Alfonso VI, Zaida, Elizabeth, etc. [part 1]
Reedpcgen
partly from Bernard F. Reilly's The Kingdom of Leon-Castilla under King Alfonso
VI, 1065-1109 (Princeton, 1988). The children and wives of Alfonso are fairly
well evidenced from original charters and documents. I'll try to summarize
what I think is important to this case.
It is important to realize that much of what we now think of as Spain and
Portugal had been under the rule of Arabs for centuries. They ruled over all
but the northernmost quarter of the Iberian peninsula in the eleventh century.
By the time of Alfonso, central power had been broken, and there were a number
of petty Arab kingdoms that had been set up. The Abbadids of Seville became
the most successful of these kingdoms, absorbing much of the others. But they
summoned the Almoravids (Berbers) from Africa to help in the struggle with
Alfonso VI, defeating him at Zallaka/Zalaca in 1086. These Berber mercenaries
soon became a threat to the rulers of Seville.
Also remember that Alfonso VI was a king without a male heir. Even though he
had the mistress Ximena/Jimena Munoz, she had only born him a daughter, Teresa.
He also had a legitimate daughter, Urraca. So it was partly because of the
very real threat of invasion by Arab Spain that Alfonso accepted Zaida as a
mistress in 1092. She was the widow of Fath al-Mamun of Cordoba (who died in
March of the previous year), daughter-in-law of al-Mutamid of Sevilla.
Importantly, Zaida became the mother of Alfonso's only son, Sancho, who would
eventually be named his heir, in spite of his being illegitimate. Bishop
Pelayo's chronicle (already quoted in the last post), states that she was
baptized and given the Christian name Elizabeth (which was then equivalent to
Isabel).
Zaida's monumental inscription states that she died on 13 [or 12, depending on
the source] September in childbirth, but the year of her death does not
survive. Thus the controversy. Levi-Provencal had concluded that she died
during the birth of her son Sancho, on 12 September 1093.
But if you equate Zaida with Queen Elizabeth, who did not die until 1107, you
arrive at a death date of 12/13 September 1107 (hence the varying dating given
by different authorities). It is known that Queen Elizabeth was the mother of
two daughters, and that Zaida was mother of Alfonso's only son. So if you
equate the two women, it means she was mother of three children. But as she
may not have died in 1093, the birth date of Zaida's son Sancho is problematic
too.
There isn't enough surviving evidence to resolve these disputes. Different
scholars interpret the evidence in different ways. BUT there is NO dispute
that Teresa was Ximena's daughter, not a daughter of Zaida or Elizabeth.
By taking Zaida into his court, Alfonso VI could claim to be a protector of
Spanish Islam against the incursions of the African Murabits/Almoravids, giving
him an excuse for further conquest of Arab lands in Spain.
Since Alfonso's only son Sancho died at the battle of Ucles in May 1108, he
must have been reaching some type of maturity (i. e., he must have been at
least about fifteen in 1108) or the life of the heir to Alfonso's kingdom would
not have been allowed to be risked on the field at that battle (Reilly, pp.
234-5). Therefore a birth date of about 1093 is a logical conclusion.
Also, as the kingdom of al-Mutamid fell with his capital in September 1091, it
would place the political act of sending Zaida to Alfonso's court between the
death of her husband 26 March 1091 and September of the same year. It would
seem almost unthinkable that the emir would give his own daughter to a
Christian king, but a daughter-in-law, ..., hmmmm, she might be expendable, yet
still important enough to be a valid symbol. And if Zaida then bore the king a
male heir in 1092 or 1093....
Alfonso VI did not have a legitimate grandson until the birth of Alfonso
Raimundez, son of the Infanta Urraca and Count Raymond. This would mean
legitimate contention for the succession to his throne. Alfonso was then a
fairly old man (for those times) of about sixty-eight. He therefore (within a
year of his grandson's birth) took action to proclaim his illegitimate son
Sancho his heir.
A document dated 27 March 1106 reads in part "regnante rege illdefonso in
legione eiusdem helisabet regina sub maritali copula legaliter aderente"
[Reilly, pp. 338-9]. This is evidence that Alfonso married Sancho's mother.
Reilly interprets this to explain a proper marriage for a formal mistress, and
we know from Bishop Pelayo that Zaida had been baptized with the name
Elizabeth. Alfonso's queen in named as Elizabeth in at least seventeen
documents between 1102 and 1106.
TERESA was daughter of Jimena Munoz, apparently daughter of the Austirian
'count' Muno Munoz. It is known from documentary evidence that the Infanta
Elvira [Jimena's elder daughter, according to Bishop Pelayo's account] was
married by 1094 [their daughter Sancha Raimundez was born by 11 November 1095].
Teresa was married by 1096. Alfonso VI bestowed all of the Portuguese lands
from the Rio Mino in the north to Santarem in the south to Henry in 1096,
apparently in an effort to change Henry from an ally of his cousin Raymond into
his rival [Reilly, pp. 253-5]. This reduced the territories controlled by
Raymond in half, lessening his threat. Henry and Teresa confirmed a charter of
Count Raymond to Tuy on 11 Feb. 1095, but the dating of this charter is in
dispute.
A charter dated 25 January 1100 by Alfonso was witnessed by the king's sister,
Urraca, his two daughters, Urraca and Teresa, and their husbands, Counts
Raymond and Henry [Reilly, p. 296]. They also witnessed a charter dated 15
April 1100 [Reilly, p. 297]. That Queen Berta was not there is taken by some
as meaning she was dead, and by others {Reilly] as meaning she was simply ill.
There is a funerary inscription to Queen Elizabeth in the royal pantheon of San
Isidoro of Leon which states that she was daughter of Louis VI of France [Hic
requiescit Helisabeth Regina filia Lodovici Regis Franciae] and that she died
in 1107, but this alleged French origin is not mentioned by the chroniclers
Bishop Pelayo and the anonymous author of Sahagun, both fairly contemporary.
And there is no evidence that Louis the Fat had a daughter named Elizabeth
[Louis was born in 1081]. As Elizabeth is known to have born Alfonso two
daughters before her death, this seems to preclude this allegation.
Alfonso had definitely married Elizabeth by 14 May 1100, when a charter stated,
in part, "una cum voluntate et assensu conjugis meae Elisabeth iperatricis..."
[Reilly, p. 298]. Queen Elizabeth, Count Raymond and the Infanta Urraca, and
County Henry and the Infanta Teresa were present at a charter dated 25 January
1103 [Reilly, pp. 313-14]. Sancho Alfonsez also confirmed the document as
"Sanctius infans quod pater fecit confirmo."
