provable descents from Byzantine emperors - who earliest?
M.Sjostrom
I have often seen a claim that it is not possible to prove a direct descent from any earlier Byzantine emperor than Konstantinos X Doukas (the 1050s) and Aleksios I Komnenos (reign since 1081 or so)
However, I gather that actually, it seems pretty provable that European royalty descends from emperor Romanos I Lekapenos (reigned until 944; more or less contemporary with emperor Leo VI, and father-in-law of emperor Konstantinos VII)
Romanos I
daughter:
Agathe Lekapenos [according to at least Yahya of Antioch]
grandchildren included:
emperor Romanos III Argyros
Pulkheria Argyra (source: Psellos) - whose maternal granddaughter possibly was that Anastasia who became the mother of Vladimir monomakh, ruler of Kievan Rus
a son whose daughter married:
Konstantinos Diogenes
his son with his Argyra wife:
emperor Romanos IV Diogenes [sources of his Argyros root include Kedrenos and Zonaras]
son:
Konstantinos Diogenes
daughter:
Anna Diogenitissa; married Urosh of Serbia
children, including:
Jelena, queen-consort of Hungary - whose descent after a few centuries includes much of western royals
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00020680&tree=LEO
A reliable descent from the upstart Romanos Lekapenos would mean that a Byzantine emperor as early as in first half of the 900s, is a proven ancestor....
------------------------
some descendants of Romanos Lekapenos
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00220765&tree=LEO
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00280740&tree=LEO
possible:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00165022&tree=LEO
possible:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00027049&tree=LEO
------------------------------
notable combinations:
*
the marriage between Geza II, king of Hungary, and Euphrosyne Monomakhine of Kievan Rus, combined a descent from Anastasia Monomakhine and a descent from Anna Diogenitissa.
http://genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00014173&tree=LEO
some descendants of that marriage:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00020685&tree=LEO
**
the marriage between Urosh the Great, king of Serbia, and Jelena 'of Zeta' POSSIBLY combined at least two descents from Anna Diogenitissa and a descent from Anastasia Monomakhine:
http://genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00165014&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=6
some descendants of that marriage:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00165016&tree=LEO
***
the marriage between Konrad of Poland, duke of Masovia, with Agafia Sviatoslavna of Novgorod, POSSIBLY combined a descent from Anastasia Monomakhine and a descent from Anna Diogenitissa
http://genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00139694&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=6
some descendants of that marriage:
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00030756&tree=LEO
M.Sjostrom
just to mention
Theophano, in her marriage empress of the West,
has no proven ancestry among Byzantine emperors.
The attested thing is that she was 'niece' of emperor Ioannes Tzimiskes, whose reign was in the 960s-970s - i.e, later than that of Romanos I Lekapenos
and, as much as Theophano's own roots are uncertain, the likely thing is however that she was a descendant of Byzantine high aristocracy - but not necessarily a direct descendant of any emperor.
Genealogics shows Theophanu as descendant of Skleros and Phokas aristocratic families
http://genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00080074&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=7
that would seemingly mean that she had several ancestral uncles who had been proclaimed emperors
so, her desdendants have a proven descent from a relatively early Byzantine 'imperial lady',
but not necessarily from any Byzantine emperor
M.Sjostrom
just to mention
Theophano, in her marriage empress of the West,
has no proven ancestry among Byzantine emperors.
The attested thing is that she was 'niece' of emperor Ioannes Tzimiskes, whose reign was in the 960s - i.e, later than that of Romanos I Lekapenos
and, as much as Theophano's own roots are uncertain, the likely thing is however that she was a descendant of Byzantine high aristocracy - but not necessarily a direct descendant of any emperor.
Genealogics shows Theophanu as descendant of Skleros and Phokas aristocratic families
http://genealogics.org/pedigree.php?personID=I00080074&tree=LEO&parentset=0&display=standard&generations=7
so, her desdendants have a proven descent from a relatively early Byzantine 'imperial lady',
wjhonson
> just to mention
>
> Theophano, in her marriage empress of the West,
> has no proven ancestry among Byzantine emperors.
>
> The attested thing is that she was 'niece' of emperor Ioannes Tzimiskes, whose reign was in the 960s - i.e, later than that of Romanos I Lekapenos
>
Leo is presenting details from one or two articles which evidently
state or at least speculate that Theophano Skleraina descends through
her grandmother Gregoria from Leo the Emperor 813-820.
