Nepociano of Asturias
maria emma escobar
I don't know the Szabolcs de Vajay and Todd Farmerie´s
hypothesis about Munia that you mention. If I
understand you, they say that Munia is a Fruela of
Cantabria´s daughter and duke Pedro's granddaughter.
It could be, but I cannot say anything about it
because I haven't read the text. But I have clear
that these two theories cannot be mixed. If Munia was
Munia Froilaz of Cantabria, she was not a Vascona.
But in this moment I cannot see any reason to say
that, and there are more reasons to support the
traditional hypothesis: The chronicles say Munia was a
vascona and don't mention a Duke Fruela´s daughter as
the queen. And there is the name of Munia itself.
Munio-Munia seems to be a "vascon" name, used in
Navarra and Bardulia. I have been looking for it in
Asturian documents and couldn't find any one. And
there is a document written in Bardulia in 759 and the
nuns who confirmed it are, between others: Nonna
Bella, Amunna, Monnia, Scemena, Umma, Munnoza, Ginta,
Anderazo, Sancia, Munnata, Mumadonna, etc. The most of
these are vascone names.
Geography is not a big problem in this case. Suppose
this line is the north coast of Spain.
cantabric sea
vizcaya gulf
France
_______________________________________________/
|Galicia Asturias Cantabria Basque country
Bardulia Navarra
The vascones´ country is an ambiguous name. They were
first situated around Navarra, but in Nepocianos´s
time the Vascones country could be the basque country,
Navarra and a part of Bardulia. I think the name was
more a language identification than land
identification and all the oriental part talks
"eusquera". This country revolted periodically against
asturian king. ( ¡There are things that never change!)
And now, I think it is important to read what the
chronicles say about Munia, King Froila I´s wife.
Crónica de Albelda: Any mention about Fruela´s wife.
Crónica de Alfonso III, Rotense versión: "
Froila....uascones reuelantes superauit. Huxoremque
sibi Munniam nomine exinde adduxit unde et filium
Adefonsum genuit."
This is: Froila defeated the rebellious "vascones" and
brought with him a wife named Munia in whom he
engendered his son Alfonso. (More or less. ¡What a
difficult thing!)
Crónica de Alfonso III, Ad Sebastianum or Ovetense
versión: "Froila.....Vascones rebellantes superavit
atque edomuit. Muniam quandam aadulescentulam ex
vasconum praeda sibi seruari praecipiens, postea eam
in regali coniugio copulauit, ex qua filium Adefonsum
suscepit." This is: Froila… defeated and
dominated and, from the booty, he (Froila) kept for
himself a young woman [named] Munia with whom he after
married and they engendered their son Alfonso.
The Alfonso III´s chronicle was written between 883,
when was finished the Albelda chronicle, and 910, when
Alfonso III died. This is less than 150 years since
Froila I´death, and probably less than Munia´s death.
The facts would be still fresh and more if Alfonso III
personally at least revised (if not written) the text.
And both chronicles say she was a vascona. I could
doubt if to be a vascona could glorify Alfonso III,
because the chronicle tries to do that, but this is a
neutral fact.
Both texts say Munia was his wife: uxor, and don't say
she was exactly a prisoner. The text say he kept,
reserved for him a young woman. This fact remember me
the royal prisoners kept in another countries as
hostages.
There is another clue in the Crónica of Alfonso III,
version ovetense, when is talking about Alfonso II:
"Silone defuncto regina Adosinda cum omni officio
palatino Adefonsus filium fratri sui, Froilani regis,
in solio constituerunt paterno, sed praeuentus fraude
Maurecate, tii sui, filii Adefonsi maioris, de serva
tamen natus, a regno deiectus apud propinquos matris
suae an alabam commoratus es." This is more or less:
When Silo was death, queen Adosinda with the officials
of the palace, promoted Alfonso, her brother king
Fruela´son to the throne, but a plot of his uncle
Mauregato, son of Alfonso the Major and a slave,
expelled Alfonso from the throne and Alfonso went to
live with his mother relatives in Alava.
Well, I think I have answered as well I can all the
questions. I hope all this "maremagnum" could be read.
Mee
=====
_______________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger
Comunicación instantánea gratis con tu gente.
http://messenger.yahoo.es
Todd A. Farmerie
> I don't know the Szabolcs de Vajay and Todd Farmerie´s
> hypothesis about Munia that you mention.