The first documentary evidence of Queen Elizabeth's two daughters, the infantas
Sancha and Elvira, was a royal charter granted to the Bishop of Oviedo on 16
March 1104. Alfonso's son Sancho, Counts Raymond and Henry, and the infantas
Urraca and Teresa also confirmed the document [Reilly, p. 318]. Elizabeth
confirmed a charter dated 19 March 1106, with Sancho and all of Alfonso's other
children and sons-in-law (Count Raymond and Count Henry spent a great deal of
time at the Spanish court) [Reilly, p. 339]. Queen Elizabeth and Sancho
confirmed another charter dated 8 May 1107, and in a charter dated eight days
later, Sancho was called "regnum electus patri factum" [Reilly, p. 340].
Elizabeth [Zaida] died 12/13 September 1107. It was on that same date that we
know Count Raymond was sick with what would prove a mortal illness (he died on
20 September 1107) [Reilly, p. 341].
[end of part one; continued in part two]
Reedpcgen
>had the mistress Ximena/Jimena Munoz, she had only born him a daughter,
>Teresa.
This should read, "she had only born him daughters, Elvira and Teresa." It was
very late when I wrote this.
The legitimate daughter, Urraca , was daughter by Alfonso's wife Constance.
Urraca [who ruled as Queen 1109-1126 ,after her father's death] married (1)
Raymond of Burgundy (by whom she was mother of King Alfonso VII, who ruled
1126-1157), and (2) Alfonso I of Aragon (their marriage was annulled).
Perhaps I did not point out strongly enough that had Sancho succeeded his
father instead of dying in 1108, he would have represented by blood not only
the Christian Spanish interests of his father's bloodline, but the Arab
interests of his mother too.
(I should read these things through before I post them, but believe it or not,
I do not have a printer here, and reading it on the computer is just not the
same as proofing things on paper.)
pcr
pcr
ray montgomery
So who is this Count Muno Munoz????
and do you have his ancestry?????
Very Well done by the way!!!!!!!!!!!
oh and what pray tell happened to your eye and i sincerely hope it is not
permanent!
Sincerely
young Raymond
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> paul
> So who is this Count Muno Munoz????
> and do you have his ancestry?????
The traditional ancestry of Jimena makes her daughter of Count Nuno
Rodriguez "de Guzman", by his wife, the daughter of Alfonso V's
illegitimate brother Ordono. This places her as sister of the founder
of the Guzman lineage. However, a close look at this count (actually
Munio Rodriguez) demonstrates that it is chronologically unlikely that
he was father of Jimena, and that his son Rodrigo Munoz was distinct
fromt he Guzman founder. (see Salazar for a discussion of this count)
The first modern source to address the question was Quintana. Here, he
identifies a count Muno Munoz that appears on a couple of charters with
Jimena, and he discusses his immediade family. Never (in the charters)
is he stated to be the father of Jimena, and while he appears before she
does, they could still be siblings (a concept returned to by the Vajay
charts. However, this Muno Munoz was a rather regional character, not
otherwise known, and his family is unlikely to be called "most noble".
The next study was the most complete. Canal lined up the three Munos
who were of any political significance in Castile/Leon at the time,
these being Muno Rodriguez (above), Muno Munoz 'the Dog' (not the same
as above), and Muno Gonzalez, Count of Castile. He concludes that
Jimena was daughter of Muno Gonzalez.
The Vajay charts were in agreement with Canal's conclusion, and added
some supplementary identifications, but unfortunately did not include
discussion of these points. Here, in addition to Jimena, Muno Gonzalez
is identified as the father of Gonzalo Munoz, and grandfather of the
Counts of Lara, Pedro Gonzalez and Rodrigo Gonzalez. This would make
Jimena the aunt of the most powerful noble in Castile/Leon during the
end of Urraca's reign, and definitly qualify as "most noble". He also
suggests that Muno Munoz was Jimena's brother, and father of Rodrigo
Munoz, founder of the Guzman line. Finally, this source augments the
ancestry of this lineage, tracing them from Gonzalo Garces, younger
brother of Count Sancho Garces of Castile. The exact reasoning and
documentation for these connections are not provided in enough detail to
evaluate them, and thus we must wait for Salazar or Masnata to produce a
manuscript discussing the line.
Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. Jimena Munoz, Amiga de Alfonso VI.
Anuario de Estudios Medievales. 21:11-40 (1991).
Quintana Prieto, Augusto. Jimena Muņiz, madre de Doņa Teresa de
Portugal. Revista Portuguesa de Historia. 12:223-80 (1969).
Salazar Acha, Jaime de. Los Descendientes del Conde Ero Fernandez,
Fundador del Monasterio de Santa Maria de Ferreira de Pallares. in
Galicia en la Edad Media. 67-86 (1990).
Vajay, Szabolcs de. Structures de Prouvoir et Reseaux de Familles du
VIIIe au XIIe Siecles. Genealogica & Heraldica: Actas de 17o Congresso
das Ciencias Genealogica e Heraldica. 275-315 (1986).
taf
sk...@ix.netcom.com
Muno Rodriguez "Canis" Count of Asturias fl 992-1020, father of Eylo
Munoz mother of Munio Gonzalez Count of Asturias fl. 1052-1082 father
of Jimena mistress of Alfonso VI, all as shown in the ahnentafel for
Teresa of Portugal? If so, what is his correct patronymic? If not,
how many dogs are there in the kennel anyway?
On Fri, 11 Dec 1998 12:55:47 -0500, "Todd A. Farmerie"
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>ray montgomery wrote:
>>
>> paul
>> So who is this Count Muno Munoz????
>> and do you have his ancestry?????
>
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Is the Muno Munoz "Canis" who is "(not the same...)" the same as the
> Muno Rodriguez "Canis" Count of Asturias fl 992-1020, father of Eylo
> Munoz mother of Munio Gonzalez Count of Asturias fl. 1052-1082 father
> of Jimena mistress of Alfonso VI, all as shown in the ahnentafel for
> Teresa of Portugal? If so, what is his correct patronymic? If not,
> how many dogs are there in the kennel anyway?
