RootsWeb GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Descendants of Mohammad
T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne
for the source of an obvious falacy which has spread like a cancer across
the internet. Interestingly, it came from this list! The error is:
'Obeidallah al-Mahdi, [always marked or flagged as a female], m. 1st
Fatimid Chalif of Egypt'. See #11, below, for the origin of this faux link.
If there is any interest remaining, I should like to revisit these lines in
discussion, particularly looking for feedback from Chico, as he seems to
have done more work than anyone else in this area since Levi Provençal. I
have added the links for the follow ups (FU's).
> GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives
> From: Kaare Albert Lie <kaar...@RIKSNETT.NO>
> Subject: Descendants of Mohammad?
> Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 16:38:21 GMT
>
> The genealogist Finn A. Wang,
I am unfamiliar with this name; so, respectfully, ask what is his background
in this area?
> who himself has not got access
> to Internet yet, has asked me to present the following article
> that he has written. Finn invites to constructive critizism
> and debate about the views presented here. Comments on this
> article can be presented here at soc.genealogy.medieval, and I
> will transmit them to Finn. He will also gladly participate in
> that debate himself, but since I am assuming the role of an
> intermediary link here, replies will probably be delayed for
> some days.
>
> Here is Finn's article:
>
> In 1995 there was a most interesting debate on Internet,
> concerning the possibility of finding Europeans descending
> from Mohammad. The debate started when I presented a line of
> descendence - based on informations I had received - from
> Mohammad's daughter Roccija, married to the kalif Othman,
> their daughter Aisha, married to the kalif Merwan ben Hakim,
> their daughter with name unknown, married to the conqueror in
> Spain, Muza ben Nuseir, and further:
>
> 1. Abd-al-Aziz ibn Musa, d.717
> 2. Aisha (?), m. Fortun benqasim
> 3. Muza ben Fortun
> 4. Muza ben Muza
> 5. Oria, m. Fortun of Pamplna
> 6. Oneca, m. Aznar Sanchez of Larron
> 7. Toda, m. Sancho I (865-925) of Navarra
>
> It turned out, however, that Aisha, the wife of kalif Merwan,
> was daughter of the kalif Muawijja, that Othman had no
> descendants with Roccija, and that the marriage of Oria,
> daughter of Muza ben Muza and Fortun of Pamplona, is far from
> sure.
>
> We are, however, convinced that the prophet Mohammad in fact
> has lots of descendants in Europe today, and concur in the
> opinion of Lt. Col. W.H. Turton, D.S.O., the editor of "The
> Plantagenet Ancestry", who says: "I have in vain tried to find
> a descent from Mohammad to Musa ibn Nuseir. Maybe there exists
> one, but usually the muslim genealogists do not care much for
> the mothers of the persons, so this would be difficult to
> trace."
Agreed on all points, except that Muslim genealogists don't care much for
the mothers.
> It is a fact that the Arabs, like most other peoples, named
> their children after the ancestors, and certain names could
> only be used by certain privileged families.
This not only not a fact, it is a fallacy!
> This can clearly
> be seen in the descendants of Mohammad's daughter Fatima, the
> shi'ites,
No, the Shi'ites are a sect of al-Islam. The descendants of Fatima are
called 'sharif', (mostly descendants of al-Hassan), and 'sayyid', (mostly
the descendants of al-Hussein). (And, if you ain't Muslim, you ain't
Shi'ite!)
> who seem to have had the special privilege of using
> the names Ismael and Mohammad.
Again, a fallacy. Muslims tended, (and still do), to name their children
after other family members, on either side, and after significant
personages. The name Mohammed is the most common male name in the world.
>
> Let us have a look at the events that preceded the year 1059,
> when Abbad of Sevilla took the title "Emir of All Spain".
>
> Ca. 846 Sa'od ben Ahmed of banu Husein, descendant of Ali's
> son Husein and Mohammad's daugher Fatima, was born. Ca. 9
> years later (ca. 855) his future wife was born. Seh [she] was ca. 15
> years old when they got married. Ca. 873 they got the son
> Mohammad, who later was called el-Khaom or al-Qasim.
>
> Around that time Sevilla tore away from the dominance of
> Cordoba.
>
> When el-Khaom was in the middle of his twenties, he married
> ca. 898 to the 15 years (?) old woman who becam mother of his
> successor Isma'il al-Mansur ca. 901. He had among others a
> half-sister, about 8 years older.
>
> In 909 Sa'od bin Ahmed conquers Tunisia and settles there. He
> takes the name Obeidallah al-Mahdi, and sends envoys and spies
> to Spain, and enters into an alliance with the most powerful
> man of southern Spain, Omar ibn Hafsun. The khadi (judge) of
> Sevilla at that time was Amr ibn Aslam, a man in his sixties,
> who now found it opportune to get a wife of good family for
> his son Abbad ibn Amr, and therefore saw to get him married to
> the daughter of el-Khaom's concubine. Their son Kharis -
> possibly Khasim(?) -- the future khadi of Sevilla, was born
> ca. 912. The next year Sevilla surrendered to Abd-ar-Rahman
> III of Cordoba, who possibly himself had a daughter of
> Mohammad el-Khaom in his harem.
Politically unlikely.
>In 934 the old Mahdi dies, and
> it may have been in this year that Kharis ibn Abbad marries --
> possibly to a cousin; a daughter of Isma'il al-Mansur, ca. 14
> years old. Their (?) son Isma'il ibn Kharis is then born ca.
> 952, and his son Mohammad I abu-l-Khasim ca. 980. It was his
> son Abbad who became "Great Emir". As the table shows, there
> are name-connections between the descendants of Ali, the
> Fatimids, of North-Africa and the khadis of Sevilla.
Because of the aforementioned false premise, this point becomes immaterial.
In fact, these names are to be expected, (passive paraphrastic), regardless
of family connections, (vide supra).
>
> 1. Mohammad ibn Abdullah, 571-632
> 2. Fatima, m. Ali ibn abu-Talib, 4. kalif (in Iraq) 656-661
> 3. al-Husein, ca. 626-680, 3. imam of the Shi'ites, Iraq
> 4. Ali Zain al-Abidin, ca. 653-713, 4. imam in Iraq
> 5. Mohammad al-Bakhir, ca. 681-733, 5. imam in Iraq
> 6. Djafar al-Sadikh, ca. 708-765, 6. imam in Iraq
> 7. Isma'il ibn Gafar, 736-760
> 8. Mohammad ibn Isma'il, b.ca. 759
> 9. Isma'il ibn Mohammad, b.ca. 791
> 10. Ahmed ibn Isma'il, b.ca. 818
> 11. Obeidallah al-Mahdi, ca. 846-934, 1. Fatimid kalif, Egypt
> 12. Mohammad al-Khaim, ca. 873-946, 2. kalif
> 13. Isma'il al-Mansur, ca. 901-952, 3. kalif in Egypt
So far, verified in numerous sources.
> 14. N.N. b.ca. 920, m. Kharis ibn Abbad, khadi in Sevilla
> 15. Isma'il ibn Qaris, b.ca. 952, khadi in Sevilla
> 16. Mohammad I abu-l-Khasim, ca. 980-1042, hachib of Sevilla
> 17. Abbad al-Mutadid, ca. 1010-1069, "Emir of All Spain"
> 18. Mohammad II al-Mutamid, 1040-1095, emir of Sevilla
As pointed out by TAF in a FU (follow up) #18 should be a brother of
al-Mutamid. FWIW: Dave Kelley is of the same conviction.
> 19. Zayda, m. Alfonso VI of Castilla, 1040-1109
> 20. Sancha, m. 1122 to Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara (el Franco)
Again, here be controversy, pointed out, in part, in the FU's, (vide infra).