It is actually neither, but instead was provided to Vajay by the
late Dr. David Masnata and Jaime de Salazar Acha, based in part
on the conclusions of Claudio Sanchez Albornoz. Vajay was
relating it, his intention being to show the interrelationships
of the various families. I posted is as part of an AT of Teresa
Munoz in order to show that there were a wealth of novel theories
standing in opposition to the crusty old ones.
> If I understand you, they say that Munia is a Fruela of
> Cantabria´s daughter and duke Pedro's granddaughter.
> It could be, but I cannot say anything about it
> because I haven't read the text.
The chart in question appears in:
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).
This is a short article about general marriage practices,
followed by 8 charts based largely on other work. There is some
novel and/or contraversial material in these charts, and the only
explanation given are found in a few footnotes - there is no
extensive textual description of the conclusions. The chart in
question relates:
Fafila
ex semine
regis
|
|-------------------|
| |
Pelagius +737 «soror»
Princeps 718 -- Munnuza Petrus Dux
-- Gaudiosa refectus Agarorum a regia prosapie
| |
|--------------| |-------------|
| | | |
Fafila +739 Ermesenda Adelfonsus I +757 Froila Petri
Princeps 737 -- ca. 723 Rex 739 +757
-- Froiliuba | | |
| |------------------| |------------|
| | | |
«proles» Froila I +768 Munnia Veremundus
737 Rex 757 Froilaz Diaconus
| | -- ca. 763 | +795
| |--------------|
? |
|----------------------|
| |
Adefonsus II +842 Froila
Rex 791 798 missus
|
|
Veremundos 842 +
Princeps
|
|
Ramirus I +850
Rex 842
-- Paterna
|
|---------------------|
Ordonius I +866 Gatonus 866
Rex 850 Comes
-- Munia -- Egilona
| |
|--------------------| |
| | |
Adefonsus III +910 Leudegundia Veremundus Gatonis
Rex 866 -- Garcia Eneconis filius comitis
-- Jimena Rex +882
filia Garcia Eneconis
|
|
\|/
The relevant notes are:
4. Le roi Froila épouse sa cousin germaine, suivant la règle de
l'endogamie wisigothique, _Munnia_ est qualifiée _uxor regis_,
mais non pas _regina_.
5. _Bermude le Doyen_, tuteur rapidemente écarté du jeune
Alphonse II, a été un véritable ecclésiastique, sans postérité
aucune. Il est donc erroné de vouloir faire descendre la
dynastie de lui.
6. Rappelons les recits divergents de deux Chroniques, à propos
du rattachement de la séquence filative Fruela-Bermude-Ramire
Ier. Selon l'Albeldense, le Fruela «en tête» serait le frère du
roi _Alphonse Ier_, tandis que d'après l'Iriense, il s'agirait
d'un frère du roi _Alphonse II_. _Bermude «neveu_ du roi
Alphonse» serait dans le premier cas _Bermude le Doyen_ mort en
795 et, dans le second cas, _Bermudo princeps_ qui semple avoir
été fils du _missus Froila_, frère et ambassadeur d'_Alphonse II_
en 798 auprès de Charlemagne. Le chronologie nous fait pencher
vers cette dernière solution.
7. La question est tranchée par le qualificatif _thius_ que donne
_Alphonse III_ à _Alphonse II_ en confirmant l'une de ses
donations. Le _thius_ ne peut désigner que le frère d'un ancêtre
direct (solution selon l'_Iriense_), mais non pas le cousin issu
de germains d'un grand'père (qui seriat la solution en suivant
l'_Albeldense_).
> But I have clear
> that these two theories cannot be mixed.
Yes, quite.
taf
Bryant Smith
to express my gratitude and my admiration
for your scholarship. For now, let me
just say "Thank you" and that your two
most recent postings (this below and the
previous one) could well serve as a model
for other scholars willing to take the time
and care to give fully-responsive answers
to questions raised by less-knowledgeable
persons.
Con muchas gracias
Bryant Smith
Playa Palo Seco
Costa Rica
memae...@yahoo.es (=?iso-8859-1?q?maria=20emma=20escobar?=) wrote in message news:<200203161341...@web13908.mail.yahoo.com>...
> suscepit." This is: Froila? defeated and
Bryant Smith
given us quotations from chronicles which seem
to make it very clear that Mun[n?]ia, wife of
Fruela I, was a "vascona" brought back by Fruela
from one of his campaigns into the vascona country,
and TAF agrees with her that we cannot have her
both as described in the chronicles and as a
grand-daughter of Pedro of Cantabria.