Sorry, my mistake. The ancestry investigated is for Munio Rodriguez
'Canis', whose only known son and heir was Munio Munoz. This is the
same one who appears in the Teresa AT. Note however, that there is a
chronological stretch dealing with the wives assigned by Salazar/Vajay
to the ancestors of Jimena. If I ever find time to revise my Teresa AT,
I will discuss this in more detail.
taf
sk...@ix.netcom.com
I can wait on the solution of chronological "stretches" by wiser heads
than mine, and I can put nobles in my file with appropriate caveats
about waiting for Salazar or Masnata to produce a manuscript,
but for now I'd like to know whether I've got a reasonable grip on
what I've read so far in this thread.
I have it that
0 {ancestral connection below}
1 Muno Gonzalez m Mayor Rodriguez
2 Jimena Munoz amiga de Alfonso VI
3 Teresa of Portugal m Enrique
3 Elvira
` 2 Gonzalo Munoz
3 Pedro Gonzalez de Lara
3 Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara
{{{Were they full brothers, half-brothers, or
couosins?}}}
2 Muno Munoz {Is this early for a son to be named
after his father?}
3 Rodrigo Munoz "founder of Guzman line"
And if the Sancho Garces and his younger brother Gonzalo
were sons of Garcia Fernandez m Ava of Ribagorza (I have
a Sancho as their son), is it safe to surmise from the
patronymic that Muno Gonzalez (supra) is the son of Gonzalo
brother of Sancho son of Garcia & Ava? (Safe, that is, subject
to the hoped-for MS discussion: I.e., is that the line traced but
without "exact reasoning and documentation ... in enough
detail..."?)
AND FINALLY (for now) --
I have a Guillen Perez de Guzman father of Mayor amiga of
Alfonso X, and suppose that Guillen's father was named Pedro:
But I have no clue how they may relate to Rodrigo Munoz.
Can you fill the gap?
Thanks
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Thanks very much. Carrying on a step or two further,
> I can wait on the solution of chronological "stretches" by wiser heads
> than mine, and I can put nobles in my file with appropriate caveats
> about waiting for Salazar or Masnata to produce a manuscript,
> but for now I'd like to know whether I've got a reasonable grip on
> what I've read so far in this thread.
> I have it that
> 0 {ancestral connection below}
> 1 Muno Gonzalez m Mayor Rodriguez
This should be Mayor Munoz (daughter of Munio Rodriguez)
> 2 Jimena Munoz amiga de Alfonso VI
> 3 Teresa of Portugal m Enrique
> 3 Elvira
Elvira was older.
> ` 2 Gonzalo Munoz
> 3 Pedro Gonzalez de Lara
> 3 Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara
> {{{Were they full brothers, half-brothers, or
> couosins?}}}
Full brothers (as best we know). Traditionally their mother is Goda
Salvadorez, sister of Gonzalo Salvadorez, but I don't think this is the
mother assigned to them in the Vajay descent.
> 2 Muno Munoz {Is this early for a son to be named
> after his father?}
Well, the guy existed (as did Munio Munoz, son of Munio Rodriguez Canis
a generation earlier), so I guess not. It is unusual, but I have seen
earlier examples.
> 3 Rodrigo Munoz "founder of Guzman line"
>
> And if the Sancho Garces and his younger brother Gonzalo
> were sons of Garcia Fernandez m Ava of Ribagorza (I have
> a Sancho as their son), is it safe to surmise from the
> patronymic that Muno Gonzalez (supra) is the son of Gonzalo
> brother of Sancho son of Garcia & Ava?
No. Munio Gonzalez was son of Gonzalo Munoz, son of Munio Gonzalez, son
of Gonzalo Garces. The generations Munio - Gonzalo - Munio are well
documented and unquestioned. The innovations of this solution are
putting Gonzalo Garces at the top, and Jimena, Munio and Gonzalo Munoz
(previously universally called Gonzalo Nunez, father of Pedro and
Rodrigo) at the bottom.
> AND FINALLY (for now) --
> I have a Guillen Perez de Guzman father of Mayor amiga of
> Alfonso X, and suppose that Guillen's father was named Pedro:
> But I have no clue how they may relate to Rodrigo Munoz.
> Can you fill the gap?
My guess would be that the intervening names are as follows (taken from
the GEN-MED archives):
Rodrigo Nunez de Guzman, ancestor of the Guzman clan, and traditionally
(wrongly) brother of Ximena Munoz, mistress of Alfonso VI. He
is
given a traditional descent from the bastard son of Vermudo II
of
Leon, but prior to this point, (and maybe even a generation
farther) the descent is probably invented.
Nuno Rodriguez de Guzman, said in traditional pedigrees to have married
Elvira Gonzalez de Manzenedo, but the corrected Manzenedo
descent
has no Gonzalo at this point, so at least the patronomic, and
perhaps the surname is wrong.
Rui Nunez de Guzman, said to have married Goda Gonzalez, daughter of
Gonzalo Nunez de Lara, but this is chronologically impossible
(see
next generation).
Pedro Ruiz de Guzman, married Elvira Gomez de Manzenedo, daughter of
Gomez
Gonzalez de Manzenedo (see earlier post) and Mayor Manrique de
Lara, daughter of Manrique (Perez) de Lara (son of Pedro Gomez
de
Lara, supposed brother of Goda Gonzalez de Lara, above), and his
wife, Hermesinde de Narbonne, from whom Manrique's descendants
inherited that Viscounty (anyone have a good reference for this
family?)
This was written before I saw the Salazar/Vajay reconstruction, which
also includes the lineage of Manzanedo, and addresses some of the
questions raised.
taf
sk...@ix.netcom.com
In your 12/13 posting you wrote (in part)
"...Rodrigo Nunez de Guzman, ancestor of the Guzman clan,
and traditionally (wrongly) brother of Ximena Munoz,
mistress of Alfonso VI ..."
But in your 12/11/98 posting you had written (in part)
"... He {Vajay} also suggests that Muno Munoz was
Jimena's brother, and father of Rodrigo Munoz, founder
of the Guzman line."
Does the contrast between "Nunez" and "Munoz" as
Rodrigo's patronymic suggest an alternative ancestry,
or is it just a natural confusion of the antecedent fore-
names "Nunio" and "Munio"?
BTW, if I am correctly reading this thread, Ximena/Jimena
was not the sister, but was the aunt, of Rodrigo, verdad?
On Sun, 13 Dec 1998 18:15:31 -0500, "Todd A. Farmerie"
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>sk...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
sk...@ix.netcom.com
I'm starting a new one. Please see my posting "Medieval Spanish
Orthography and Naming."
On Sun, 13 Dec 1998 18:15:31 -0500, "Todd A. Farmerie"
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>Rodrigo Nunez de Guzman, ancestor of the Guzman clan, and traditionally
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Thanks again. Where would we be without you?