This is not to say that the evidence (if any) is good or firm. I
don't see any clear indication on Leo's site and whether the actual
data was based on onomastic speculation or actual citations to primary
sources. However it's there, for what it's worth.
Will Johnson
taf
That she was a Skleraina at all is just undocumented speculation.
taf
wjhonson
*If* she were a Skleraina and her father were this Konstantinos
Skleros who Leo is showing died 11 Mar 991 (curiously just a few
months before she died), *then* would the remainder of the ascent to
Emperor Leo be evidence-based ?
Will
taf
> *If* she were a Skleraina and her father were this Konstantinos
> Skleros who Leo is showing died 11 Mar 991 (curiously just a few
> months before she died), *then* would the remainder of the ascent to
> Emperor Leo be evidence-based ?
I only have a vague memory of the argument, but I think it is based on
a combination of vague relational statements and onomastic
suppositions - nothing direct or unambiguous.
taf
M.Sjostrom
Will,
the source for emperor Basileios I's grandmother to been a daughter of one Leo, is apparently the tome authored by Konstantinos VII - a much later family member. Writing in 900s.
And even that writer seems not to say it specifically was Emperor Leo V. Just a Leo.
we could expect that a descendant would either embellish his roots or -if it really was emperor- write the fact that it was emperor.
Only the lack of information is a conceivable reason why a descendant would not identify the 'Leo' as emperor Leo V.
and because the closest to-us-preserved writer who knew anything about that root (= Konstantinos VII, a century later), has not identified in with the said emperor,
then there's not much why any later genealogist would be able to make that identification.
Besides, Basileios I was reputed to be of humble origins. Which looks credible. So, an emperor as his great-grandfather is a bit ridiculous vis-a-vis that information.
So, in my opinion, that entire 'Leo V the Armenian' is an incredible root, and I have already yesterday mailed to genealogics a recommendation to cut that particular filiation.
The identification of emperor Leo V with that great-grandfather of Basileios I, is imo a typical example of wishful thinking in genealogy.
-----
Gregoria attestedly descends from a man who is believed to have been brother of Basileios I.
This does not mean that Gregoria descends directly from any reigning emperor.
------------------
since I already wrote that Theophano's own parentage is uncertain (which means i.a that any surname to her is just a proposition), what compelled you to use that 'Skleraina' of her ?
I surely did not use it.
M.Sjostrom
Will,
the source for emperor Basileios I's grandmother to been a daughter of one Leo, is apparently the volume authored by Konstantinos VII - a much later family member.
And even that writer seems not to say it was Emperor Leo V.
we could expect that a descendant would either embellish his roots or -if it really was emperor- write honestly that it was emperor.
Only the lack of information is a conceivable reason why a descendant would not identify the 'Leo' as emperor Leo V.
and because the closest to-us-preserved writer who knew anything about that root (Konstantinos VII, a century later), has not identified in with the said emperor,
then there's not much why any later genealogist would be able to make that identification.
Besides, Basileios I was reputed to be of humble origins. Which looks credible. So, an emperor as great-grandfather is a bit ridiculous vis-a-vis that information.
So, in my opinion, that entire 'Leo V the Armenian' is an incredible root, and I have already yesterday mailed to genealogics a recommendation to cut that particular filiation.
The identification of emperor Leo V with that great-grandfather of Basileios I, is imo a typical example of wishful thinking in genealogy.
-----
Gregoria attestedly descends from a man who is believed to have been brother of Basileios I.
This does not mean that Gregoria descends directly from any reigning emperor.
------------------
since I already wrote that Theophano's own parentage is uncertain (which means i.a that any surname to her is just a proposition), what compelled you to use that 'Skleraina' ?
Leo
*If* she were a Skleraina and her father were this Konstantinos
Skleros who Leo is showing died 11 Mar 991 (curiously just a few
months before she died), *then* would the remainder of the ascent to
Emperor Leo be evidence-based ?
Will
Dear Will,
Sadly I have no longer access to the two articles mentioned.
ES Freytag von Loringhoven - Isenburg Volume I, Tafel 3
Theophano (daughter of Konstantinos Skleros), niece of Emperor Johannes
Tsimiskes
(the brackets mean ES is not totally certain)
ES Schwennicke Volume I,1 Tafel 10
Theophanu is only mentioned as "neptis des basileus ioannes Tsimiskes".
As Schwennicke is so much later (roughly 40 years), I feel that the Skleros
link could be very weak. If only I still had access to those two articles.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
M.Sjostrom
The starting points are:
1) the western emperor would not have accepted a full disappointment. this lady to marriage was a seal in a treaty.