TAF has now given us (well, me at least) our (my)
first peek at the actual chart and notes of Vajay
which, in showing Pelayo as an ancestor of subsequent
Spanish royalty, touched off what may well be a
revolution in the genealogy of the period.
The questions multiply. The first three that occur
to me are:
First: Was the information "provided to Vajay by the
Second: Are the "conclusions of Claudio Sanchez
Albornoz" published anywhere, and if so does the
publication include any of Sanchez Albornoz' reasoning?
Third: Since Vajay's article is described as being
"about general marriage practices" and is not really
all that "short" if it covers pages 275-315, I would
hope that Vajay, however obscure he may have been on
the Pelayo question, had something to say about the
marriage between Mun[n]ia and Fruela which might
shed some light on his reasons for making her a
descendant of Pedro. [The question here being, what
if anything *did* Vajay say about that?]
Thanks and
Saludos
Bryant Smith
Playa Palo Seco
Costa Rica
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote in message news:<3C93ABA2...@interfold.com>...
Todd A. Farmerie
> First: Was the information "provided to Vajay by the
> late Dr. David Masnata and Jaime de Salazar Acha"
> provided privately and now unavailable?
> Second: Are the "conclusions of Claudio Sanchez
> Albornoz" published anywhere, and if so does the
> publication include any of Sanchez Albornoz' reasoning?
"Cette mise au point résume des recherches en cours du Dr. David
E. Masnata et de Jaime de Salazar Acha, se fondamentant aussi sur
les conclusious de Claudio Sánchez Albornoz."
That is ALL that is said. Of these, Masnata and Sánchez Albornoz
are both deceased, and the problems in tracking down the
conclusions are opposite - Sánchez Albornoz was quite prolific,
and you could spend years acquiring and working your way through
all of his material to find the origins. Masnata did not publish
as much, and one probably would have to consult his manuscript
collection at the University of Miami (Fla.) to learn this - if
it is even there.
> Third: Since Vajay's article is described as being
> "about general marriage practices" and is not really
I should have said "marriage, naming, and relational patterns",
but the "general" part is entirely accurate.
> all that "short" if it covers pages 275-315, I would
> hope that Vajay, however obscure he may have been on
> the Pelayo question, had something to say about the
> marriage between Mun[n]ia and Fruela which might
> shed some light on his reasons for making her a
> descendant of Pedro.
You can hope all you want, but that doesn't change anything.
Vajay, in his text, mentions in passing only a handful of
specific relationships, and only in the context of his broader
issues.
> [The question here being, what if anything *did* Vajay say about that?]
I already posted EVERYTHING Vajay has to say about the marriage.
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
the root of this reconstruction. I had vague memories of seeing
a documentary basis somewhere, so checked:
Ronald F. Malan, "The Ancestry of Dhouda, Duchess of Septimania",
in _The Genealogist_, 11: 116-126 (1997).
He cites Mussot-Goulard, _Le Princes de Gascogne_ as in turn
citing _Al Muktabis_ of ibn Hayyan for the quote "Garcia, son of
Lupus, [and] son of the sister of Vermudo, maternal uncle of
Alfonso [Ildefonse is the literal translation]"
This would appear to be the origin of the connection shown in the
Vajay chart. Alfonso II (it is pretty clear this is the
individual ibn Hayyan is refering to) has a maternal uncle
Vermudo, and if you equate this Vermudo with the Deacon Vermudo,
it would suggest that Alfonso's mother was then daughter of
Fruela Perez and first cousin of her husband King Fruela. If you
assume that Alfonso's mother was the Munia described as Fruela's
wife, then you are left with the reconstruction given by Vajay.
The alternatives are pretty obvious (and endless) - that ibn
Hayyan had the relationship wrong (as Malan prefers, although he
reaches his conclusion based on the 'known' relationship between
Alfonso and Bermudo, without considering that this 'known'
relationship may be incorrect, or that it may not be the only
relationship). Likewise, it is possible that Fruela married
twice, first to Vermudo's sister, and second to Munia. That a
sister of Vermudo married a Gascon lordling may suggest a prior
connection with the Basque region, so Munia and her sister may
have been daughters of Fruela by a 'vascon' wife, etc.