> In your 12/13 posting you wrote (in part)
>
> and traditionally (wrongly) brother of Ximena Munoz,
>
> But in your 12/11/98 posting you had written (in part)
>
> "... He {Vajay} also suggests that Muno Munoz was
> Jimena's brother, and father of Rodrigo Munoz, founder
> of the Guzman line."
>
> Does the contrast between "Nunez" and "Munoz" as
> Rodrigo's patronymic suggest an alternative ancestry,
> or is it just a natural confusion of the antecedent fore-
> names "Nunio" and "Munio"?
I guess it is time for my Nunez/Munoz tale again.
(Let me state that for the following discussion, I will use Munio, Nuno,
Munoz, and Nunez, for convenience, but the correct forms are Munio,
Nun~o, Mun~oz, and Nun~ez, where n~ represents the spanish character
with the ~ over top of the n, and which my software is currently unable
to accurately reproduce.)
While the two names shared a common origin, by the time that they appear
in surviving documentation, the names Munio and Nuno were entirely
distinct, and continued to be throughout most of the medieval period.
However, with by the 16th century, they had come to be viewed as
varieties of the same name. Thus the historians of the late 16th and
17th centuries treated them interchangably, usually using Nuno/Nunez to
represent both. This caused the historical traditions of many families
to be confused. Unfortunately, even this is not the worst of it, since,
until recently, the vast majority of the "primary" documents which serve
as the basis for reconstructing this early history only survive as
copies made by these same historians, and they have made the same
substitution of Nuno for Munio in the transcripts of these documents.
It was only with the recent research done with surviving documentation
which had not passed through the hands of these 17th century historians
that it has become clear that the majority of the individuals who
historical tradition names Nuno/Nunez were in fact Munio/Munoz. (As an
example, the early generations of the Counts of Castile, there is a
traditional stretch of Nuno Nunez names, which turn out to be
alternating generations of Munio Nunez and Nuno Munoz.)
Thus, the traditional name of the Guzman founder Rodrigo Nunez need not
reflect a historical Rodrigo Nunez, rather than Rodrigo Munoz. Which it
originally was is lost (since he cannot be documented in the
contemporary record), and may have been either form, with the Vajay
chart prefering the latter.
The same is true of the Lara ancestry, where the father of the famous
brothers is traditionally Count Gonzalo Nunez, son of Count Nuno
Gonzalez, son of Count Gonzalo Nunez, son of Count Nuno Gonzalez, where
the last three are entirely undocumented. At the same time, there is a
well documented Count Munio Gonzalez, son of Count Gonzalo Munoz, son of
Count Munio Gonzalez. This theory suggests that the traditional line
has suffered from a Munio/Nuno substitution, and that the Laras tie
directly into the documented line of counts Munio Gonzalez and Gonzalo
Munoz.
> BTW, if I am correctly reading this thread, Ximena/Jimena
> was not the sister, but was the aunt, of Rodrigo, verdad?
If this reconstruction is correct, then yes. However, to an extent the
reconstruction begs the question. The following is as best I can tell
from the little information which is provided. The Guzmans traditionally
descend from a Rodrigo Nunez (who was not unlikely originally Rodrigo
Munoz) who was supposed to be a relative of Jimena. Jimena's brother
Rodrigo Munoz is well documented and cannot be the Guzman founder.
Jimena appears to be related to a Munio Munoz, who could be her
brother. The Guzman founder could then be son of this Munio Munoz, and
Jimena's nephew, accounting for the tradition of a close relationship.
Finally the chronology does not prohibit this solution.
The Salazar/Masnata team (to whom anyone interested in the noble
families of Castile/Leon during this period owe a large debt of
gratitude) appears to subscribe to the view that the traditional
accounts of relationships among the ancient families are usually
incorrect in detail, but preserve seeds authentic tradition. They
appear to apply the same reasoning in their placing of Gonzalo Garces of
Castile at the top of this pedigree.
(I tried explaining this last in this post, but ended up talking myself
in circles, so I will present it, with historical perspective, in a
different post.)
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
Gonzalez de Lara, Salvadorez de Lara, Guzman, and Jimena.
The traditional Guzman pedigree traces to Count Rodrigo Nunez, brother
of Jimena Nunez, and son of a Count Nuno Rodriguez, who married the
daughter of the Infante Ordono Vermudez. There is also a faint
tradition of a relationship to Lara.
With Gonzalez de Lara there are several competing traditions (note, I am
using this name to represent the later well-known Lara family, with
brothers Pedro and Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara, who fathered children by
two of Alfonso VI's daughters). The most popular, and also the most
astoundingly unlikely, is that found in the tale of the Infantes de
Lara, which derives the family from a count Mudarra Gonzalez, son of a
relationship between Count Gonzalo Gustioz de Lara and the daughter of
his muslim captor. When his half-brothers, the Infantes, are killed by
their uncle, he returns to Castile and exacts his revenge. It makes for
a great chanson, but there is no surviving evidence that a person named
Mudarra Gonzalez existed, and no evidence that any of the several
Gonzalo Gustioz were ever captured, that any of them had any
relationship to Ruy Vermudez (or was it Velasquez), the uncle, or had
any link to Lara, or that the tradition has any particular claim to
accuracy that would override the scepticism which must be applied to
such a formuleic account (captive seducing the daughter of captor,
relative returning from out of the country to exact revenge for the
killing of a kinsman, etc.). It has even been argued that the fact that
the descent survived the expulsion of muslim ancestry tat occurred in
the 15th and 16th centuries proves that it is real, but this logic is
faulty. Whether real or fabulous, it would have had the same fate,
since in the 15th and 16th century, they would have thought it
authentic. In fact, we have the popularity of the tradition itself to
thank for its survival.
Moving on, as early as the end of the 17th century, Salazar y Castro
examined the several traditions regarding the origins of the Lara, and
even at that time rejected the Mudarra as unsupported romance, instead
selecting as most likely the descent starting with the documented father
of the famous brothers, Gonzalo Nunez, and running through Nuno
Gonzalez, Gonzalo Nunez, and Nuno Gonzalez to Gonzalo Fernandez, eldest
son of Castillian Count Fernan Gonzalez. A competing tradition which he
decided was less likely was thatGonzalo Nunez was son of Nuno Alvarez
(who then is difficult to distinguish from at least three contemporary
Nuno Alvarez,including an uncle of el Cid). The Castillian descent held
sway into this century, when it became clear that Gonzalo Fernandez left
an only son, Sancho, who died young, without issue. This caused the
whole thing to be reexamined, and at least one modern author (Carle)
chose to accept the Nuno Alvarez version.