> 21. Rodrigo Rodriguez de Lara, b. 1128, m. Garcia de Azagra
> 22. Sancha, m. Gonzalo Ruiz II Giron, d. 1234
> 23. Maria, m. Guillen Perez de Guzman
> 24. Maria, d. 1262, m. Alfonso IX of Castilla
> 25. Beatrice, m. Affonso III of Portugal
> 26. Dionisiso of Portugal, 1261-1325, m. Isabel of Aragon
> 27. Affonso IV of Portugal, 1291-1357
> 28. Maria, 1313-1357, m. Alfonso IX of Castilla, daughterson
> of nr. 26.
> 29. Pedro the Cruel, 1334-1368, king of Castilla
> 30. Isabella, 1355-1394, m. duke Edmund of York, England
>
> Kere A. Lie
> kaar...@riksnett.no
>
>
> This thread:
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1997-04/0860431101
Descendants of Mohammad? by Kaare Albert Lie
> <kaar...@RIKSNETT.NO>
>
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1997-04/0860782620 Re:
Descendants of Mohammad? by "Todd A. Farmerie"
> <ta...@PO.CWRU.EDU>
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1997-04/0860787232 Re:
Descendants of Mohammad? by Nathaniel Taylor
> <nta...@FAS.HARVARD.EDU>
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1997-04/0860814517 Re:
Descendants of Mohammad? by Chris Bennett
> <cben...@ADNC.COM>
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1997-04/0860815270 Re:
Descendants of Mohammad? by Chris Bennett
> <cben...@ADNC.COM>
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/1997-04/0861046004 Re:
Descendants of Mohammad? by "Todd A. Farmerie"
> <ta...@PO.CWRU.EDU>
>
>
> RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb
community.
>
> Copyright © 1998-2002, MyFamily.com Inc. and its subsidiaries.
Nathaniel Taylor
smomm...@earthlink.net ("T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne")
wrote:
> RootsWeb: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Descendants of Mohammad?I was recently searching
> for the source of an obvious falacy which has spread like a cancer across
> the internet. Interestingly, it came from this list! The error is:
> 'Obeidallah al-Mahdi, [always marked or flagged as a female], m. 1st
> Fatimid Chalif of Egypt'. See #11, below, for the origin of this faux link.
I see. Kaare's use of "1." to mean 'first' (as in first caliph) was
given an interpolated 'm.' to turn it into a first marriage?
> If there is any interest remaining, I should like to revisit these lines in
> discussion, particularly looking for feedback from Chico, as he seems to
> have done more work than anyone else in this area since Levi Provençal. I
> have added the links for the follow ups (FU's).
Well, there's no point resurrecting the Zaida line; the Isabel, wife of
Alfonso VI, who had two daughters (of whom one left descendants
traceable in Sicily, but the other's descendants disappear from the
record in three generations) may have been Zaida, but Zaida's ancestry
is not known in the sources, whatever people may want to believe.
But Chico has kept alive the idea of Muslim descent focusing on a
different point: aristocratic Muslims in the region of Coimbra
(specifically, the area around the monastery of Lorvao), from whom lines
may possibly be traced forward (interestingly, by male conversion, not
female intermarriage) into Christian Castile and Portugal. This is
something he and Marshall Kirk have been working on, as I think you know.
> > It is a fact that the Arabs, like most other peoples, named
> > their children after the ancestors, and certain names could
> > only be used by certain privileged families.
>
> This not only not a fact, it is a fallacy!
> > ... As the table shows, there
> > are name-connections between the descendants of Ali, the
> > Fatimids, of North-Africa and the khadis of Sevilla.
>
> Because of the aforementioned false premise, this point becomes immaterial.
> In fact, these names are to be expected regardless
> of family connections ...
These thoughts echo my reservations about the current onomastic avenue
under exploration by Chico and Marshall. I would like to see some
disinterested analysis of the frequency of specific names in the Muslim
population (or specific subgroups, such as Al-Andalus), with discussion
of restrictions and norms in choosing prominent names among specific
Muslim social and ethnic strata in specific places and times relevant to
these proposed lines. As Chico and Marshall can tell you much more
fully, in this case we are not dealing with the (admittedly quite
generic) Fatimid names, but those of the Idrissids. Does an Idrissid
name (e.g. 'Idris') borne by a locally prominent person compellingly
suggest that that person descends from the Idrissid dynasty? This is
the $64,000 (or $0.02) question.
OK, off to bed.
Nat Taylor
Francisco Antonio Doria
First, let me state clearly: we will never have
complete certainty in those matters.
Here is what we've got: Nat and Marshall noticed a
document (code number DC 3) - of corrected date 911 -
where King Ordonho II grants to Lorvão some lands and
a servant formerly (?) ``in the possession'' of one
Ydriz. The document is very unusual, as it is signed
by King Ordonho followed by five bishops as
confirmants. (There is another one with a similar set
of ecclesiastical confirmants, I guess.)
Documents signed by the King himself are exceptional
and indicate both the high rank of those involved and
the import of the act. In this case there is the grant
of land `held' by (I guess) a grandee, this Ydriz, so
it was the King's responsibility and word, plus the
bishops'.
(Another document signed by the King himself is the
Zahadon sale do Gondemiro ibn Da'uti, very likely
Zahadon's inlaw. Zahadon was - I think that's now
consensual - an Ummayad; he was married to a
high-ranking Christian lady, Aragunte Fromariques,
which I think was the niece of a queen and descended
from the family of Vímara Peres. The Zahadon sale is
DC 39, dated 933, and is confirmed by Ramiro II, his
son, two counts, etc.)
In a nutshell: we can (carefully) thus reconstruct the
ancestry of Abunazar Lovesendes, Lord of Maia (978):
1. Fikhri, or al-Fikhri. Married a Christian lady (?)
from the family of Mendo Guterres (conjectured through
onomastics). Son:
2. Leodesindo/Lovesendo ibn Fikhri. M. a daughter of
Zahadon ibn Halafi, al-Umawi, accordng to the 13th
century genealogy. Son:
3. Abu Nazar, or plain Nazar, Lovesendes.
I had noticed an Yahya ... ibn Fikhri al-Hasani as the
first confirmant in DC 229, dated in Hajra years that
correspond to 1006, Christian Era. Since this person
tops a list of al-Umawis (Ummayads), al-Qayzis and
al-Lahamis (Lakhmids), he must have been a true
grandee. His name would place him as an Idrissid, of
the branch (descended from?) the last Amir of Morocco.
The Maia family has its origins surrounded by an
impossible myth: that they are agnatically descended
from Ramiro II. There is no documentary evidence
whatsoever of such a descent, or from any other King
Ramiro. Moreover its onomastics - first generations -
is either Muslim or derived from the family of Mendo
Guterres.
*My guess*: there was a `conversion' of the family's
genealogy when they became Christianized: the royal
and more than royal origin was `translated' into the
Leonese royal ancestry. There are examples of some
other minor agnatic lines descended from Prophet
Muhammad and later christianized. This is easy to
explain: children were educated by the maternal family
if there was a divorce, and (male) Muslim x (female)
Christian marriages were common.
I've also found documentary evidence that some lines
descended from Zahadon remained Muslim.
If I am right - I think that Marshall and I think sort
of the same way here; Nat wonderfully acts as the
Devil's Advocate in this case; I just say `I' because
I don't want to make Marshall responsible for my wild
dreams ;-)) - then most of the Western European
population is descended from Prophet Muhammad himself.
(Of course I'm quite attentive to the political
meaning of that...)
Happy 2004 to you all,
chico
--- Nathaniel Taylor <nathani...@earthlink.net>
escreveu: > In article
______________________________________________________________________
Conheça a nova central de informações anti-spam do Yahoo! Mail:
http://www.yahoo.com.br/antispam
Francisco Antonio Doria
Ford:
Good morning. I've already answered you in pvt and
through the list. I thought that you were aware of the
discussions among Marshall, Nat and myself. Hope the
summary I made will give you an idea of it.