All of these alternative interpretations (or refutations),
including the one shown by Vajay, are thus based on the weighing
of two primary sources - one stating that Fruela took to wife a
vascon named Munia, the other that Alfonso II was maternal nephew
of Vermudo.
taf
D. Spencer Hines
El Pollo Loco lives in Hope and Fantasy.
Ay, Caramba!
Deus Vult.
"One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no
ordinary man could be such a fool."
George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair) [1903-1950] ---- _Notes on
Nationalism_, May, 1945
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
---------
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor.
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:3C94F841...@interfold.com...
Bryant Smith
I guess even a blind pig cam root out a truffle
now and again if he keeps pushing! (I refer of
course to myself.)
I haven't asked my last question about this most
interesting and important wedge of the middle ages.
How, for example, can we evaluate ibn Hayyan as a source?
More, or less, reliable than the cronicles? Why so?
I don't know whether it's more personally satisfying to
have this information, or to see <censored> shooting off
his filthy mouth just an hour too quick.
Saludos
Bryant Smith
Playa Palo Seco
Costa Rica
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote in message news:<3C9502A4...@interfold.com>...
Todd A. Farmerie
> How, for example, can we evaluate ibn Hayyan as a source?
> More, or less, reliable than the cronicles? Why so?
More appropriate, is his chronicle more or less reliable than the
christian chronicles? I think his testimony has to be given
equal weight. He is the sole source for much of which he writes
- not because it is fabulous, but because he is more detailed
than other sources (for example, the politics of the Banu Qasi
and the Counts of Pallars with respect to Saragoza). He is, of
course, writing from across a cultural divide, but he seems to
have detailed knowledge of the Christian kingdoms - Asturian,
Navarre, and to a lesser extent, the Spanish March.
This evaluation is general, though. To correctly address this
question, it is important to know the context in which it is made
- for example, if it is found within a batch of Gascon material,
then it is likely it came from Gascon sources, and hence is an
extra step removed from its Asturian roots, and less likely,
perhaps to be correct. On the other hand, your question is one
of comparison, and hence a similar analysis would need be done on
the christian chronicles as well.
(How is your arabic?)
taf
Francisco Antonio Doria
You arose my interest with this discussion. There are
some three of four individuals named Nepociano that
appear from the 8th to the 10th century. They are all
of high rank, and those that I've quoted (if they are
two different individuals) appear at the top of the
genealogy of the great Baião clan, that originates
several very old Portuguese families, like the
Barretos, Velhos, and Azevedos lords of S. João de
Rei.
This clan has a confusing early genealogy, and a
parallel, somewhat inconsistent, documentation that
led Mattoso to postulate a 12th century individual,
Gondesendo Viegas, that is totally undocumented.
Moreover the name *Nepociano* doesn't seem to be
Germanic or Basque; if its looks mean anything, it
appears to me to be derived from *nepos*, root nepot-
+ ending -ianus.
1) Is that an early direct connection between the
Counts Ferrandos and the Asturian monarchs through the
Nepocianos?
2) Does that explain the early Baião legend?
chico
--- "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com>
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Empregos
O trabalho dos seus sonhos pode estar aqui. Cadastre-se hoje mesmo no Yahoo! Empregos e tenha acesso a milhares de vagas abertas!
http://br.empregos.yahoo.com/
Chris Bennett
"Francisco Antonio Doria" <dori...@yahoo.com.br> wrote in message
news:2002031908211...@web20105.mail.yahoo.com...
<snip>
> Moreover the name *Nepociano* doesn't seem to be
> Germanic or Basque; if its looks mean anything, it
> appears to me to be derived from *nepos*, root nepot-
> + ending -ianus.
>
At last a point on this great thread that I can comment on!
The name is certainly Latin. Iul. Nepotianus, a nephew of Constantine I,
son of Virus Nepotianus, cos. 336, proclaimed himself emperor in June 350
and rapidly came to a sticky end -- see
http://www.roman-emperors.org/nepot.htm. The citation therein to Jones,
Martindale and Morris shows him as the fifth Iul. Neoptianus in their
prosopography.
To the extent that you can safely assume onomastic heritability, the name
probably indicates a connection with a leading Ibero-Roman family. Whether
there are any connections to the Constantinian Nepotians is another matter.
Chris
Francisco Antonio Doria
Very very interesting. So, I wasn't too far off this
time. Do I smell of a possible DFA here?
