unknown to me, but I never paid much attention to it, because the century he was put in did not seem to have been exact (it wasn't clear when he lived, so hard to put him context/place?). He had a daughter Machteld the one encounters in a charter of 1336. 2) HdGvC. That is unfounded. He comes from the Van Voorne family and had a.o. a daughter Justine, that married secondly to DvC, viscount of Leiden. I hope to be able to speak in more detail of this elsewhere.

Sicco legend

Dirk Paulszoon wrote about the Sicco-leggend. Johannes a Leydis might have expanded on it. These transcripts, altough they maybe forgeries, confirm more Teijlingers:

Syfridus Sicco x Thetburga lived in 993 and must have been adults. The Sifridus also called Sicco of 1030 is likely the same person, an old man by then (at least 55 if at least 18 in 993), he died june 5 of that year. He is brother of count Theoderic IV. Then #124 and #143 follow.

That could be Dirk IV, graaf van Egmond, altough he only became count in 1039. It is said his father was on pilgrimage that year, it possible his son took care of thing during his absense. His parents were Arnulf x Lutgarde, also mentioned in 993.

That doesn't work though. The only way for Sifridus to be son of Arnulf, brother to Dirk IV, son of Dirk III, would be if Lutgarde married both fathers.

Dirk III though, was son of Arnulf van Gent en Lutgardis van Luxemburg. Dirk III was count in 1030. And he had a son Siegfried van Holland (985 - 1030), die huwde met Thetburga (985 -). Bingo. Someone missed a Dirk then somewhere, because in 1030 they counted 4.

If Willem I descended of this Siegried that would also explain the coat of arms, the same as the graven van Holland, but with a barensteel (John Ooms), indicating a younger branch. At the time of Willem I the house of Holland descents from the older brother Dirk III. More on then Sicconiden-legend with Thetburga. According to that legend, Siegfried and Thetburga had sons Dirk and Simon, Dirk being Dirk Drossaert, and Simon would be first lord of Teylingen. But that was disproved because Dirk Drossaert is first mentioned in 1205 (#202 together with Willem van Teijlingen). Just because it is a different Dirk? No, he was not the father of Dirk Drossaert.

If Siegfried was born in 985 (only 8 when he was first mentioned), his children yould be born... around 1005, succeeding their father in 1030. According to Medieval Lands (2.1.a.ii), only a son Baldric was recorded, but by the age of his burial he must have been of 1 or 2 generations earlier.

Could be Gerard #124, lord of Teylingen in 1043. Maybe also Dirk and Simon. Gerard begat Hugo, who begat Willem, who begat Dirk (Drossaert) and Willem, the latter begat Dirk, Willem, Simon, and Floris, to emphasis his Van Holland descent. On GO Dietz, without naming sources, makes him have a son Simon, Gerard, and Gerrit, apparently following BI.

Historia dominorum de Teysterband, Arckel, Egmonda, Brederoede, Ysselsteyn etc., W.F. Andriessen, 1933

This thesis describes several old manusscripts aboud noble houses and there differences and similarities. Teijlingen starts at 106, in Latin.

Europäische Stammtafeln

On Graafschap Middeleeuwen I found Margaretha, daughter of Willem van Teylingen en Geertrud, married Giselbert uten Goye. She died 1333. That would be the Willem, son of Dirk, son of W#202. See also Geertruid van Woerden. It gives as source "ES-VIII_1980, D. Schwennicke", and those are the Europäische Stammtafeln. No results in Klosterman. The are not free to read, but I found some clips.

• 28: Zwischen Maas und Rhein, 4, 5 matches, one about Uten Goye, one about Duvenvoorde.
• Die deutschen Staaten, 1 match about the Earl of Grantham
• Zwischen Maas und Rhein, 3 matches, 1 the index, the others about Borssele, likely Katharina then, and the other about Burggraven (Viscount) of something
• 28: Zwischen Maas und Rhein, 4, 5 matches, mentions Wassenaer.

Sometime some text can be made out from the search results, but hard to put it in context: "N van Teylingen Maria uten GOYE", " Eleonora v Teylingen", "Bergerota v Teylingen". That volume 28 might be very interesting is confirmed by the index.

Scenario's

Around 1200 Teylingen and the area around switched hands several times, the land being owned by church, than the lords, back and forth. It was the time where the graven van Holland established themselves, who centuries before that were just a side branch of the graven van Friesland according to Winsemius. So Teylingen might have switched hands several times. From at least 1198 Van Teylingen was very close to Van Holland. According to their coat of arms, seal, they were a younger branch (wapen of Van Holland with a barensteel, see John Ooms). Van Teylingen is usally among the first mentioned as a witness, right after the family. It is unclear how they got their lands, NL26 points out that is why in earlier times an earlier dynastie was invented, that could explain how they descended from Van Holland and/or how the got in possion of their lands.