Marshall has made a beautiful reconstruction of the
Idrissid genealogy; do you have it?
Best, chico
--- "T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne"
<smomm...@earthlink.net> escreveu: > RootsWeb:
=== message truncated ===
T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne
assume I can use this word, here, about you, a man, without rufflingly any
feminist feathers), response.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathaniel Taylor" <nathani...@earthlink.net>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: Descendants of Muhammad
> In article <000101c3cef5$58d0e3a0$bf0d0043@hppav>,
> smomm...@earthlink.net ("T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne")
> wrote:
>
> > RootsWeb: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Descendants of Mohammad?I was recently
searching
> > for the source of an obvious falacy which has spread like a cancer
across
> > the internet. Interestingly, it came from this list! The error is:
> > 'Obeidallah al-Mahdi, [always marked or flagged as a female], m. 1st
> > Fatimid Chalif of Egypt'. See #11, below, for the origin of this faux
link.
>
> I see. Kaare's use of "1." to mean 'first' (as in first caliph) was
> given an interpolated 'm.' to turn it into a first marriage?
>
Curiously, the '2.' and '3.' were not.?
> > If there is any interest remaining, I should like to revisit these lines
in
> > discussion, particularly looking for feedback from Chico, as he seems to
> > have done more work than anyone else in this area since Levi Provençal.
I
> > have added the links for the follow ups (FU's).
>
> Well, there's no point resurrecting the Zaida line; the Isabel, wife of
> Alfonso VI, who had two daughters (of whom one left descendants
> traceable in Sicily, but the other's descendants disappear from the
> record in three generations) may have been Zaida, but Zaida's ancestry
> is not known in the sources, whatever people may want to believe.
>
> But Chico has kept alive the idea of Muslim descent focusing on a
> different point: aristocratic Muslims in the region of Coimbra
> (specifically, the area around the monastery of Lorvao), from whom lines
> may possibly be traced forward (interestingly, by male conversion, not
> female intermarriage) into Christian Castile and Portugal. This is
> something he and Marshall Kirk have been working on, as I think you know.
>
Actualy, no - I didn't reälize that MK was doing any work in this area. I
shall have to have speaks with him concerning such reticence!
> > > It is a fact that the Arabs, like most other peoples, named
> > > their children after the ancestors, and certain names could
> > > only be used by certain privileged families.
> >
> > This not only not a fact, it is a fallacy!
>
> > > ... As the table shows, there
> > > are name-connections between the descendants of Ali, the
> > > Fatimids, of North-Africa and the khadis of Sevilla.
> >
> > Because of the aforementioned false premise, this point becomes
immaterial.
> > In fact, these names are to be expected regardless
> > of family connections ...
>
> These thoughts echo my reservations about the current onomastic avenue
> under exploration by Chico and Marshall.
From what I understand of Chico's work, he is using onomastics among the
Christian groups, where the circumstances were quite different. They were
also different among the Berbers, as pertains to what follows.
Gordon Banks
in the 15th century, where he said King Fernando of Aragon had converso
ancestry (meaning Jewish convert, not Muslim), and that most of the
nobility by that time did. Is this so? Do you know of any conversos in
the line of Sancha de Ayala?
On Wed, 2003-12-31 at 00:46, Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
> In article <000101c3cef5$58d0e3a0$bf0d0043@hppav>,
> smomm...@earthlink.net ("T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne")
> wrote:
>
> > RootsWeb: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Descendants of Mohammad?I was recently searching
> > for the source of an obvious falacy which has spread like a cancer across
> > the internet. Interestingly, it came from this list! The error is:
> > 'Obeidallah al-Mahdi, [always marked or flagged as a female], m. 1st
> > Fatimid Chalif of Egypt'. See #11, below, for the origin of this faux link.
>
> I see. Kaare's use of "1." to mean 'first' (as in first caliph) was
> given an interpolated 'm.' to turn it into a first marriage?
>
> > If there is any interest remaining, I should like to revisit these lines in
> > discussion, particularly looking for feedback from Chico, as he seems to
> > have done more work than anyone else in this area since Levi Provenal. I
T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Banks" <g...@gordonbanks.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 12:56 AM
Subject: Re: Descendants of Muhammad
> Along similar lines, I heard a lecture by Teofilo Ruiz of UCLA on Spain
> in the 15th century, where he said King Fernando of Aragon had converso
> ancestry (meaning Jewish convert, not Muslim), and that most of the
> nobility by that time did. Is this so? Do you know of any conversos in
> the line of Sancha de Ayala?
>
There was a bishop, (I don't remember which), who wrote a libretto in the
late middle ages, early Renassance, called _La Tinza de la Nobilidad_, or,
for non-Hispanophones[?], 'The Taint of the Nobility'. Tinza, because it is
cognate, could also be translated as 'tint'. The work deals with the Moslem
& Jewish ancestry of the noble families of Iberia, (and by unspoken
extension, the royal families thereof). I remeber in particular one of the
families de Toledo from Jews. Most of these origins were via conversos,
either from Judaism or from al-Islam.
marshall kirk
correct -- Chico, in concluding that the "Ydriz" of the document of
911 CE (corrected) is, by token of its nature and content, a grandee
of high degree; Nat, that a central question becomes, does the name
'Idris' itself point with strong probability to the Idrisids of
Morocco ... or is it too common to point anywhere in particular?
FWIW, here're my reasons for thinking that the name probably does
point to the then-ruling dynasty of Morocco.
Altho' there *may be* and probably *are* studies of Muslim
prosopography, I'm not aware of them, never having been a student of
the subject. I would like to see someone here weigh in with a
relevant bib, if possible. Should such studies exist, to be useful
they'd have to focus on 9th- and 10th-century Andalusia, since that's
the era and area with which we're dealing, and the relative
frequencies of Muslim names vary greatly with time and place, as one
can readily see simply by reading Arabic historians. That said, a
pretty fair substitute for a formal study, which gives one a rough and
ready idea of what's what with Muslim name-frequencies in Andalusia,
is provided by the very lengthy and detailed index to Maqqari's
voluminous history of 'the Muslim states in Spain.' I'd say it
references some thousands of named individuals. All those named
'Idris' are, as far as I can see, members of the Moroccan dynasty. (I
have NOT, however, examined every *nasab* for Idrises further up the
line; the index is arranged by individual's personal names, not those
of their ancestors. I should rectify this, tho' the task will be
time-consuming.)
It might be argued that the people Maqqari names are inevitably going
to be high-level history-makers and/or men of wealth, not the rank and
file; but that's why it's important to note that the Idris at Lorvao
is himself, *prima facie*, NOT of that rank and file.
As a second fact, genealogies of the Ummayad family are themselves
quite voluminous, owing to polygamy and concubinage. Of the (perhaps)
200 names of individual Ummayads I've seen, none is named Idris.
I think it important to point out that Idris II, thru whom all
Moroccan-Idrisid lines pass, had a dozen or so sons, all of whom seem
to have reproduced in some abundance. By the fourth or fifth
generation, the family probably numbered several hundred Idrisids of
male-line descent, most of whom can't, it would seem, have gone down
in history. In other words, there should be no shortage of potential
candidates for the man at Lorvao.
Next, the index to one French edition of one of earlier chroniclers of
the Maghreb matter-of-factly identifies a man mentioned in the text as
lord of an estate near Seville, with a known Idrisid. Since no
evidence is presented, I can't yet say whether or not that's a valid
ID.
Finally, the signatories to the various Lorvao and Coimbra charters
cumulatively number perhaps a couple of hundred. As far as I can
recall, there's only one Idris.