2) this lady was mentioned as niece of emperor Ioannes Tzimiskes, and has to be one such.
Tzimiskes' own family on one hand is very weakly known (meaning there could be a sibling or such who could have produced a niece) and on the other hand, appears to been *small* (meaning that likelihood of a blood niece is quite low).
Byzantine nomenclature allowed for nieces of wedded wives of the guy to be mentioned as his nieces, in spite of blood kinship missing.
Ioannes Tzimiskes married twice. His second wife was sister of the late emperor Romanos II. His first wife had been Maria Skleraina.
Had the bride been issue of any child of the late emperor Konstantinos VII (= niece of Ioannes' second wife), it's likely we would have heard more about it. Descent from a recent emperor tends to get mentioned, and the chronicle-reported (slight) disappointment is not too explained, had the bride been daughter or granbddaughter of an emperor.
Particularly, if she were daughter of Romanos II, that would mean she would practically been a porphyrogenneta, something this lady apparently was not.
So, nieceship via the second wife is unlikely.
The first wife's niece on the other hand, would been a Skleraina.
And that's the likeliest alternative researchers have arrived at.
We have to remember how much the western emperor would have accepted. a daughter of the Skleros couple, would have been descendant of several siblings of earlier emperors. Something still acceptable for highness requirements of the western royalty.
A daughter of a sibling of Tzimiskes' sibling, would been somewhat lower - the only imperial there being this very uncle.
Plus, there was some onomastical support for this Skleros filiation: sophia, a daughter born of the marriage, represents a name which is perfect for the Skleros filiation, because Konstantinos Skleros' wife was a Sophia. (= Sophia Phokaina)
so, I am not eager to cut that filiation - as long as it is understood that it is a reconstruction, plays on likelihood, and in a way represents that Theophano had to be from a highly aristocratic Byzantine family.
wjhonson
>
> since I already wrote that Theophano's own parentage is uncertain (which means i.a that any surname to her is just a proposition), what compelled you to use that 'Skleraina' of her ?
> I surely did not use it.
Thanks for that update.
That I called her a Skleraina was from Leo
http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00080074&tree=LEO
who cites some source for that. But apparently this is speculation,
and I've noted it in my database now as that.
Will
M.Sjostrom
let's see about the situation at the time of the adolescent Theophano's marriage to Germany.
Her marriage took place in springtime 972. She was sent by 'her uncle' emperor Ioannes some months earlier.
emperor Ioannes ascended the throne in December 969.
we do not know of any children of Ioannes.
emperor Ioannes I is reported to been a kinsman of his predecessor emperor Nikephoros II (whose murder Ioannes arranged) - and this means that Ioannes was equally kinsman on Sophia Phokaina, who was a niece of the late emperor Nikephoros.
Sophia's children would have been remote blood relatives of emperor Ioannes. something of the sort of second cousins....
Sophia Phokas' father, Leo Phokas, a former chief minister during the reign of the assassinated emperor, was just in c970 sent to exile, or to be kept in a remote place, plus blinded, under orders of emperor Ioannes. His sons were also exiled.
However, the Skleros family and Bardas Skleros (Konstantinos' brother and Sophia's brother-in-law) were in favor of emperor Ioannes.
This Skleroi branch descended from the late emperor Basileios I's family, through their mother Gregoria.
emperor Ioannes' first wife had been (the probably late) Maria Skleraina, daughter of Gregoria, and sister of Bardas Skleros and Konstantinos Skleros.
There appears no record of any divorce of said Maria. And obviously emperor Ioannes was tightly allied with these Skleroi, also all through his reign. So, Maria was apparently dead - and the emperor Ioannes (who was quite familyless himself...) seemingly held these Skleroi as his closest family.
emperor Ioannes was actually a sort of 'usurper', being co-emperor with two underage boys (Basileios II and konstantinos VIII) who were young sons of the late emperor Romanos II.
Ioannes had married Romanos II's sister Theodora.
The children of Romanos II were born in 959, 961 and 963. it is quite obvious, for several reasons, that Theophano was not one of them.
The need in c971 to have an imperial bride to marry to Germany, came somewhat too early so no daughter of Romanos II would have been old enough.
(actually, attestedly there was only one daughter of his... and that daughter was named Anna and her life is known.)
-----
one of points is that apprently, there were not much to choose from among 'eligible' families..... in the year 972.
The process of elimination is somewhat helpful when the parentage of Theophano tries be identified