Salvadorez de Lara likewise had a traditional descent from Fernan
Gonzalez (I am using this to refer to the family of Gonzalo Salvadorez
de Lara, whose son Gomez Gonzalez was the lover of Queen Urraca before
she took up with Pedro Gonzalez de Lara). This makes the founder son of
a Salvador Gonzalez, son of Gonzalo Salvadorez, son of Salvador Perez,
son of Pedro Fernandez, son of Fernan Gonzalez by his second wife. An
alternative pedigree drops out the two middle generations and makes
Gonzalo Salvadorez de Lara son of Salvador Perez. (It is to this family
that Urraca, wife of Count Sancho Garces of Castile has traditionally
been assigned.) The problem with this is that Fernan Gonzalez never had
a son Pedro. This derivation hence must be rejected. In this century,
Balparda looked at the question, and concluded that Salvador Gonzalez
was brother of Count Munio Gonzalez, whose son Gonzalo Munoz was Count
of Castile, and grandson Munio Gonzalez was Count of Asturias. (If I
recall correctly, he had 4 generations, GS de Lara son of SG, son of GS,
son of SG, the brother of MG.) This left unaccounted for the
longstanding tradition that Gonzalo Salvadorez de Lara was kinsman of
Gonzalo Nunez de Lara, but tradition also had Gonzalo Nunez marrying
Gonzalo Salvadorez's sister, so perhaps their relationship was only by
marriage.
Jimena was long held (as I said) to be sister of the Guzman founder, and
daughter of Nuno Rodriguez. This traditional derivation is
chronologically impossible (likewise, his documented son Rodrigo Nunez
could not be identical to the Guzman founder, since he died without
(male?) heirs. Quintana discovered that she appeared in documents with
a Munio Munoz, and concluded he was her father (although he could as
well have been her brother). Canal reevaluated the question and lined
up a whole host of candidates. He concluded that Jimena was daughter of
Munio Gonzalez, Count of Asturias (see under Salvadorez de Lara).
This was the lay of the land from which the Vajay/SalazarAcha/Masnata
theory arose. The following is how I reconstruct the process that they
went through to arrive at their conclusions, and is my best guess based
on what I see. The traditional relationship between Gonzalez and
Salvadorez de Lara led them to look at the Munio Gonzalez clan, and
notice that the line Munio - Gonzalo - unio seemed to fit exactly with
the Salazar y Castro prefered Nuno - Gonzalo - Nuno, and with the known
Nuno/Munio confusion problem, it might be that they were the same.
Jimena is said to have come from a most noble family, and were she kin
to the Lara, this would certainly be the case. Likewise, it would give
the Laras a position among the highest nobles in the kingdom, consistant
with them marrying (or not) the King's daughters. Finally, it
reestablishes the relationship to the Salvadorez de Lara family.
Guzman I have already discussed. The tradition of close relation with
Jimena, and also relationship to the Laras suggests that (now that the
two appear to be closely related) Guzman derives from this same Munio
Gonzalez lineage. Munio's son Rodrigo Munoz is well known - too well
known to be the Guzman ancestor, and likewise is a little early. Since
the Munio Munoz appearing with Jimena is probably her brother (having
been excluded as father) then the Guzman founder Rodrigo Nunez would fit
as his son. (Note that there is no direct evidence that this is the
case. It depends only on the tradition of relationships with Jimena and
Lara.)
Finally, looking at the other end, we now have Munio Gonzalez Count in
Castile, and his brother Salvador Gonzalez, being founders of two
families traditionally derived from the Counts of Castile. They could
not have been sons of Gonzalo Fernandez, but in the subsequent
generation, Count Garcia Fernandez did have a son Gonzalo, who is little
known. He then is identified as the Gonzalo who was father of Munio and
Salvador.
This is roughly the chain of logic, but what is lacking is whatever
documentary support they can produce to support their deductions. This
is particularly the case with the top of the pedigree. They show a wife
for Gonzalo Garces, and I have failed to find any source which provides
this information, so they must have something I am not aware of (not
surprising in the least). It looks a little flimsy right now, being so
firmly based in the traditions of relationships, and without knowing
what other support they have, we are left without any grounds for
reaching a firm conclusion.
Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. Jimena Munoz, Amiga de Alfonso VI.
Anuario de Estudios Medievales. 21:11-40 (1991).
Carle, Maria del Carmen. Gran Propriedad y Grandes Proprietarios.
Cuadernos de Historia de Espana. 57-8:1-222 (1973).
Quintana Prieto, Augusto. Jimena Muñiz, madre de Doña Teresa de
Portugal. Revista Portuguesa de Historia. 12:223-80 (1969).
Salazar Acha, Jaime de. Los Descendientes del Conde Ero Fernandez,
Fundador del Monasterio de Santa Maria de Ferreira de Pallares. in
Galicia en la Edad Media. 67-86 (1990).
Salazar y Castro, Luis de. Historia Genealogica de la Casa de Lara:
Justificada con Instrumentos y Escritores de Inolvidable Fe. (1697).
Vajay, Szabolcs de. Structures de Prouvoir et Reseaux de Familles du
VIIIe au XIIe Siecles. Genealogica & Heraldica: Actas de 17o Congresso
das Ciencias Genealogica e Heraldica. 275-315 (1986).
Vajay, Szabolcs de. Les Lara avant Narbonne. Heraldique et Genealogie.
18:4:101:411-3 (1986).
taf
sk...@ix.netcom.com
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>sk...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>
[snip]
>> 1 Muno Gonzalez m Mayor Rodriguez
>
>This should be Mayor Munoz (daughter of Munio Rodriguez)
>
>> 2 Jimena Munoz amiga de Alfonso VI
>> 3 Teresa of Portugal m Enrique
[snip]
But the Ahnentafel of Teresa shows
3. Jimena Munoz
6. Munio Gonzalez
7. Mayor Rodriguez
14. Rodrigo
Should it be corrected?