What we do know is the Loonse Oorlog that started in 1203. Count Dirk VII van Holland died without male heirs, and only his daughter Ada remained. She could not inherit-and-pass-on the countship, as she could the property (zwaardleen vs. spilleleen). Dirk's brother Willem would inherit it, but Dirk's wife Aleid quickly arranged a marriage of Ada with Louis II van Loon. Willem, most likely W#149, sided with Dirk's brother. The conflict ended in 1206, spoils were divided, the brother got Zeeland, and Holland went to Van Loon. De facto, Willem ruled Holland though, and later Louis gave up his claims in return for his wife Ada. How W#149 got through all that we don't know. It seems his sons take the stage not long after that.

That is why NL26 starts with N.N.: "we don't know". We don't. So it wise. BI does go before. Jan van Leiden was not (entirely) proven wrong by then.

Before Willem I

BI has Hugo before Gerard, and some of Van Leiden's list, that are at the least doubtfull. NL26 states #124, #143, #149 could be fakes. NL26 explains that some 19th century authors "invented/needed" a "dynasty of regents" to make Teylingen/Brederode descent from Van Holland. That would make them "lords of", but not family/ancestry.

I choose to go with Oorkonden, assuming there were no fakes, assuming Teylingen was a familiy thing from 1143 on. No proof. Just a hunch. If Gerard and Hugo were grandpa and pa of Willem... Gerard prepared the stage, Hugo helped Van Holland to get in the saddle, Willem and Dirk got everything going for them when they enter the stage. Finish what dad started and take it home! Sounds glorious, and it was, wasn't it?

Ben de Keijzer

In Stamreeks van der Duyn (Verduyn), Keijzer, B. de, some interesting points are made.

• The coat-of-arm/heraldry (CoA) of #149 is the same as that of the counts of Holland, but with a barensteel, indicating 'younger brother'. Like John Ooms.
• Van Voorne uses a similar CoA too, but without barensteel, so their descent must be older, preheraldic age.
• Thus, Theylingen split from Holland after Van Voorne did, but before Dirk VI.
• Because of the positions of the lands of vV and vT, and the order in, and period over which, those lands were gained (diked, and made dry), the timeframe during which a 'younger son' would have established house vT would be 1080-1157
• Naming: there was no Willem in vH (yet, W1vH was named after an ancestor of Ada van Schotland), so it would have come from mother's side
• If WvT came from vH, then he would have married the erfdaughter vT

It leads to the hypotheses that:

• WvT was a son of Floris de Zwarte, who married a daughter of possibly Willem van Isla-et-Lake, after whom #149 was named.
• WvT married a daughter of GvT #124, who was a sister of Hugo #143, thus becoming vT. She would have been mother of G v Heemskerk and died young, maybe in childbirth.

I like the argumentation, and it seems to me a better explanantions of WvT CoA than the Sicco-legend. It also fits all mentions of vT in Oorkonden. Let's plot it:

	   F2 vH (-1122) x G/P vS				W v Lekke (->1122)
	/			\				/
D6 vH (1114-1157) x SvR		F de Zwarte (?-1133) x N.N. Willemsdr van Lekke		GvT #124
     /		       \		 		|			 /		\
D Pelgrim vH		F3 vH x Ada v Scotland		W vT #149 x N.N. Gerardsdr vT		HvT #143
 (1138-1151)		/	\
 |			D7 vH	W1 vH	
N vV (1160-)  		|
 |		  	Ada vH x van Loon
F vV (-1203)
 |
H? vV (1035-1108)

Van Voorne seems obscure:

Well, JO has H3 marry Hadewich vH, bastard daughter of F2 vH. But then he names possible ancestors of H1 vV as FvV, who died 1203, grandson of Dirk Pelgrim, son of D6 vH. BI also has Pelgrim, then Floris, son not grandson, and then Hugo, @BI that Hugo dies 1245, and @JO that Hugo (1) died 1108. The Hugo son of (4b) Dirk comes closest looking at years, but he did not descend from Pelgrim, but was instead grandson of F2 by bastard daughter Hadewich. Not sure where and how to fit those early H?vV then...

Either way, a Van Voorne was a grandchild of F2 vH, and that agrees (barely) with an 'earlier split'.