For these reasons, I tentatively conclude that the name is uncommon in
that time and place, and associated primarily, indeed almost solely,
with the dynasty at Fez.
--mk
P.S.: one other point: the -al-Hasani itself indicates descent
either from *A* Hasan or from *THE* Hasan, that is, son of Ali.
(There are two extant texts of the relevant charter, which slightly
disagree, and it's not easy to say which should be considered more
authoritative in this particular regard.) The Idrisids were, of
course, Hasanids.
franciscoa...@yahoo.com.br (Francisco Antonio Doria) wrote in message news:<2003123109510...@web41713.mail.yahoo.com>...
Francisco Antonio Doria
It's the La Paloma line, isn't it, from the
Henriques/Henriquez line?
chico
--- Gordon Banks <g...@gordonbanks.com> escreveu: >
______________________________________________________________________
T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne
From: "marshall kirk" <mkk...@rcn.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: Descendants of Muhammad
Now, this is what I was, kind of, sort of, saying by saying that Berbers
and such had different attitudes towards naming. This kind of
argumentation, based upon truly 'dynastic' names, (for lack of a better
term), than upon the most common name in the world treated as a dynastic
name; and speculations that are phrased as fact. I know that in my piece,
'A Key to Descents from Antiquity', the lineages laid out LOOKED pretty
factual, but one must READ all of the material, not just copy snippets so
haphazardly as to split one man into husband and wife. My preface to the
aforementioned article stated that it was presented as a spur to further
research. Luckily, for many of us, Ch. Settipani and others took up the
gauntlet 'with a vengeance'. (I still, very respectfully, disagree with him
on his reconstruction of the Anicii Ruriciani, though.)
That being said, and as fascinating as I find this current sub-thread, I
should still like to know more about the line of the Fatimids, and possible
links to Europe, (or to the Maghreb). I feel in my bones, and in my heart
of hearts, that there is such a lineage and linkage; but proving one, or
even reconstructing as is done with DFA's, or this current line, would be
soooooooooo much better.
Thanks Marshall, for taking the time to respond.
Francisco Antonio Doria
The point, Ford, is documentation. I take from
Lévi-Prpvençal that the Idrissids were close allies of
the Ummayad amirs and that a few Idrissid branches
moved to al-Andaluz in the 9th and 10th century. This
fits quite nicely with the Ydriz documented in DC 3.
How did he get those lands? The quote is `quos
obtinuit Ydriz.' Literally, obtained - got - by Ydriz.
This might mean, to get by force; if not, it would be
something like `quos dedit X Ydrizi,' or, `quos Ydriz
comparauit' (that X gave to Ydriz, that Ydriz bought).
I must expand now on my earlier remarks. A few months
ago I listed some 6 or 7 documents which I had found
*dispersed* in Herculano's DC, and asked for
facsimiles of them. These were: Zahadon's sale to
Gondemiro; two documents with Nazeron and Leodesindo
as confirmants; the Hajra-dated sales to Lorvão. To my
HUGE surprise my colleague in Lisbon sent back to me
the first 15 or so pages of the _Liber Testamentorum
Laurbanensis_, dated 1116 by Ruy de Azevedo (txs Nat
for that piece of info!) and ALL documents I had asked
for were collected together in those first 15 pages.
One of the most interesting is DC 229, dated 1006,
which tells of land sold to Dulcidius [Abu al-Mundhir]
abbot of Lorvão by a Musmim. The first confirmant is
the al-Hasani. His position is one of honor, and he
stands first among Ummayads. So he must rank higher:
the `nisba' (surname) al-Hasani may indicate that he
was descended from the Prophet or, perhaps, might be
the end link in the `nasab' (genealogical name),
indicating that he was descended from the last amir of
Morocco. Both possibilities indicate an Alid ancestry.
I tentatively identified the Fikhri (ibn?) al-Hasani
as the ancestor of the Maia family, since I get that
Abunazar is Abunazar ibn Leodesindo ibn Fikhri.
(There is a Fikhri, a Lakhmid, in the same time frame,
but if we take him as an ancestor to the Maia family
we don't explain its most exalted rank.)
As I've said before, we may never be totally sure on
those matters, but the pointers are very strong.
chico
--- "T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne"
<smomm...@earthlink.net> escreveu: > ----- Original
______________________________________________________________________
J.L.Fernandez-Blanco
The topic has been dealt with last year (you can search "tizón").
The name of the (in)famous pamphlet is "Tizón de la Nobleza Española".
The word Tizón has a dual meaning here: a "tizón" is a piece of
half-burned log (obvious reference to the stake) and it also means
stigma.
Regarding the supposed converso ancestry of Fernando through the
Enriquez, the topic has also been discussed. One of the main sources
for this alleged ancestry is the same pamphlet. Contemporaries of
Alfonso Enríquez, the alleged son of "La Paloma" never made reference
to his mother. However, the "Cancionero Popular" (popular songs of the
time) compiled legends saying that his mother was Blanche de Bourbon
(wife of Pedro el Cruel). Of course, Spanish historians are still at
lost in this sense.
What is very interesting is that EVERYBODY likes to remember the
alleged "Jewish" ancestry of Fernando, but NOBODY makes reference to
the also alleged "Jewish" ancestry that Isabel de Castilla might have
had through her mother Isabel de Portugal, who was a granddaughter of
Inês Pires of whom many times have been said that was the daughter of
a converted shoemaker...topic also discussed here.
Anyway, the statement above that "most of the nobility" descended from
converted people--either Jewish or Muslim--seems quite an
exaggeration. But then, if the legend of "La Paloma" is true it could
be said that ALL the leading Castilian families during the XVI and
XVII centuries had "converso" ancestry because ALL of them, without
exception, were descended from that lady.
But I don't understand why time and again the same question is asked
as if it were the latest discovery when it has been around for more
than 500 years!
Cordially,
Lic. Jose Luis Fernández-Blanco
Frank Young
> From: "Gordon Banks" <g...@gordonbanks.com>
> > Along similar lines, I heard a lecture by Teofilo Ruiz of UCLA on Spain
> > in the 15th century, where he said King Fernando of Aragon had converso
> > ancestry
> There was a bishop, (I don't remember which), who wrote a libretto in the
No, rather a cardinal-archbishop, and no, not a libretto, since teh text
was not prepared for a musical setting ---
> late middle ages, early Renassance, called _La Tinza de la Nobilidad_, or,
> for non-Hispanophones[?], 'The Taint of the Nobility'.
No, that is NOT even close to the correct title of this famous work (see
below); and not in the "late middle ages, Early Renaissance," but rather
in the Late Renaissance.
> & Jewish ancestry of the noble families of Iberia, (and by unspoken
> extension, the royal families thereof).
No, not unspoken at all. Surely you should read the texts on which you
comment before venturing a public opinion.
The work in question, <El tizón de la nobleza española, ó, Maculas
y sambenitos de sus linajes> (1560, but not published in book form
until the nineteenth century) was written by Cardinal Francisco Sylvio de
Mendoza y Bobadilla, archibishop of Burgos, and the most important
churchman in Spain in his time. A full citation of the most recent
scholarly edition of the work appears below.
The future cardinal was born in Cuenca on September 25, 1508, the son
of Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, marques de Canete and viceroy of Navarre.
Following his studies at Alcala and Salamanca, from which he received a
doctorate in theology and letters, he received a number of early
ecclesiastical appointments. Among these were canonries in Evora and
Coimbra, and, in the 1520's, archdeacon of Toledo. On February 14, 1533,
Clement VII, on the recommendation of Charles V (Carlos I), made him
bishop of Coria, in succession to Francisco de los Angeles Quinones, who
had resigned.