Thanks
Bryant Smith
Austin, Texas
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> But the Ahnentafel of Teresa shows
> 3. Jimena Munoz
> 6. Munio Gonzalez
> 7. Mayor Rodriguez
> 14. Rodrigo
>
Again, my mistake. This is correct (well, this is what the cited source
relates, but again, I have not seen it discussed). I was confusing his
wife with his mother, who was daughter of Munio Rodriguez Canis.
sk...@ix.netcom.com
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>sk...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>
{SNIP}
>Pedro Ruiz de Guzman, married Elvira Gomez de Manzenedo, daughter of
>Gomez
> Gonzalez de Manzenedo (see earlier post) and Mayor Manrique de
> Lara, daughter of Manrique (Perez) de Lara (son of Pedro Gomez
>de
> Lara, supposed brother of Goda Gonzalez de Lara, above), and his
> wife, Hermesinde de Narbonne, from whom Manrique's descendants
> inherited that Viscounty (anyone have a good reference for this
> family?)
>
>This was written before I saw the Salazar/Vajay reconstruction, which
>also includes the lineage of Manzanedo, and addresses some of the
>questions raised.
>
>taf
OK -- one loose end here: Is the Pedro Gomez (surely Gonzalez not
Gomez?) de Lara (supposed brother of Goda), who was the father of
Manriquez, the same Pedro with whom Queen Urraca "took up" after she
was through diddling with Gomez Gonzalez of the Salvadorez de Lara
clan?
Thanks
sk...@ix.netcom.com
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>OK, here is what I can say (off the cuff) on the relationships between
>Gonzalez de Lara, Salvadorez de Lara, Guzman, and Jimena.
>
{SNIP}
>The problem with this is that Fernan Gonzalez never had
>a son Pedro.
{SNIP}
OK I can live without Pedro Fernandez. But I have a Sancha Sanchez
who m. Berenguer Ramon I of Barcelona (as parents of Ramon Berenguer
I), as dau of Sancho Garces & Urraca Salvadorez dau of Salvador Perez,
and now Salvador has no father! How then does Sancha Sanchez fit into
the reconstruction?
Thanks
Skip
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> OK -- one loose end here: Is the Pedro Gomez (surely Gonzalez not
> Gomez?) de Lara (supposed brother of Goda), who was the father of
> Manriquez, the same Pedro with whom Queen Urraca "took up" after she
> was through diddling with Gomez Gonzalez of the Salvadorez de Lara
> clan?
Typos, typos, and more typos. It should have been Pedro Gonzalez de
Lara. He, the father of Manrique, is the same as the lover of Urraca,
by whom he had a son Fernando and a daughter (Elvira?) who married a
crusader, and is shown in the Vajay chart to be ancestral to the Meneses
family. Both Pedro and his brother Rodrigo had more substantial descent
from their non-royal wives. The position of Goda Gonzalez de Lara,
supposed wife of Guzman, is problematic, and she should be ignored (she
may have been entirely invented). Please keep in mind that I have not
looked at the early Guzman's since early 1996, and even then I was
forced to rely on more traditional sources.
taf
sk...@ix.netcom.com
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>OK, here is what I can say (off the cuff) on the relationships between
>Gonzalez de Lara, Salvadorez de Lara, Guzman, and Jimena.
{SNIP}
OK, one more loose end: Three generations after Mayor de Guzman was
mistress to Alfonso X, I have a Leonora de Guzman who was mistress to
Alfonso XI (and wife of Luis de la Cerda), and was mother of the
Trastamara house. Is that correct? If so, can her descent from the
earllier de Guzmans be traced?
Thanks
Skip
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> On Mon, 14 Dec 1998 14:04:47 -0500, "Todd A. Farmerie"
> <ta...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>
> >Gonzalez de Lara, Salvadorez de Lara, Guzman, and Jimena.
> >
>
> >The problem with this is that Fernan Gonzalez never had
> >a son Pedro.
>
>
> OK I can live without Pedro Fernandez. But I have a Sancha Sanchez
> who m. Berenguer Ramon I of Barcelona (as parents of Ramon Berenguer
> I), as dau of Sancho Garces & Urraca Salvadorez dau of Salvador Perez,
>
> and now Salvador has no father! How then does Sancha Sanchez fit into
> the reconstruction?
This was discussed in one of the Stuart/Royalty for Commoners/RFC
threads. Count Sancho Garcia of Castile had by his wife Urraca the
following children: Fernan(do), who died in infancy; Muniadomna Mayor,
m. Sancho Garces III of Navarre (the personal name Mayor is an
innovation, and probably refers to some personal characteristic,
although perhaps simply that she was the oldest daughter. It appears
that she gave the name Mayor to a daughter of hers who married the Count
of Toulouse); Tigridia, a nun; Sancha, m. Berenger Ramon I; and Garcia
Sanchez, who succeeded his father in Castile before being assassinated.
There is no surviving document in which the parentage, or even the
patronymic of Urraca is given. She has been traditionally given as a
member of the Salvadorez clan, daughter of this supposed Salvador Perez,
son of Pedro Fernandez, son of Count Fernan Perez. As already
discussed, this line is flawed for several reasons. First of all, there
is no evidence that Pedro ever existed, nor is there a Salvador Perez.
Of equal importance, the line fails on chronological grounds. There are
too many generations in too little time. Note that Pedro's supposed
mother was niece of the mother of his half-brother, Garcia, and yet
Garcia's son is said to have married Pedro's granddaughter. The dates
themselves show the line to be false.
Who was she then. Salazar Acha has concluded that Urraca was daughter
of Count Gomez Diez of Saldana, namesake of the powerful Banu Gomez
clan. This conclusion is based on nomenclature. The daughters of
Sancho and Urraca were named Muniadomna, Tigridia, and Sancha. Of
these, Muniadomna was the name of a paternal aunt, and Tigridia is
previously unknown in the family, while Sancha was Sancho's paternal
grandmother. There is no evidence that the couple had a daughter named
Ava, after Sancho's mother. The name Tigridia, at this time, was almost
unique to the Banu Gomez, being the name of the mother of Gomez Diaz,
who was perhaps the most powerful non-royal in Castile at the time,
having negotiated a separate allience with the muslim enemies of the
king he was rebelling against. This suggests that Urraca was of this
family, but which of the children of Diego Munoz and Tigridia would be
Urraca's father. Here he concludes that it was Gomez Diaz. The reason
for this is that it would be unusual to name a first daughter after the
child's great-aunt, in preference to the mother, a grandmother or
greatgrandmother. Gomes Diaz was married to none other than "aunt"
Muniadomna, and if Urraca were her daughter, then the oldest daughter
was named for her maternal grandmother.
Thus he concludes that Sancho married Urraca Gomez, daughter of Gomez
Diaz de Saldana and Muniadomna Fernandez de Castile.
Salazar Acha, Jaime de. Una Hija Disconocida de Sancho el Mayor Reina de
Leon. in Actas del I Congreso General de Historia de Navarre. 2:183-192
(1988).