But what about the heraldry? So WvT had a barensteel, because his father was not count, because his older brother D6 was? But did D6, and/or his father F2 have the CoA, without barensteel then? I do not know my sources on that one.

But... Ada, wife of F3 would have had the Scottish royal CoA... The same CoA as her husband? Can't be a coïncidence. Where did she get if from? Apparently from brother Malcolm IV, son of Henry, son of David I, son of Malcolm III.

"Its use in Scotland originated during the reign of Malcolm III (1058–1093), The Lion rampant motif is used as a badge by those Irish clans that have lineage in common with Malcolm III"

So the CoA had been in use for a while, but in Scotland, and it looks like F3 adopted it at or after his marriage in 1162, not combining it with any of his own, if he had those. Seems not, because we do not know of any, do we? That does not fit 'strict heraldic rules'. That means that Dirk Pelgrim, D6, FdZ never could have had any heraldry based on that of the counts vH. It seems that it was WvT then, that decided to take on a CoA too, the prestigious one of his cousin the count, using a barensteel because his father was the younger brother of the counts? That does not seem to fit strict rules, but at least some rules. They were related, and he used a barensteel. Possible he did not do so until Loon War, to show his loyalty to the house vH, as apposed to Van Loon.

And Van Voorne? A Rampant Lion too, reverse colors. Maybe H3vV married to Hadewich adopted it? Because his wife was an aunt of Ada's husband? He died only 6 years after the marriage of F3xAda. Maybe it was his son H4, and maybe the same occasion as WvT, the Loon War? Or was it Floris vV, grandson of Dirk Pelgrim who adopted it. Did he die in the Loon War (1203)?

So the heraldic argument, and the Van Voorne being 'preheraldic' do not seem very convincing. To me it seems they all adopted their heraldry at roughly the same time, and not bound by any strict rules. It could reflect their lineage in some way, and it seems to support the hypothesis, that has more going for it than just a CoA. Maybe BdK just says that "before 1100" is when the (vV) familiy "split", and because it split from the branch of oldest sons, it did not use a barensteel when it, or seemingly the entrire and broad familiy, adopted the CoA in one form or anthor over a century later. Hey, it was a royal CoA, they all must have wanted it.

It does seem that the later "strict rules" of the "heraldic period" led to wrong assumptions. It led to stories about vT CoA going back to Troy. It made illustrators use the CoA on older generations too.

Even wikipedia nowadays seemingly assoicates the Scottish CoA with 9th century Gerulf. Besides strict heraldic rules, he also postulates strict naming rules, at least for the vH family, and points to Cordfunke.

How many Willems?

If I try to put it al together, trying to "invent" as little people as possible (how many Willems in 1174-1241? Could have been, must have been there?)... ...it get about the same tree as the one in NL26. Talking about I, II and III gets confusing quickly. I need a different nomenclature to distinguish between Willems, lets use the numbers of the Oorkonden they first appeared in. So we start with W#149. He is N.N. in NL26.

The Willem (#149) of 1198, was most likely born before 1180, around 1170 even, possible even 1160, to become first noble mentioned in 1198? Stuff must have happened to get him where he was in 1198. Having established his position, he might have had two adult sons already who he brings into play. If that was the case, and those sons were around 20 in 1205, born in 1185, their father would have been born not later than 1165... then 1205 would be a good time to have them spread their wings. Father established position with Van Holland, and his sons soar from that. So I'd like to call W#202, the brother, son of W#149. It just happens that's what John Ooms writes too, Dirk was born around 1180, W#202 must have been the oldest son.

The Willem from #182 and #188 could be about either, I'd say W#149 was still the main man, and died or took the back seat somwhere between 1201 and 1205. He would have been in his 40's or 50's, not the youngest anymore.

From 1205-1220 they are several time explicitly named as brothers (#202, #208, #271). Why was that important enough to write down? Because they were from the same, well known, important father? I think 1205-1220 the sons take over center stage.

NL26 attributes to Willem Procurator "„dat de eerste, die te Brederode heer was, een broeder van den heer van Teylingen, Dirk Drossaet heette; zijn echtgenoote was vrouw Alveradis, een dochter van den heer van Heusden.". That is our Dirk #202 #271 and his wife, nothing about his brother or father though.

Of course all could have been the same Willem, W#149 and W#202 could have been the same person. But the Willem brother of Dirc died in 1244, would have been over 64 if born before 1180, over 75 is he ware a made man in 1198 that actually shaved. Old, especially for the time, but possible. That Willem that died in 1244 was son of Willem 1198 would fit better.