;-)))
chico
--- Chris Bennett <cjbe...@sbcglobal.net> escreveu:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Francisco Antonio Doria
None, Chris. To be totally sincere, I know of no such
links, no evidence at all.
But this onomastic pattern is intriguing, really.
Best, chico, and txs for the remark.
--- Chris Bennett <cjbe...@sbcglobal.net> escreveu:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Francisco Antonio Doria"
> <dori...@yahoo.com.br>
> To: "Chris Bennett" <cjbe...@sbcglobal.net>;
> <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 5:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Vajay's chart (was: Nepociano of
> Asturias)
>
>
> >
> > Very very interesting. So, I wasn't too far off
> this
> > time. Do I smell of a possible DFA here?
>
> Do you know of any studies of the late Roman /
> Visigoth Romano-Iberian
> aristocracy comparable to the work that has been
> done on Gaul?
maria emma escobar
In a document from the Celanova monastery dated in
916, a Nepociano with his wife Alagundia gives the
towns of Quintela, Sa y Fenales to his nephew San
Rosendo" " Ego Nepotianus et uxor mea Alagundia tibi
subrino meo Rudesindo, salutem in Domino." Emilio Saez
in his work " The ancestors of San Rosendo" says this
Nepociano must be a brother of San Rosendo´s maternal
grandmother, because the other branches of the family
are well known. But about this grandmother named
Adosinda, first wife of Ero Fernández, we know only
she and her husband founded the monastery of San
Salvador de Chantada.
I think it is not possible to link this Nepociano with
the other one, after 150 years. The name could bo (or
not) be a coincidence. On 926, in the Celanova
monastery, a Nepociano (¿the same one? ¿another one
with another wife?) with his wife Gontina sells some
properties.
And finally, in a chart from the same monastery, dated
in 927, Sancho Ordoñez ( the named "king of Galicia")
gives a town to Gutier and his family (San Rosendo¨s
father). A Didaco Nepociani as a witness signs the
chart. This one is probably a son of Nepociano and
Alagundia, because the name of Diego was not a normal
name in Galicia, and an uncle of Rosendo´s mother:
Ilduara Eriz, was Diego Fernández, brother of Ero
Fernández. About the origin of this Diego has been a
lot of discussions, because of his name, because is
the unique Diego in Galicia, and some people talk
about a possible Castilian origin, but today near all
investigations says Diego was from Galicia.
But, on the other hand we have a Nepociano Diaz in
Castilla…!
Francisco Antonio Doria
Maria Emma,
Txs, as usual. These are the ones mentioned by
Mattoso.
BTW, I just got the copy of a 12th century chart about
the Furtados in Portugal. Manuel Cesar has also a
copy. I'll soon post it here.
Best, chico
--- maria emma escobar <memae...@yahoo.es>
escreveu: > Some " Nepocianos" appear in Galicia in
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Bryant Smith
> While not from Vajay's work at all, the following appears to be
> the root of this reconstruction. I had vague memories of seeing
> a documentary basis somewhere, so checked:
>
> Ronald F. Malan, "The Ancestry of Dhouda, Duchess of Septimania",
> in _The Genealogist_, 11: 116-126 (1997).
>
> He cites Mussot-Goulard, _Le Princes de Gascogne_ as in turn
> citing _Al Muktabis_ of ibn Hayyan for the quote "Garcia, son of
> Lupus, [and] son of the sister of Vermudo, maternal uncle of
> Alfonso [Ildefonse is the literal translation]"
>
> This would appear to be the origin of the connection shown in the
> Vajay chart. Alfonso II (it is pretty clear this is the
> individual ibn Hayyan is refering to) has a maternal uncle
> Vermudo, and if you equate this Vermudo with the Deacon Vermudo,
> it would suggest that Alfonso's mother was then daughter of
> Fruela Perez and first cousin of her husband King Fruela. If you
> assume that Alfonso's mother was the Munia described as Fruela's
> wife, then you are left with the reconstruction given by Vajay.
>
> All of these alternative interpretations (or refutations),
> including the one shown by Vajay, are thus based on the weighing
> of two primary sources - one stating that Fruela took to wife a
> vascon named Munia, the other that Alfonso II was maternal nephew
> of Vermudo.
Where, then does the previous discussion of Alfonso III referring
to Alfonso as his "thius" fit into this analysis of the documentary
foundation(s) of the Vajay reconstruction?