Salazar Acha, Jaime de. El Conde Fernando Pelaez, un Rebelde Leones del
Siglo XI. Anuario de los Estudios Medievales. 19:87-97 (1989).
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
> OK, one more loose end: Three generations after Mayor de Guzman was
> mistress to Alfonso X, I have a Leonora de Guzman who was mistress to
> Alfonso XI (and wife of Luis de la Cerda), and was mother of the
> Trastamara house. Is that correct? If so, can her descent from the
> earllier de Guzmans be traced?
Yes, it can, but not by me. (never copied the information)
taf
Henry Soszynski
>
>OK, one more loose end: Three generations after Mayor de Guzman was
>mistress to Alfonso X, I have a Leonora de Guzman who was mistress to
>Alfonso XI (and wife of Luis de la Cerda), and was mother of the
>Trastamara house. Is that correct? If so, can her descent from the
>earllier de Guzmans be traced?
>Skip
>
Here's what I have on her ancestry. Caveat emptor. Corrections welcome.
1. Leonor de Guzman 1310-1351
2. Alfonso Perez de Guzman Señor de Medina Sidonia
3. Juana Ponce de Léon
4. Alvaro Perez de Guzman
5. Maria Gonzalez Girón
6. Fernando Perez Ponce
7. Urraca Gutierrez de Meneses
8. Pedro Guillen de Guzman (possibly father of Alfonso 1256-1309,1st Señor
de Sanlucar de Barrameda)
9. Teresa de Brizuela
10.Gonzalo Ruiz Girón
11.Elvira Diaz de Castañeda
Cheers,Henry
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Here's what I have on her ancestry. Caveat emptor. Corrections welcome.
> 1. Leonor de Guzman 1310-1351
> 2. Alfonso Perez de Guzman Señor de Medina Sidonia
> 3. Juana Ponce de Léon
> 4. Alvaro Perez de Guzman
> 5. Maria Gonzalez Girón
> 6. Fernando Perez Ponce
> 7. Urraca Gutierrez de Meneses
> 8. Pedro Guillen de Guzman (possibly father of Alfonso 1256-1309,1st Señor
> de Sanlucar de Barrameda)
He would, I presume, be son of the Guillen Perez mentioned earlier.
taf
sk...@ix.netcom.com
With respect, I should presume Pedro Guillen the father, rather than
the son, of Guillen Perez, on patronymic grounds.
>taf
BTW, thank you both!
Skip
Todd A. Farmerie
On patronymic grounds it could work either way, since their names are
the reverse of each other. Pedro Guillen should be son of someone named
Guillen, and Guillen Perez appears to be about a generation before the
dates shown here for Pedro Guillen. Guillen Perez is son of a Pedro
Ruiz, if I recall correctly, and the first time the name Guillen appears
in the Guzman family.
By the way, I was looking back over the Vajay charts, and noticed for
the first time that they have added (or subtracted) a generation to the
Salvadorez line. Balparda showed Gomez Gonzalez, Urraca's lover, to be
son of Gonzalo Salvadorez, son of Salvador Gonzalez, (and here it gets a
little unclear, perhaps son of another Gonzalo Salvadorez, son of
another Salvador Gonzalez) brother of the first Munio Gonzalez. The
Vajay charts show Gomez - Gonzalo - Salvador - and then a Gonzalo
Gonzalez, brother of Munio Gonzalez and son of Gonzalo Garces of
Castile. I know nothing of this Gonzalo Gonzalez, and wonder if he
isn't simply a hypothetical construct invented to account for the
difference of a generation in the chronology of the Munoz and Salvadorez
lines.
taf
sk...@ix.netcom.com
wrote:
>At 15:00 17/12/98 +0000, sk...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>
<SNIP>
>Here's what I have on her ancestry. Caveat emptor. Corrections welcome.
>1. Leonor de Guzman 1310-1351
>2. Alfonso Perez de Guzman Señor de Medina Sidonia
>3. Juana Ponce de Léon
>4. Alvaro Perez de Guzman
QUERY: #s 2 & 4 with same patronymic? I suspect either a missing
generation (Pedro Alvarez), or a mistaken patronymic at #2 (Alfonso
Alvarez rather than A. Perez?
Skip
>5. Maria Gonzalez Girón
>6. Fernando Perez Ponce
>7. Urraca Gutierrez de Meneses
>8. Pedro Guillen de Guzman (possibly father of Alfonso 1256-1309,1st Señor
>de Sanlucar de Barrameda)
Leo van de Pas
>On 17 Dec 1998 18:46:15 -0800, H.Sos...@uq.net.au (Henry Soszynski)
>wrote:
>
>>At 15:00 17/12/98 +0000, sk...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>>
><SNIP>
>>Here's what I have on her ancestry. Caveat emptor. Corrections welcome.
>>1. Leonor de Guzman 1310-1351
>>2. Alfonso Perez de Guzman Señor de Medina Sidonia
>>3. Juana Ponce de Léon
>>4. Alvaro Perez de Guzman
>
>QUERY: #s 2 & 4 with same patronymic? I suspect either a missing
>generation (Pedro Alvarez), or a mistaken patronymic at #2 (Alfonso
>Alvarez rather than A. Perez?
With apologies, perhaps I should keep out of this as
this is not my territory. However, in the Netherlands
1500-1600s they did nasties with patronyms and sometimes
in a name two or even three generations were covered,
and you have to be very careful as otherwise you skip
(sorry) one generation.
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Henry Soszynski
>On 17 Dec 1998 18:46:15 -0800, H.Sos...@uq.net.au (Henry Soszynski)
>wrote:
>
>>At 15:00 17/12/98 +0000, sk...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>>>
><SNIP>
>>Here's what I have on her ancestry. Caveat emptor. Corrections welcome.
>>1. Leonor de Guzman 1310-1351
>>2. Alfonso Perez de Guzman Señor de Medina Sidonia
>>3. Juana Ponce de Léon
>>4. Alvaro Perez de Guzman
>
>QUERY: #s 2 & 4 with same patronymic? I suspect either a missing
>generation (Pedro Alvarez), or a mistaken patronymic at #2 (Alfonso
>Alvarez rather than A. Perez?
>
This isn't necessarily incorrect, as the system of patronymics would appear
to have started to break down at around this point. Chronology appears to
be a bit tight as it is without allowing for an extra generation (unless
there's one generation to much). Over to you Todd.