According to BI, there was another Willem in between. There might have been, not much is said about him. Ignoring the other sons of Hugo, W#149 would have been the one captured "in den Oorlog tegen den Grave van Loon" and would have been married to "Halewijne van Egmont". Could be the dynasty theory speaking. The "in between" Willem does not really fit anything, he'd only be the father of the brothers Willem and Dirc, but he is not needed for that, his father Willem could be that as well, we don't need another Willem. Sources would help.

In De Navorscher 1904, see below, there is also a third in row, after Hugo and before Dirk. First W#149, then W#202, who is supposed to have died in 1236. The Willem of 1236 would be a different Willem, and he dies "before 1257", because Dirk succeeds then (6-6-1257 he is explicitly called heer), but that Dirk appears in 3-2-1251 already (#537). Another Willem is needed to explain #437, but that could be the Willem son of W#202 that dies in 1284.

Willem 2½

So, Willem gets first mentioned in 1174 (W#149). He would be the same as #177, #182, #183, #188. Born around 1156 according to some. Probably a father around 1170-1180, to W#202 and his brother Dirk. W#202 taking over from his dad from 1205 on.

W#202 had at least 4 sons, Dirk, Symon, Florens and Willem, according to NL26. W#202 must have been old enough to be a father around 1205. Most of his sons (Dirk, Symon, Willem) seem to die around 1280-1285, making them very old if born in 1200-1210. Being children of a marriage around 1220-1230 would fit better. That could fit a marriage with Agnes van Lynden is she were born ca 1203. Other sources state that there is discussion about here death being 1203 or 1230. That would leave room for an 'in between Willem' like in BI. W#202 born around 1175, a son W born around 1205, that could be W2½, and him being the father to the sons that die around 1280-1285. It could be that Willem son of #202 was the one in #437. He doesn't seem to succeed Dirk, because after that we see Dirk again, assuming it is the same one as before.

Post Willem

The death of Willem (W#202) 5-3-1244, according to NL26 "25) Zie de 16e eeuwsche kroniekschrijvers Theodericus Paul i (Bijdr . Vad. Gesch . 4e reeks , VIII, bl . 379) en Joannes a Leydis (bij Matthaeus , Analecta , 2e uitg. I , bl . 616). Hij wordt niet vermeld in het Necr. Egm.;" Wife unknown, sons Dirc, who succeeds him, Symon, Florens en Willem. That would have been the Dirk #564.

Then, according to NL26: (II) Dirc first mentioned 1251 (#562 is 1252, might have missed one), ridder, died 19-11-1282. (III A 1) son Willem (grandson of W#202) succeeds but dies 1-1-1283 x Oda van Wassenaer (frem#9, frem#42), no offspring. Easily to confuse him with his nephew. Unclear who succeeded him, his other son Jan (frem#45) would be logical. Jan lived in 1292, knape, esquier. It seems that Teylingen reverted back to the count, and Jan only succeeded partly. That would fit Catharina van Durbuy receiving it from the count. Also [2] Janne des heren sone van Teylinghen points in that direction, he was not lord, only son of the lord.

(III B) Symon's son Dirc (III B 1, frem#5) posseses Teylingen, according to NL26, possibly just the house/castle itself. That would be Simon, brother of Dirc (also grandson of W#202). Jan had no offspring and died 1304, unclear whether he succeeded. Dirc is alive in 1303. If also lord, than also miles. Jan was miles though, and might have succeeded his brother. Symon, maybe not the same, is alive in 1304. He is probably Symon Willemsz, and still alive in 1320. He has an son Dirk in 1327 A Willem "de Gouwe" Willemsz van Teylingen in 1306.

To many footnotes to mention, many sources have been noted already. It continues in a different issue of NL (search).

By 1223 Gerard pops up, 1230 it is Dirk, possibly the brother, 1241 Willem one last time, probably W#202, who died in 1244 according NL26. That is because the book ends, there were other Willems.

Spouses

Margaretha van der Lippe

On GO Chrstina van Brederode is daughter of a Willem van Teylingen and Margaretha van der Lippe. No sources. Born around 1180 she would be sister to brothers Willem and Dirk, so daughter of W#149.

According to the same author, again no sources, her daughter Agnes van Lynden, who follows, would mary W#202 (who was not born in 1198, his father was mentioned then). So W#202 marries his (maybe half)sisters daughter...

She is in the tree of Johannes a Leydis, married to a Willem that died in 1221, most likely W#149.