On December 19, 1544, as the second creation in his eighth consistory
for the promotion of cardinals, Mendoza was created and published a
cardinal-priest. Late in 1545, he made his formal entrance into Rome. The
ceremonies of the opening and closing of the mouth were performed for
him, and, on December 4, 1545, he was given the rank of cardinal-priest
of the title of Santa Maria in Araceli. On February 28, 1550, Julius III
transfered him to the title of San Giovanni a Porta Latina, but when that
was found to be unsuitable -- presumably because of the poor condition
of the church itself -- he was immediately transfered to the title of San
Eusebio, a title he retained until his death.
Shortly afterwards, on June 27, 1550, he was elevated to be archbishop of
Burgos when the incumbent in that see, Juan Alvarez y Alva de Toledo,
was made archbishop of Santiago de Compostela. He died on December
1, 1566.
In 1560, Mendoza became involved in a conflict regarding the <limpieza>
of his nephew, the conde de Chinchon. In response, he wrote <El tizón de
la nobleza española, ó, Maculas y sambenitos de sus linajes>, which he
presented to King Philip II. Mendoza also prepared a separate manuscript
of genealogical tables, <Pedaço y del libro de linages [que scribio el
Conde D. Fra[ncis]co de Mendoça y Bobadilla arçobispo de Burgos]> (see the
full citation of one surviving manuscript, below). In his work, Mendoza
showed that nearly all the aristocracy of Castille and Aragon had Jewish
or Moorish blood.
In his <A History of the Inquition of Spain> (see complete citation,
below, vol. II, bk. 4, chap. 4, p. 298), Henry Charles Lea wrote of the
question of <limpieza> and Mendoza's work:
"There were two sources of descent which caused impurity of blood--from an
ancestor of either of the proscribed races, or from one who had ever been
penanced by the Inquisition. As regards the former, the line was drawn at
the massacres of 1391 for Jews and at the enforced baptisms of the early
sixteenth century for Moors. Voluntary converts, prior to those periods,
were accepted as Old Christians, the subsequent ones were considered as
unwilling converts and were regarded as New Christians, together with
their descendants, no matter how zealously they had embraced the Christian
faith. The prevalence of intermarriage with Conversos throughout the
fifteenth century had led to infinite ramifications throughout the land in
the course of generations and, about 1560, Cardinal Mendoza y Bobadilla,
apparently moved by some discussion on limpieza, drew up and presented to
Philip II a memorial in which he showed that virtually the whole nobility
of Castile and Aragon had a strain of Jewish blood."
At the present time, the best scholarly edition is:
El tizón de la nobleza de España /
Francisco de Mendoza; Armando M Escobar Olmedo; Fredo Arias de la
Canal
1999
Spanish Book xlix, 235 p. : ill., ports. ; 23 cm.
México, D.F. : Frente de Afirmación Hispanista,
Title: El tizón de la nobleza de España /
Author(s): Mendoza, Francisco de, d. 1566. ; Escobar Olmedo, Armando M.
; (Armando Mauricio).; Arias de la Canal, Fredo.
Publication: México, D.F. : Frente de Afirmación Hispanista,
Year: 1999
Description: xlix, 235 p. : ill., ports. ; 23 cm.
Standard No: LCCN: 00-346926
Note(s): Originally published as: El tizón de la nobelza española, ó, M
culas y sambenitos de sus linajes./ Includes bibliographical references
(p. 176-185) and index.
Class Descriptors: LC: CR4071
Other Titles: Tizón de la nobleza española
Responsibility: por el Cardenal Francisco de Mendoza y Bovadilla ;
introducción, versión paleográfica y notas, Armando Mauricio Escobar
Olmedo ; prólogo, Fredo Arias de la Canal.
Accession No: OCLC: 42305131
The cardinal's additional genealogical materials are found in:
Pedaço y del libro de linages que scribio el Conde D. Fra[ncis]co de
Mendoça y Bobadilla arçobispo de Burgos :
[Spain] : ms.,
Francisco de Mendoza
1550-1599?
Spanish Book : Thesis/dissertation/manuscript 1 v. ([16], 90 leaves (the
last 2 leaves blank)) : paper ; 32 x 22 cm.
A book of lineage which lists titles of nobles and other significant
persons, with occasional historical references. Among those listed
include: the Dukes of Nájera; Acuñas, señores de Valencia, dukes and
counts; Dukes of Alva; Velascos, counts of Haro; Marquises of Vélez; Count
of Fuensalida; Count of Cifuentes; Count of Orgaz; count of Chinchón;
Marquis of Cañete; Count of Oropesa; Count of Puño en Rostro; Count of
Medellín; Admiral of Castilla; Duke of Maqueda; Marquis of Tarifa, Count
of Hureña; Duke of Medinaceli; Duke of Medina Sidonia, Duke of Arcos;
Duke of Alburquerque; Marquis of Villena; señores of Pacheco.
Title: Pedaço y del libro de linages que scribio el Conde D. Fra[ncis]co
de
Mendoça y Bobadilla arçobispo de Burgos :
[Spain] : ms., [between 1550 and 1599?].
Author(s): Mendoza, Francisco de, d. 1566.
Publication: Spain
Year: 1550-1599?
Description: 1 v. ([16], 90 leaves (the last 2 leaves blank)) : paper ; 32
x 22
cm.
Language: Spanish
Abstract: A book of lineage which lists titles of nobles and other
significant persons, with occasional historical references. Among those
listed include: the Dukes of Nájera; Acuñas, señores de Valencia, dukes
and counts; Dukes of Alva; Velascos, counts of Haro; Marquises of Vélez;
Count of Fuensalida; Count of Cifuentes; Count of Orgaz; count of
Chinchón; Marquis of Cañete; Count of Oropesa; Count of Puño en Rostro;
Count of Medellín; Admiral of Castilla; Duke of Maqueda; Marquis of
Tarifa, Count of Hureña; Duke of Medinaceli; Duke of Medina Sidonia,
Duke of Arcos; Duke of Alburquerque; Marquis of Villena; señores of
Pacheco.
References: Cortijo Ocaña, A. Fernán Núñez,; 8
Note(s): Various hands, in black ink. Text on both sides of leaves.
Numerous marginalia and later additions, including an incomplete
"Indice" on the 16 prelim. leaves./ Bound in full 19th c. tree calf, spine
gilt; red morocco spine label: Mendoza y Bobadilla Pedazo del libro de
linages./ Watermark: ovoid figure with cross in the middle, with letters A
and T below./ Part of: Fernán Núñez collection./ Original shelfmark: C29-
c5.
Other Titles: Fernán Núñez collection.
Material Type: Manuscript text (mtx)
Holding: Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley.
Accession No: OCLC: 52139384
The full citation of Lea's still-valuable history is:
A history of the Inquisition of Spain,
Henry Charles Lea
1906-1907
English Book 4 v. 24 cm.
New York, London, The Macmillan company; Macmillan & co., ltd.,
Title: A history of the Inquisition of Spain,
Author(s): Lea, Henry Charles, 1825-1909.
Publication: New York, The Macmillan company; London, Macmillan & co.,
ltd.,
Year: 1906-1907
Description: 4 v. 24 cm.
Standard No: LCCN: 06-2996
Class Descriptors: LC: BX1735; Dewey: 272.2
Responsibility: by Henry Charles Lea ...