Maria Emma, can you identify, and perhaps quote from, the version
of the cronica in which Alfonso made this claim? You've said that
the later, more elegant and better organized, version was intended
to glorify Alfonso III and relate him to Pelayo. Is this where the
"thius" claim appears? If so, do you see it as part of the effort
to glorify Alfonso III? Doesn't the ambiguity of the "Alfonso" part
of the statement argue against that? (That is, if he wanted to
explicitly if subtly use the "thius" statement to tie back to Pelayo,
would he have left open the issue of which Alfonso (I or II) he was
referring to?)
Todd, you have mentioned that Alfonso III enjoyed a reputation as
a scholar, comparing well with Alfred the Great. How was the
reputation acquired? If the earlier version of his cronicle is
in "horrible latin" as Maria Emma has said, and the later one is
propaganda (as she has implied), whence the reputation?
Bryant Smith
and few star-names like Adalbaran and Betelgeuse it peters out
pretty quick.)
Chico, maybe one of your arabist friends can help us here?
Specifically (apart from the evaluation question) ibn Hayyan
used a word which has been interpreted/translated to mean
"maternal uncle" -- how precise is the meaning of the arabic
word(s) actually used by ibn Hayyan?
Saludos
Bryant Smith
Playa Palo Seco
Costa Rica
> taf
Bryant Smith
<SNIP>
> Alfonso II (it is pretty clear this is the
> individual ibn Hayyan is refering to) has a maternal uncle
> Vermudo, and if you equate this Vermudo with the Deacon Vermudo,
> it would suggest that Alfonso's mother was then daughter of
> Fruela Perez and first cousin of her husband King Fruela. If you
> assume that Alfonso's mother was the Munia described as Fruela's
> wife, then you are left with the reconstruction given by Vajay.
<SNIP>
Would not the consanguinity have been a serious impediment to
a marriage of Fruela I to a daughter of Fruela Perez? The
Visigoths had turned from arianism to orthodox catholicism some
generations before the ones in question; Alfonso I, the putative
father-in-law of Munia Froliaz, earned his soubriquet "el catolico"
(as I recall) by allying himself militarily with the Roman church
in the incipient reconquest.
Surely, if his son were to marry his niece there would be
some record of a dispensation? Has anyone looked?
Francisco Antonio Doria
Dear Bryant,
I'm following this thread only (or nearly so) as a
lurker, because I've been extremely busy of late.
Yestarday I met by chance (perì tukhes...;-))) my
consultant Dr. Mohammed El-Hajji. I'll submit it to
him the next time we meet.
Best, chico
--- Bryant Smith <ski...@racsa.co.cr> escreveu: >
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd A. Farmerie
> "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote in message news:<3C96D266...@interfold.com>...
>
>>(How is your arabic?)
>
> (Not so hot. After "alcohol," "algebra," "alkali" and "allah"
> and few star-names like Adalbaran and Betelgeuse it peters out
> pretty quick.)
>
> Chico, maybe one of your arabist friends can help us here?
> Specifically (apart from the evaluation question) ibn Hayyan
> used a word which has been interpreted/translated to mean
> "maternal uncle" -- how precise is the meaning of the arabic
> word(s) actually used by ibn Hayyan?
Unfortunately, a full version of ibn Hayyan is, as far as I can
tell, nearly impossible to get one's hands on here. However,
several reprints and translations of specific portions have
appeared, and in this case, extracts of ibm Hayyan relevant to
the early years of Asturias were compiled and printed, apparently
with parallel spanish translation. I can lay my hands on this
next time I am in Salt Lake.
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
> "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote in message news:<3C9502A4...@interfold.com>...
>
>>All of these alternative interpretations (or refutations),
>>including the one shown by Vajay, are thus based on the weighing
>>of two primary sources - one stating that Fruela took to wife a
>>vascon named Munia, the other that Alfonso II was maternal nephew
>>of Vermudo.
>>
>
> Where, then does the previous discussion of Alfonso III referring
> to Alfonso as his "thius" fit into this analysis of the documentary
> foundation(s) of the Vajay reconstruction?
Two separate issues - this "thius" addresses the connection
between Ramiro I Vermudez and Alfonso II, while the above is
addessing the connection between Alfonso II and Vermudo the
deacon. Both play a role in the reconstruction, but they dare
independent, in that each of which contributes to a different
part of the reconstruction and does not depend on the accuracy of
the other - in other words, the "thius" argument could be right
even if ibn Hayyan was mistaken, or "thius" could be misused even
is Munia was sister of Vermudo the deacon.