Agniese van Bentheim

She is mentioned by John Ooms and others, married to W#149. Unknown source. She appears in 1203 as a witness, possibly representing her husband who might have been away on the 4th crusade. She is mother of Dirk, W#202 and Machteld. That Dirk, probably Drossaard, died in 1236 (9b), (1) ca 1174 volgens (112231329) Source: Gens Nostra 1995 bl,249 according to [3]. Issue not found. According to the ToC on p244 is an article D.F. GOUDRIAAN, De boerenfamilie Poes tussen IJ en Meer 244, and the next would be H. VAN FELIUS, 'Van wege zijne majesteit den koning' 257, no entries found in between. That article is a source on HoGenDa, that also mentions source J.C. Kort, Repertorium op de lenen van de hofstede Teilingen 1258-1650; in: Ons Voorgeslacht, jrg. 40 (1985), blz. 718, that mentions -.-1284: Floris, broer van de heer van Teilingen, zoals van Teilingen, LRK 5 fo. 88v, that would be II#42, Florentius frater domini.

Maria van Castricum

First wife of W#149, mother of Gerard van Heemskerck van Teijlingen. Source: Kw.Statenboek Nr IX bl 36 Prometheus Delft According to this parenteel N.N. Gerardsdr maried W#149 in 1199, she might have died in childbirth, because W#149 remarries in 1200 to Agniese.

Agnes van Lynden

A Willem marries to Agnes Willemsdr. van Lijnden some write, born in 1203 according to some (source?). John Ooms writes about an Agnes, second wive after a marriage to the erfdochter van Gerard of W#149, but she is Van Bentheim and 1203 was the year she died.

If W#149 had sons W&D between 1170-1180 mothers death in 1203 would fit well. Her birth in 1203 would make her way too young for W#149. W#202, around 25 in 1205 in my story, would have married by that time, wanting to produce a male heir to succeed him.

Because she would have been the daughter of W#202's sister, she must be (a lot) younger than W#202. About 28 years in my book. Marriage at 12, in 1215, and motherhood at 15 was normal at the time in those circles would have been 1218. Her marriage wouldn't have produced offspring untill around 1220, fitting what Pieter says.

That W#202 did not become a father until 1220 would not fit, it is likely that W#202 was married already in 1205, maybe even had young son Willem already, that would marry Agnes and make W#202 grandfather for the first time around 1220. It is therefor likely Agnes was a second or third marriage, she was not the mother . According to the GO author, Dirk, Simon and Hadewich where hers, born in 1225, 1228 and 1230. But Dirk succeeded him, so he was probably the oldest surviving son at the time. Florens and Willem would not have been sons of an earlier marriage then. According to GO Agnes outlived W#202, making it unlikely there would have been a later spouse.

Gilles Schotel, Abdij van Rijnsburg, 1866 mentions an Agnes van Lijnden, wife of Willem van Teylingen, becoming a nun and 25-11-1211. I assume W#149 died around the time sons W#202 and Dirk Drossaard appeared. His widow could have entered the convent after that, and could have died in 1211. That can't have been a 8yo widow, so she is either a different person, or was not born in 1203, but that contradict the GO statement.

Halewijne van Egmont

According to BI a Willem was married to Halewijne van Egmont, daughter of kwade Wouter van Egmont.

Halewijne van Egmont was married to Arend van Egmond (2d) aka Van Rijswijck aka Van Teijlingen , son of W#149, brother of W#202. She might be the Hadewig van Teijlingen that is a witness in 1203, possibly representing her husband. He might have been away on the 4th crusade.

Geertruid van Woerden

According to BI a Willem was married to Geertruyd van Woerden, daughter of Herman. She is likely the same as the Gheertrudis from NL26.

The Willem that married Geertruyd must be the one that died in 1283, and was possibly a son or a grandson of W#202. If the son was married to Agnes van Lijnden and did not marry twice, the grandson would be more likely, and in accordance with NL26. The wikipage about Kwade Wouter references Jan van Leiden, whom according to NL26 should not be trusted. There have been several Herman van Woerden, if the Willem that married her was the son of the Willem that got children around 1220, she could have been a daughter of Herman V.

She is mentioned by Thomas Salmon in Hedendaagsche historie ... der Vereenigde Nederlanden, 1749. He seems to have written numerous books about numerous countries. This is what his story tells:

   Herman (V?) van Woerden
          \
      Geertruid van Woerden x Willem van Teilingen
                               |
            Katharina van Teilingen x Aalbert van Voorne
               x Floris V (van Holland?)               \
      /        x Willem van Brederode               Gerard van Voorne
Dirk        x Wolfaart van Borsselen

On Groesbeek I found Katharina van Teijlingen running Voorne around 1327 (source?).