Accession No: OCLC: 1485109
Regards, Frank Young
tip...@wam.umd.edu 703-527-7684
Post Office Box 2793, Kensington, Maryland 20891
"Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate... Nunc cognosco ex parte"
Francisco Antonio Doria
Luis K W recently discussed in detail the documentary
sources about the ancestry of Inês Pires; if I
correctly recall she had property in the Muslim
quarters of Lisbon. Manoel Cesar Furtado also
discussed the ``Barbadão'' - he can add lots of detail
to the picture.
fa
--- "J.L.Fernandez-Blanco"
<jfernand...@yahoo.com> escreveu: >
______________________________________________________________________
Laloo Singh
out to current times, IE H.H. the Aga Khan (who lives in France):
http://www.iis.ac.uk/hhak/imamat_hist.htm
Clearly, there are several groupings within Shi'a Islam, with the
Nizari Isma'ili (who followed Nizar after Mustansir) branch being the
only one with a remaining "Hazar" (or living) Imam. The term Imam in
this context is quite different between the Sunni and Shi'a branches
of Islam.
smomm...@earthlink.net ("T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne") wrote in message news:<000101c3cef5$58d0e3a0$bf0d0043@hppav>...
Todd A. Farmerie
> RootsWeb: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Descendants of Mohammad?I was recently searching
> for the source of an obvious falacy which has spread like a cancer across
> the internet. Interestingly, it came from this list! The error is:
> 'Obeidallah al-Mahdi, [always marked or flagged as a female], m. 1st
> Fatimid Chalif of Egypt'. See #11, below, for the origin of this faux link.
> If there is any interest remaining, I should like to revisit these lines in
> discussion, particularly looking for feedback from Chico, as he seems to
> have done more work than anyone else in this area since Levi Provençal. I
> have added the links for the follow ups (FU's).
While I followed up on the original, I see that in at least one
instance, I was too vague, so I will give parts of it another go.
>>From: Kaare Albert Lie <kaar...@RIKSNETT.NO>
>>
>>The genealogist Finn A. Wang,
[snip, and others throughout]
>>Here is Finn's article:
>>1. Abd-al-Aziz ibn Musa, d.717
>>2. Aisha (?), m. Fortun benqasim
>>3. Muza ben Fortun
>>4. Muza ben Muza
>>5. Oria, m. Fortun of Pamplna
>>6. Oneca, m. Aznar Sanchez of Larron
>>7. Toda, m. Sancho I (865-925) of Navarra
>>
>>It turned out, however, that Aisha, the wife of kalif Merwan,
>>was daughter of the kalif Muawijja, that Othman had no
>>descendants with Roccija, and that the marriage of Oria,
>>daughter of Muza ben Muza and Fortun of Pamplona, is far from
>>sure.
Fortun Garces, King of Pamplona, is known to have married a wife
named Oria (from the latinate name Auria = gold). There is no
direct testimony as to her origins, and the onomastic argument
which makes her a member of the Banu Qasi is based on two names
of local derivation (and of Indo-European rather than Arabic or
Basque origin) that had previously been seen (although not
exclusively) in the Banu Qasi - Oria and Lupe (Llub - from wolf).
I find this argument of insufficient strength, particularly
since both families already shared a group of common names, both
with each other and with other local families, (Garcia being the
best example, and let's not forget that Loup also appears among
in other prominant Basque/Gascon families) suggesting that these
names could simply have been drawn from the font of local common
names.
There is an earlier problem as well. As to Fortun ibn Qasi (son
of Cassius, the semi-legendary founder of the Banu Qasi), his
marriage is without support - in fact, IIRC, he himself is only
found in the later pedigree which gives the foundation tradition
of the Banu Qasi family, and chronological issues have been
raised with regard to this earliest generation. It is usually
supported with onomastic arguments - that Fortun gave muslim
names to some of his children, and notably Muza. Setting aside
the debates over the accuracy of the male line, one would expect
Fortun, the first to have children born into his father's new
faith, to adjust naming practice accordingly, with or without a
marriage. Even is one posits a muslim marriage, it must be
questioned whether the status of Fortun, at this time, would have
merited marriage to any ruling muslim clan, rather than a lower
level of muslim nobility (using the same typical names).
>>14. N.N. b.ca. 920, m. Kharis ibn Abbad, khadi in Sevilla
>>15. Isma'il ibn Qaris, b.ca. 952, khadi in Sevilla
>>16. Mohammad I abu-l-Khasim, ca. 980-1042, hachib of Sevilla
>>17. Abbad al-Mutadid, ca. 1010-1069, "Emir of All Spain"
>>18. Mohammad II al-Mutamid, 1040-1095, emir of Sevilla
>
>
> As pointed out by TAF in a FU (follow up) #18 should be a brother of
> al-Mutamid. FWIW: Dave Kelley is of the same conviction.
>
>
>>19. Zayda, m. Alfonso VI of Castilla, 1040-1109
>>20. Sancha, m. 1122 to Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara (el Franco)
This isn't exactly what I said - rather I said that Zaida is the
daughter-in-law of Mohammad, as attested in the muslim sources
that name her. It has been suggested that she was daughter of
one of Mohammed's brothers, and thus had married her first
cousin, but I have failed to locate any explanation for this
opinion, and it smacks as an attempt to 'rescue' the descent lost
when Zaida was found not to be directly connected with Mohammed.
taf
T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne
T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne
From: "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com>
To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: RootsWeb GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Descendants of Mohammad
This wasn't the portion of the lineage which I was questioning; so I didn't
address it. My understanding has always been that Auria was Basque. One
MIGHT note that the name 'Wolf', (or as it is currently pronounced in the
US, 'Woof'), is very common among all sorts of peoples, e.g. the
Scandinavians, (Ulf), the Romans, (Lupus as a cognomen and agnomen), Welf,
(probably more akin to Whelp, which is a cognate, nevertheless), The
Ashkenazim, (Wolf), and as founding ancestor of the Mongol and Turkic royal
houses, and as an ancestor of the Tuban, (Tibetan) nation, (but not of their
royal dynasty), etc. Perhaps some distant racial memory the spurred the
werewolf legends? Anyway, the common occurance of this name I should think
would preclude seeing its bearers as Basque, (barring other eveidence), as
it could be name of any number of other ethnoi who settled in the area,
(severally or collectively), and used the local translation. E.g. a Jewish
trader.
> I find this argument of insufficient strength, particularly
> since both families already shared a group of common names, both
> with each other and with other local families, (Garcia being the
> best example, and let's not forget that Loup also appears among
> in other prominant Basque/Gascon families) suggesting that these
> names could simply have been drawn from the font of local common
> names.
Would that font be Arial, Times New Roman, or Courrier?
>
> There is an earlier problem as well. As to Fortun ibn Qasi (son
> of Cassius, the semi-legendary founder of the Banu Qasi), his
> marriage is without support - in fact, IIRC, he himself is only
> found in the later pedigree which gives the foundation tradition
> of the Banu Qasi family, and chronological issues have been
> raised with regard to this earliest generation. It is usually
> supported with onomastic arguments - that Fortun gave muslim
> names to some of his children, and notably Muza. Setting aside
> the debates over the accuracy of the male line, one would expect
> Fortun, the first to have children born into his father's new
> faith, to adjust naming practice accordingly, with or without a
> marriage. Even is one posits a muslim marriage, it must be
> questioned whether the status of Fortun, at this time, would have
> merited marriage to any ruling muslim clan, rather than a lower
> level of muslim nobility (using the same typical names).
>
Regardless of all of this, none of which I'm questioning, -------> Is there
a reliable, comprehensive pedigree of the Banu Qasi?
> >>14. N.N. b.ca. 920, m. Kharis ibn Abbad, khadi in Sevilla
> >>15. Isma'il ibn Qaris, b.ca. 952, khadi in Sevilla
> >>16. Mohammad I abu-l-Khasim, ca. 980-1042, hachib of Sevilla
> >>17. Abbad al-Mutadid, ca. 1010-1069, "Emir of All Spain"
> >>18. Mohammad II al-Mutamid, 1040-1095, emir of Sevilla
> >
> >
> > As pointed out by TAF in a FU (follow up) #18 should be a brother of
> > al-Mutamid. FWIW: Dave Kelley is of the same conviction.