Cheers,Henry
---------------------------------------------------------------
GENEALOGICAL GLEANINGS - Information on non-European Royalty
http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/pollock/359 ICQ#15770739
---------------------------------------------------------------
... A good scare is better than good advice.
Luke Stevens
I notice in your Teresa AT you showed:
> 152.Muno Nunez "of Roa", Count of Castile, fl. 899-915
Likewise:
> 2312.Muno "Belchitez"
Should this really be "Muno", or rather "Munio" or perhaps "Muño"?
Luke Stevens
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> On 17 Dec 1998 18:46:15 -0800, H.Sos...@uq.net.au (Henry Soszynski)
> wrote:
>
> >At 15:00 17/12/98 +0000, sk...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> >>
> <SNIP>
> >Here's what I have on her ancestry. Caveat emptor. Corrections welcome.
> >1. Leonor de Guzman 1310-1351
> >2. Alfonso Perez de Guzman Señor de Medina Sidonia
> >3. Juana Ponce de Léon
> >4. Alvaro Perez de Guzman
>
> QUERY: #s 2 & 4 with same patronymic? I suspect either a missing
> generation (Pedro Alvarez), or a mistaken patronymic at #2 (Alfonso
> Alvarez rather than A. Perez?
At the end of the 13th century, the patronymic system began to break
down. The pattern seen here could occur with either of the two new
systems that were starting to be used. First, if Alfonso was named
after an uncle Alfonso Perez de Guzman, he would have been given his
uncles full name, Alfonso Perez, and not just the given name.
Alternatively, this branch of the Guzman family may have taken 'Perez de
Guzman' as their surname, and were no longer using different
patronymics.
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
It should be Munio. (Traditionally the name was Nuño, and I must have
just corrected the first letter, and not the whole name.
taf
Rik Vigeland
Spain. Here is a short synopsys of two lines, with further connections
into England. They are put together from several posts long ago here
which I wasn't able to find on the net.
Descent from Sancha to England
Sancha of Castile m. Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara
Rodrigo Rodriquez de Lara m. Garcia de Azagra
Sancha Rodriguez de Lara m. Gonsalo Ruis II Giron, d. 1234
Aldonza Gonzales Giron m. Ramiro Senor de Cifontes
Aldonza Ramirez Sra. de Alcanices m. Fernan Gonsales
Meria de henestrona m. Juan Garcia de Padilla, Senor de Villagera
Maria de Padilla (1335-1365) m. Pedro I (the Cruel), King of Castile and
Leon
Maria and Pedro I had two daughters, Constance, the third wife of John
of Gaunt, and Isabella (1355-1394) who m. 1372 Edmund of Langley, Duke
of York.
From the marriage of John and Constance descends Henry VII of England.
From the marriage of Edmund and Isabella descends Edward IV of England.
Edward IV's daughter married King Henry VII and their daughter married
James IV of Scotland, from whom the present Elizabeth II descends.
Descent from Sancha to Queen Isabella
Sancha Rodriguez de Lara m. Gonsalo Ruis II Giron (see Part 6)
Maria Gonsalez Giron m. Guillen Perez de Guzman
Maria Guillen de Guzman, d. 1262 m. Alfonso X, King of Castile
Beatrice of Castile, d. 1303, m. Alfonso III, King of Portugal
Dennis the Wise, King of Portugal m. Elizabeth of Aragon
Alfonso IV of Portugal m.. Beatrix of Castile
Pedro I of Portugal m. Philippa of Lancaster
Juan I of Portugal m. Isabella of Branzaga
Isavella of Portugal m. Juan II, King of Castile
Isabella, 1451-1504, Queen of Castile m. Ferdinand, 1452-1516, King of
Aragon. This united Spain under one rule and it was during this reign
that
the Christian reconquest of Spain was completed.
Since the case for a single Isabel appears to be looking stronger, what
is the
latest on her parentage? The last I can find are two possibilities for
her
father - 1. Abn-Alhaje, King of Denia, which was dismissed by Stewart
Baldwin
about two months ago. She was the widow of Fath al-Mamun of Cordoba (and
I
seem to recall a posted possibility that she may have also been his
niece;
Arab scholars put her in this family) and daughter-in-law of al-Mutamid
of
Seville (or was it proposed that she was a niece of this fellow?).
Rik Vigeland
Chris Bennett
Rik Vigeland wrote in message <367EA1...@mentorg.com>...
<snip>
>
>Maria and Pedro I had two daughters, Constance, the third wife of John
>of Gaunt, and Isabella (1355-1394) who m. 1372 Edmund of Langley, Duke
>of York.
>From the marriage of John and Constance descends Henry VII of England.
>From the marriage of Edmund and Isabella descends Edward IV of England.
The second one I'll grant you but the first is news to me -- I always
undertood that Henry VII's only descent from John of Gaunt was via his
liaison, subsequently legitimised, with Catherine Roelt. How is Henry VII
descended from Constance of Castile?
Chris
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Todd recently mentioned the descent from Alfonso and Zaida back into
> Spain. Here is a short synopsys of two lines, with further connections
> into England. They are put together from several posts long ago here
> which I wasn't able to find on the net.
>
> Descent from Sancha to England
>
> Sancha of Castile m. Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara
> Rodrigo Rodriquez de Lara m. Garcia de Azagra
Again, this guy is fictional. Rodrigo and Sancha had no such son. The
father of Sancha, wife of Gonzalo Ruiz Giron was Rodrigo Fernandez de
Torono
> Sancha Rodriguez de Lara m. Gonsalo Ruis II Giron, d. 1234
> Aldonza Gonzales Giron m. Ramiro Senor de Cifontes
The only documented line from Sancha must pass through Juan Diaz de
Haro, her only identified great- great- grandchild.
taf
Nathaniel Taylor
<rik_vi...@mentorg.com> wrote:
>Todd recently mentioned the descent from Alfonso and Zaida back into
>Spain. Here is a short synopsys of two lines, with further connections
>into England. They are put together from several posts long ago here
>which I wasn't able to find on the net.
>
>Descent from Sancha to England
>
>Sancha of Castile m. Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara
>Rodrigo Rodriquez de Lara m. Garcia de Azagra
>Sancha Rodriguez de Lara m. Gonsalo Ruis II Giron, d. 1234
Todd & I just got through saying this is NOT a valid line. The wife of
Gonzalo Ruiz Giron wasn't a Lara. The only descendants of Isabel/Zaida
past the fourth generation are through the descendants of the Sicilian
marriage of Elvira Alfonso.
Nat Taylor