Wikipedia confirms a "possible Dirk" This Albrecht, son of Hendrik, only a marriage to Aleyd van Loon

Salmon also calls her Van Durbuy, and she was Vrouwe van Teilingen, but not daughter of Willem x Geertruid. Her husband links to the first Albrecht, where she is not mentioned.

She must have been his second wive. The Huygens Institute mentions "Na de dood van Albert van Voorne schonk Floris V (1254-1296) aan Catharina de heerlijkheid Teylingen, onder de voorwaarde dat zij deze zou teruggeven indien zij opnieuw trouwde."

So Teylingen a heerlijkheid (an independant lordship), and a gift from Floris. Probably somewhere after Dirk Symonsz the lordship had fallen to the count. But not a daughter of Willem then.

No mention of the marriage with this Willem, no mention of the marriage with this Willem.

Wolfaart married her in 1297. Lover of Floris V. His daughter Heilwig married Katherine's son Gerard van Voorne.

Wikipedia contradicts Geertruid being her mother, that does not rule out Geertruid was married to a Willem.

Floris van Teijlingen van Tol

Let's look at primary sources first.

• #282 1274 graaf Floris V bevestigt de abdij Leeuwenhorst in haar bezit, presentibus: Theodericus de Thelingen, Clara de Nordeke cum omni familia sua, Florentio de Tolne, Baldwino de Nordeke, Th. De Waremonde; sigilladomini Th. De Theilinge predicti , Symon de Harlem, W. de Brederoede, Johannes Persyn, Arnold de Hemskerke
• #228 11-1282 no 4) leen van heer Florens van der Tolle: al die scouwinghe van Tedingherbroeke tot 10 sc, en in heer Ghisebrechts land 17£ waardland [buitendijks]; no 120) Jacob en Arnoud, de twee stiefzoons van heer Florens van der Tolne, houden in leen 4 morgen en een huis daarop {Voorburg ?}
• #228 11-1282 no 174) Hughe de Sluter van Telinghen, in Voorhoute, 12 sc gelds aen manscap {stamvader familie van Toll}
• frem#46 1283 heer Florens van der Tolne 2½ hoet haver uit de tiende van Rijswijc, nu leen van Holland

There seems to be agreement on Floris being the stamvader of Van Tol. But which one is that Floris?

BI tells us that Floris van Teijlingen was son of Hugo, younger brother to W#149. It mentions Gouthoven called him Hugo by mistake. Groesbeek refers to a Russich Alg. Wapenboek I haven't been able to find, that Van Toll springs from Hugo van Teylingen. According to #174 above, it would be a different Hugo than #143, who lived in 1162. Hughe de Sluter van Teilingen lived 120 years later. It is just a note from Groesbeek that appoints him stamvader, but BI does not have anything more going for it. Let's draw again:

                       Hugo (#143) *?-+>1162
                       /                   \
       Willem (#149) *1150-+1205            Floris?
                       |                    (BI)
              Willem (#202) *1175-+1244
         /             |       \         \
   Dirk (#437,#562)  Symon     Florens   Willem
      *1200-1282    *?-+c1280            *?-+1284
    /     |       \         \       ?\? 
Willem   Florentius Jan      \        Hughe de Sluter (#228)  
(-+1283) (frem#42) (frem#45)  Dirc           \
                           (*?-+>1305)      Floris? de Tolne?
                                |           (#228, #282, frem#6)
                              Willem

Shall I name them Floris, Florens, Florentius and FdT? That last one is our ancestor for sure, unsure whether he is son of Hughe de Sluter, only a note of Groesbeek. Also hard to say if it is the father Floris van Teijlingen, or the son Floris van Tol.

Father or son

Floris (van Teijlingen van Tol) married N.N. van Poelgeest, and was the first lord/owner of Huis van Tol [4]. He lived around 1250. No sources. If he became Van Tol, he was born Teijlingen and that could explain the double name.

With his wife Van Poelgeest Floris van Teijlingen had Floris I van Tol, who married Marcelia van Rhyn, who begat Gerrit Ramp van Tol and Floris II van Tol x Odilia van Lewen, who begat Floris III van Tol, according to BI. Ons Voorgeslacht 1989 mentions in Oudshoorn: "308. Het goed in het ambacht Oudshoorn, (1405: zijnde 91/2 morgen met tiende, waarvan oude Floris van Tol met nr. 309 de andere helft houdt)." In 1405... if the first Floris lived 1250, Floris I would live 1280, Floris II 1310, Floris III 1340, that would be around Floris V. Haven't looked that far yet.