> >
> >
> >>19. Zayda, m. Alfonso VI of Castilla, 1040-1109
> >>20. Sancha, m. 1122 to Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara (el Franco)
>
> This isn't exactly what I said - rather I said that Zaida is the
> daughter-in-law of Mohammad, as attested in the muslim sources
> that name her. It has been suggested that she was daughter of
> one of Mohammed's brothers, and thus had married her first
> cousin, but I have failed to locate any explanation for this
> opinion, and it smacks as an attempt to 'rescue' the descent lost
> when Zaida was found not to be directly connected with Mohammed.
>
> taf
Sorry, you are absolutely right. I misunderstood your comment here.
norenxaq
>
> This wasn't the portion of the lineage which I was questioning; so I didn't
> address it. My understanding has always been that Auria was Basque. One
> MIGHT note that the name 'Wolf', (or as it is currently pronounced in the
> US, 'Woof'), is very common among all sorts of peoples, e.g. the
> Scandinavians, (Ulf), the Romans, (Lupus as a cognomen and agnomen), Welf,
> (probably more akin to Whelp, which is a cognate, nevertheless), The
> Ashkenazim, (Wolf), and as founding ancestor of the Mongol and Turkic royal
> houses, and as an ancestor of the Tuban, (Tibetan) nation, (but not of their
> royal dynasty), etc. Perhaps some distant racial memory the spurred the
> werewolf legends? Anyway, the common occurance of this name I should think
> would preclude seeing its bearers as Basque, (barring other eveidence), as
> it could be name of any number of other ethnoi who settled in the area,
> (severally or collectively), and used the local translation. E.g. a Jewish
> trader.
The Tibetans believe themselves descendants of a monkey and an ogress, not a
wolf...
As for their royal family, they believe the founder came from India and is
usually considered the son of Prasenajit and his wife who was adopted by a
member of Buddha's clan as his daughter. (her adopted father being of the clan,
but not Siddhartha)
T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne
----- Original Message -----
From: "norenxaq" <nore...@san.rr.com>
To: "T. Stanford Mommaerts-Meulemans-Browne" <smomm...@earthlink.net>
Cc: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 3:47 AM
Subject: Re: RootsWeb GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Descendants of Mohammad
>
> The Tibetans believe themselves descendants of a monkey and an ogress, not
a
> wolf...
>
That is the prevailing belief, yes. But there is also a minor legend
involving a wolf.
> As for their royal family, they believe the founder came from India and is
> usually considered the son of Prasenajit and his wife who was adopted by a
> member of Buddha's clan as his daughter. (her adopted father being of the
clan,
> but not Siddhartha)
>
I'm not understanding the parenthetical remark, here.
There are actually five major sources for the imperial line. That which you
cite is one. One is a generation later in the family, Two are from other,
contemporary rajas, related to this line, and one from the time of Rama and
the Mahabhrata - the Pauravas, if memory serves. Clearly impossible
chronologically.
norenxaq
> > The Tibetans believe themselves descendants of a monkey and an ogress, not
> a
> > wolf...
> >
>
> That is the prevailing belief, yes. But there is also a minor legend
> involving a wolf.
understood
>
>
> > As for their royal family, they believe the founder came from India and is
> > usually considered the son of Prasenajit and his wife who was adopted by a
> > member of Buddha's clan as his daughter. (her adopted father being of the
> clan,
> > but not Siddhartha)
> >
>
> I'm not understanding the parenthetical remark, here.
> There are actually five major sources for the imperial line. That which you
> cite is one. One is a generation later in the family, Two are from other,
> contemporary rajas, related to this line,
do you have any details about any of these?
> and one from the time of Rama and
> the Mahabhrata - the Pauravas, if memory serves. Clearly impossible
> chronologically.
the Mahabharata. Rama was later. the version I recall attaches the founder to
one of the sons of Pandu. These brothers were collectively refered to as the
Pandavas.
As for chronology, none of them work
Todd A. Farmerie
> Anyway, the common occurance of this name I should think
> would preclude seeing its bearers as Basque, (barring other eveidence), as
> it could be name of any number of other ethnoi who settled in the area,
> (severally or collectively), and used the local translation. E.g. a Jewish
> trader.
I think all bets are off, with regards to Lupe. This was an area
that was heavily influenced by its neighbors. In the Banu Qasi
itself, you see Latin (Auria and Cassius - the original Qasi),
Basque (Garcia, Iñigo) and Arabic (Muza, Muhammed) names. In
neighboring Pallars and Ribagorza (which family was linked by
marriage with the Banu Qasi, but not as it normally appears in
print) you see French (Raymond, Bernard, Richilda, William,
Arnald), Basque (Isarno, Galindo), Catalan French (Borrell,
Sunifred, Sunyer), Goth (Odisendo), and some that I don't know
enough to type (Ava - probably latinate, Lope - probably the
same, but I don't know enough of the surrounding non-Romance Indo
European languages to be sure they didn't have a similar form,
Dadildis, and Miro). This to me indicates that we are seeing a
complex mixture of matrimonal and cultural mixing, and any
interpretation based solely on naming patterns is misplaced.
In this case, the children of Fortun and Oria (based on the Roda
codex) were:
Enneco (Iñigo) - the name of Fortun's paternal grandfather
Asenari (Aznar) - a name found in the counts of Aragon (Aznar
Galindez married Fortun's sister, so he would be an uncle
by marriage) and those of Gascony (leading some to derive
the counts of Aragon from the Gascon clan, but this is
making the same error, in my view)
Belasco (Velasco) - at this period, only known in the family
of Galindo Belascotes, father of Garcia el Malo, who in
turn was Fortun's uncle by marriage.
Lope - found in the Banu Qasi, the Counts of Bigorre and
Ribagorza
Onneca - the female form of Enneco
There is no pattern here that I can see, other than that they all
appear to derive from a common collection of named found
scattered among all of the regional families. When one adds in
that Fortun's mother is also of unknown origin, there can be no
basis for insisting that Oria must have been a bint Qasi, just
because the only other instance of the name in the immediate
region is in that family - females are named so infrequently that
we only have a small number of instances of any name, and any
pattern seen in such a small data pool is more likely to
represent a statistical sampling error, rather than a true trend.
I will add one more comment here - we know what we know about the
Basque families largely for one reason and one reason only - a
collection of pedigrees was prepared in celebration of the
marriage of Garcia Fernandez, Count of Castile, to Ava of
Ribagorza. This document, now called the codice de Roda (Roda
codex) traces their ancestry as far back as it could then be
learned. The document appears to have come from the Basque
regions, as it ignores Garcia's paternal parentage, but covers
Ava's in detail, as well as Garcia's maternal line, the royal
line of Navarre.
Simply put, if Ava or Garcia descend from a particular Basque
family, we know a good bit about them. If they don't, we know
virtually nothing. An example of this is the husband of the
other Oria (Awriya bint Musa ibn Musa ibn Qasi), a nobleman named
Garcia, who died on Mt. Laturce about 859 - that much is found in
Ibn Hazm, and nothing else is known of him, not even his
patronym. Likewise, we know of the Belascotes line only because
Garcia el Malo made a nuisance of himself and thus impinged into
the pedigree through his actions, or this line also would have
passed virtually unnoticed. The second family of Kings of
Navarre seem to have been regional lords who had already married
into the first royal family, and who took advantage of King
Fortun's 22-year imprisonment to elevate themselves to near-royal
status, and finally to supplant Fortun's family after his return.