A slightly different story tells us that the son Floris I van Tol moved into the house that was built by his father-in-law: Geehrlant van Rhijn bouwde hier ongeveer in 1276 een kasteel. Zijn dochter Marcelia huwde met Floris van Tool. Tot 1471 blijft het goed in handen van de familie van Toll, waarna het overgaat aan Jacob Coppier. Deze werd opgevolgd door zijn zoon Hendrick. Deze overlijdt na een val van zijn paard in 1532. They would live there untill the generation that could have seen a Floris VII.

That would mean the Floris that lived in 1250 and married Van Poelgeest did not become "Van Tol", but his son did. If the castle was build in 1276 Floris must have moved in aftwards. He must have lived there by 1282/1283 because he was named Van Tolne in the sources. That makes it higly unlikely #228, #282, frem#6 refer to the father, he would not have been named Van Tolne yet. It is still possible the Floris that became Van Tolne in 1283 already lived in 1250. But he would not have owned Van Tolne, his son would have, through his wife. Maybe the son was born ca 1225, married in 1250, his father-in-law started built in 1276 and died soon after, and he moved in around 55 yo.

Floris brother of W#149

If W#149 was born around 1155, his brother must have been very old to be alive in 1250, even he were a lot younger than his brother. It seems more likely that de Floris that lived in 1250 was either the same Floris as the one in #228, #282, frem#6, or even more likely, his father. Johannes A Leydis mentions a Floris that died 1198, haven't seen him mentioned anywhere else. So Floris could be a brother to W#149, as BI states, born around 1160 or even 1170, but it would be unlikely the he would be the same Floris that fl. 1250. I haven't seen him mentioned anywhere either. Floris could be a son of W#149, but he is ficticious for now. W#202's sons Willem and Dirk are assumed to have been born 1170-1180, and W#149 died 1244. Even when born 1180 he would have been 70 when 'living 1250'.

Florens, son of W#202

According to NL26 W#202 had a son Florens that little was known about. He might be born between 1200-1220, and have lived in 1250 and thus be the same that married Van Poelgeest. He is the most likely to be floruit 1250. If his son was born around 1250, this Florens would have been quite old when he moved into the castle. His grandson Floris II would likely have been born already.

Florentius, son of Dirk and grandson of W#202

frem#42: Lord Dirk that died 1282 had a son Willem that died 1283, and sons Florentius and Jan. Dirk might have been born later than 1200, or he would have been very old. His sons could have been born 1230-1240 or even a little later, Dirk dying old, his soon dying young soon after. Florentius would have "lived" in 1250, but most likely not an adult yet. Tight fit. He might have married Van Poelgeest and begat a Floris that was an adult arond 1280 and moved into Van Tolne.

Floris, son of Hughe de Sluter

If Florentius (frem#42) did not sprout Van Toll, Floris and Florens most likely being to old, where would this Hughe fit in? He would be of about the same generation, maybe a son of one of Dirk's +1282 brothers (Symon, Florens or Willem)?

It all hinges on the castle being built in 1276 by the father-in-law, and there is no source. For now I will asume Floris van Teijlingen, floruit 1250 was a son of W#202. That Floris van Teijlingen might have been the first that lived in the house Van Tolne, if that was built in 1276 by Geehrlant van Rhijn, his son would be the first to live there.

Floris Florisz van Tolne

He would have been the son of Floris van Teijlingen, whatever Floris that might have been. He would have been the lord of Van Tolne, maybe after his father. Everything seems to agree he married Geehrlant's daughter Marcelia.

Putting years to some of the Florissen, to Gheerlant or Van Poelgeest, finding more on Hughe de Sluter van Telinghen, all would help substantiate things. Groesbeek adds adds Navorscher jg 1904 p 447 as a reference, and that proves an interesting source. A few pages before that, it is about Van Teijlingen and Van Toll. In French. It refers to a previous article in june, likely also 1904, added to #Other_Sources.

List of loanes

The source is a list of lenen, that De Fremery dates 1283. If that was before the death of Willem, and Willem was lord... then there could have been confusion about 'frater domini', and one would expect his name would have been given. If it was after the death of Willem, there was no lord anymore, and it doesn't make sense. Just a bit earlier, and Dirk would still have been lord, had been for long, no need to specify his name. One the other hand, the death of Willem, and the returning of the lenen to the counts, was most likely the reason to create the list. The list is partly in Latin, partly in old Dutch. Let's translate.