The point is that there were other families of status in the
area, some even known to have intermarried with those we know,
and hence any particular bride could just as well have come from
one of these unknown or barely known families, rather than those
few we only know of because they appeared in a pedigree compiled
when their descendants happened to marry. (or, in other words,
the author of the Roda pedigrees had detailed information on
these families, and he failed to name Oria's parentage - perhaps
this even means that she did not derive from one of the families
appearing (and the Banu Qasi do appear in several places, so no
argument of pedigree purging or that they were unknown can
explain this failure).
In typing the above, I realized something I had missed before:
>> >>3. Muza ben Fortun
>> >>4. Muza ben Muza
>> >>5. Oria, m. Fortun of Pamplna
The compiler is marrying Fortun to the same woman who ibn Hazm
reports as married to the otherwise unknown Garcia, yet in light
of Fortun having been the king, one would expect a marriage to
him to have been mentioned too. Even if one decides Oria is a
bint Qasi, I see no justification for making her identical to
this one.
[snip]
> Regardless of all of this, none of which I'm questioning, -------> Is there
> a reliable, comprehensive pedigree of the Banu Qasi?
The most available is that of Levi-Provençal, Histoire de
L'Espagne Musulmane, which has been translated from the original
French into both English and Spanish (the latter as part of the
monumental Ramon Menendez Pidal Historia de España series). He
gives a chart which is derived, nearly in its entirety, from a
pedigree of the Banu Qasi found in a collection of Iberian muslim
pedigrees by Ibn Hazm, called "Jimharat ansab al-'Arab", which is
much harder to lay hands on, and, as far as I know, has never
been translated, although a 20th century arabic edition can be
found. As daunting a task as it might seem, with a table of
arabic letters and using Levi-P's chart as guide (and with an
occasional look at an Arabic-English dictionary), one can follow
right along in the original Arabic (just so long as you remember
that it is written right to left and, from a western perspective,
from the back of the book to the front).
taf
norenxaq
>marriage with the Banu Qasi, but not as it normally appears in
>print)
Todd:
what other marriages between these families are known?
thank-you
Todd A. Farmerie
>>In neighboring Pallars and Ribagorza (which family was linked by
>>marriage with the Banu Qasi, but not as it normally appears in
>>print)
>
>
A muslim chronicler reports that Count Raymond ambushed and
killed his brother (taken to mean brother-in-law by most - I have
not seen the original or even a translation into a language that
makes the necessary distinction), Muhammed of the ibn Qasi. This
has been used by several genealogists to suggest that Raymond I,
Count of Pallars and Ribagorza married a sister of Muhammed ibn
Llub ibn Musa ibn Qasi. (Or alternatively, because Muhammed was
of a generation earlier, that Raymond married a niece of Muhammed
- Levi-P presents one version in the text, the other in the table
of his work, and in neither place cites a source that supports
the relationship shown.)
In addition to the old error of assuming that when you have
brothers-in-law, then the one you descend from must have married
a sister of the one you want to descend from, rather than the
other way around, this solution presents another problem. The
chronicle entry is in reference to events that took place long
after both Muhammad ibn Llub and Raymond I were dead. Rather,
this must refer to Muhammed II ibn Abd'Allah ibn Muhammed ibn
Qasi (grandson of Mo I) and Raymond II (either of Pallars or of
Ribagorza, grandsons of Ray I, or [ibn] Raymond - one of Raymond
I's sons, to address the chronological problem that the Raymonds
and Muhammeds were of alternating generations and that either Ray
II would have been a bit young to be off ambushing the -in-laws
in 929).
The difference is critical, for while we have no wife for Raymond
I, we have wives for most of his children and grandchildren
Raymonds, in many cases with the maternity of the children
explicitly known. It certainly looks like Muhammed II married a
Pallars/Ribagorza daughter, rather than the other way around, and
even if it was the other way around, the marriage left no
documented progeny. Anyhow, the reported muslim descent through
a marriage of Raymond I is bogus.
taf
norenxaq
> The difference is critical, for while we have no wife for Raymond
> I, we have wives for most of his children and grandchildren
> Raymonds, in many cases with the maternity of the children
> explicitly known. It certainly looks like Muhammed II married a
> Pallars/Ribagorza daughter, rather than the other way around, and
> even if it was the other way around, the marriage left no
> documented progeny. Anyhow, the reported muslim descent through
> a marriage of Raymond I is bogus.
>
> taf
understood
thank-you
maria emma escobar
descendency, out of the royal family of León and
Castilla, but in the next generations, since Alfonso
VI, I think there are at least two weak points:
>19. Zayda, m. Alfonso VI of Castilla, 1040-1109
Is not proved that Sancha was Zaida´s daughter. This
is a point in discussion.
>20. Sancha, m. 1122 to Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara (el
Franco)
Rodrigo Rodríguez de Lara and his brother Pedro
probably were not infanta Sancha´sons: In a document
of 1.125, Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara founded a monastery
with his daughters. Probably Sancha was already dead,
because in the document appeared Queen Urraca,
Rodrigo and his daughters: “ego comite Ruderico
Gunzalvez, una cum filias meas, quas abuit de mea
mulier infante domna Sancia, filia regi imperatori
Adefonsi.” (Monasterio de Vega). Rodrigo says: The
daughters which I had with Sancha, with a sense of
past time.
Rodrigo and Pedro were, with all probability, sons of
Estefanía Armengol, Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara´second
wife
>21. Rodrigo Rodriguez de Lara, b. 1128, m. Garcia de
Azagra
The tradition about Rodrigo Rodríguez´s wife is that
sha was a woman of the Aza family. Salvador de Moxó
gives her the name of Inés Pérez de Aza, probably a
daughter of Pedro García de Aza, but I cannot find her
in any document.
>22. Sancha (Rodriguez), m. Gonzalo Ruiz II Giron, d.
1234
Gonzalo Ruiz Girón married a woman named Sancha
Rodríguez, but all the modern studies makes Sancha as
a Rodrigo Fernandez de Toroño´s daughter.
With that two weak points, the line is broken at least
in two links.
Mee
=====
___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Nueva versión GRATIS
Super Webcam, voz, caritas animadas, y más...
http://messenger.yahoo.es
maria emma escobar
Todd A. Farmerie
>>20. Sancha, m. 1122 to Rodrigo Gonsalez de Lara (el
>
> Franco)
>
> Rodrigo Rodríguez de Lara and his brother Pedro
> probably were not infanta Sancha´sons: In a document
> of 1.125, Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara founded a monastery
> with his daughters. Probably Sancha was already dead,
> because in the document appeared Queen Urraca,
> Rodrigo and his daughters: “ego comite Ruderico
> Gunzalvez, una cum filias meas, quas abuit de mea
> mulier infante domna Sancia, filia regi imperatori
> Adefonsi.” (Monasterio de Vega). Rodrigo says: The
> daughters which I had with Sancha, with a sense of
> past time.
>
> Rodrigo and Pedro were, with all probability, sons of
> Estefanía Armengol, Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara´second
> wife
>
>
>>21. Rodrigo Rodriguez de Lara, b. 1128, m. Garcia de
>
> Azagra
>
> The tradition about Rodrigo Rodríguez´s wife is that
> sha was a woman of the Aza family. Salvador de Moxó
> gives her the name of Inés Pérez de Aza, probably a
> daughter of Pedro García de Aza, but I cannot find her
> in any document.
I am wondering. Have you found documentary evidence of Rodrigo
Rodriguez de Lara himself? At least one author basically
concluded that he was an invention of Salazar y Castro, created
to fill the chronological gap between the two sisters now thought
to have been Toroños, and their supposed ancestor Rodrigo
Gonzalez de Lara (in other words, that S y C said "I have these
two Rodriguez de Lara sisters who are too young to be his
daughters, so they must be granddaughters of Rodrigo Gonzalez de
Lara, with a Rodrigo Rodriguez in between").
taf