Reading the list, assuming it is a list and all entries belong together cause style and language seems to differ between entries, I get the impression all the "tennants" have been asked to give an account of their loans, and their replies have been compiled into this list. The list does mention Willem as lord, and is dated to be from the year of death of Willem, that caused those loans to return to the count, and that is also what I read between the lines [#7 "a domino de Thelinghen et hoc jus feodale movetur a comite": to the lord of T, by feudal law moves to the count]. On the other hand, the list names Willems' part, so he cannot be dead yet [#9 Wilhelmus filius Theoderici], and he seems to have succeede his father [#17 tenuerunt a Wilhelmo de Thelinghen]. That would make the lord of Teijlingen not Dirk for sure, he had died weeks/months before that, probable his son Willem. Or had he died too, and is that why the list was compiled, and although his heir was no longer leenheer of the count, he would have been living in the castle. So there would still be a lord of the castle, and thus domini might also refer to the one that had inherited the castle. Most likely Jan, and when he died without children around 1304, Simon, or maybe directly Dirk Simonsz. Confusing, because it is unclear what lord of Teijlingen Florentius is a brother of. So Willem #202, Willem II, could be 2 different persons, II and III, like BI. That would help explain that children of W#202 could have been born around 1200-1210, but seem to die around 1280-1285, making them rather old. I'd say if the list is indeed a list, a compilation of smaller parts of similar date (same couple of weeks), that it seems that at the time, Willem Dirksz was dominus. Then Florentius was son of Dirk too. Florens van der Tolne is also in the list, #46, and unlikely the same person as #42. Florens was already de Tolne in 1274, when Dirk was still lord.

Then Dirk, Symon and Florens were his (2.5 or III) sons. He might or might not have had a son Willem (that died 1284, source?). Florentius could have been son of Willem Dirksz as well, because he was lord in 1283. But then he would have succeeded, and the lenen would not have returned to the count. If at the death of Willem in 1283 the castle went to his Willem's brother Jan, he would have been lord (of the castle, not of the lenen). But Jan died without heirs, and there is nothing that points to Florentius being a brother of lord Jan. Maybe the castle went to Dirk's brother Simon after the death of Willem Dirksz, maybe after the death of Jan. Then Simon might have been lord. Then Florentius would be the same person as Florens, brother of Symon (frater domini). Maybe it skipped Simon entirely, and Dirk Simonsz succeeded/inherited from Jan. But it one of those seem likely, because Dirk Simonsz possesed the castle later on (according to NL26). Maybe his broter got the castle next to it, through his father-in-law (#2 in Lijst der lenen van Teylingen, that seems to confirm the different story under Father and son)

His son Floris is first lord of Toll. Or was his father, lenen #2? The father/son thing again. He was, accoriding to Navorscher ridder. Vassal of Holland and Teijlingen (but that had befallen to the count in 1283). Found 1283-1306, married to Marcelia van Rhyn, daughter of Gheerlant, had a son Floris. All agree on that.

It then continues on Brederode.

Foycken

Florens, son (grandson) of W#202 founded House van Tol. Seems to fit, his brother became lord Van Teijlingen. He also might have had a bastard son Foyke, mentiond 1281-1284. There, Huge die Sluter van Telinghen is suggested to be the first Van Tol. Florens Foykinsz (van Teylingen) is alive in 1316. Foykin had brothers Willem en Gherid in 1316. Or were Willem and Gherids sons of Foyken, and thus brothers?

Agree and disagree

A: NL26 gives W#202 a son Willem, that supposedly died 1284 (source?). NV04 and BI agree on him having a son Willem.

D: According to BI and NV04 Dirk is a grandson of W#202 by that son Willem, and not of #202.

A: All agree on Simon and Florens being brothers to Dirk.

D: Most unclear is Florentius frater domini. Was he a brother of Dirk and thus Florens, son of Willem, but not W#202? Of Willem Dirksz.?

If son of Hughe/Hugo, most likely not #143, what brother was dominus then?

After reading NV04, I say Floris is brother of the last leenheer Willem Dirksz van Teijlingen, also Floris van Tollne, so #228, #282, frem#6, frem#42, altough some may also refer to his son. If Dirk was son of W#202 he died old, maybe up to 80. If grandson he might have been 60. Willem Dirksz died young, and was born around 1230 in the first case, arond 1250 in the latter. The first Floris floruit in 1250, so must have at least been adult by then. Might have been a father already in 1250, so the son Floris could have been married to Marcelia already, and a mention around 1283 could refer to either.