> Todd, you have mentioned that Alfonso III enjoyed a reputation as
> a scholar, comparing well with Alfred the Great. How was the
> reputation acquired? If the earlier version of his cronicle is
> in "horrible latin" as Maria Emma has said, and the later one is
> propaganda (as she has implied), whence the reputation?
That is two more chronicles than are attributed to any other king
prior to Alfonso X. Although I have not gotten hold of the
originals, I wonder if the chronicle was not "horrible latin"
because it was drifting toward vernacular. At any rate, he also
brought the sources together from which the chronicle was compiled.
He really occupies a similar role in the mindset - living at the
same period, he combatted an invader people and engaged in
political policy that encompassed much of the christian portion
of what would later be Spain. He took an interest in the history
of his family and kingdom, and the earliest native chronicle
source owes its existance to his efforts. He became known in the
history of his nation as Alfonso 'el Mayor'. See the similarities?
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
> Would not the consanguinity have been a serious impediment to
> a marriage of Fruela I to a daughter of Fruela Perez? The
> Visigoths had turned from arianism to orthodox catholicism some
> generations before the ones in question; Alfonso I, the putative
> father-in-law of Munia Froliaz, earned his soubriquet "el catolico"
> (as I recall) by allying himself militarily with the Roman church
> in the incipient reconquest.
> Surely, if his son were to marry his niece there would be
> some record of a dispensation? Has anyone looked?
Did the church intervene in royal marriage policy at this time,
anywhere in Europe? In Iberia, at this time, little is known,
but it is clear that the church did not take quite the negative
view of later years. At slightly later dates, you see the
royalty involved in sequential first-cousin marriages without
indication of church influence. Even at this period (slightly
earlier), a family (perhaps related, the names Fafila, Pedro, and
Silo all appear) making a donation to Liebana demonstrates
first-cousin marriage. In fact, I can only think of one such
marriage even later that was abrogated at the instigation of the
clergy. As to a record of a dispensation in the 8th century, I
doubt that one would survive if it did exist (I don't know that
the church had yet becaome the administrative entity that it
later would, particilarly in far-off Asturias).
taf
Francisco Antonio Doria
Just a point - again: as far as I can go, *in
Portuguese*, tio - thius - is a vague word. It
strictly translates as uncle, but quite frequently
means older relative, and even old family friend (this
is a more recent meaning).
chico
--- "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com>
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Bryant Smith
> Just a point - again: as far as I can go, *in
> Portuguese*, tio - thius - is a vague word. It
> strictly translates as uncle, but quite frequently
> means older relative, and even old family friend (this
> is a more recent meaning).
Chico
We hear you loud and clear -- again -- but if I read
TAF's posts correctly two successive schools of
historians ("earlier" and "later") agreed that when
Alfonso III used the word in reference to "Alfonso"
the word meant "brother of a paternal ancestor," and
the only disagreement between the two schools was that
the earlier one took "Alfonso" to mean Alfonso II whereas
the later one chose Alfonso I; and Vajay gave the word
the same meaning.
I agree that "uncle" in any language I know of can mean
a lot of things -- in American English, as apparently in
Portuguese, it can even mean an old family friend, as
between an older person and the children of the older
person's close friends: I had two such "uncles" who were
not blood-relations.
But when a serious historian uses the word in a work dealing
with a period in which virtually all of the important figures
were in one way or another related to him by blood or marriage,
it's fatuous to suppose that he meant only "older relative"
when writing about one of his predecessors on the throne.
When, on the other hand, a historian writing in a non-
Indo-European language about the history of a different
culture uses a word or phrase interpreted (by scholars in
that other culture) to mean "maternal uncle," it becomes
important to examine _de novo_ and closely the meaning, in
that historian's own language and culture, of the word(s)
he used -- especially where, as here, calling Vermudo a
"maternal uncle" of Alfonso II is in direct conflict with
chronicles in Alfonso's own culture asserting that his
mother was a "vascona" (and therefore not a visigoth).
Bryant Smith
On March 17 2002 TAF wrote in relevant part:
"Ronald F. Malan, "The Ancestry of Dhouda, Duchess of Septimania",
in _The Genealogist_, 11: 116-126 (1997).
"He cites Mussot-Goulard, _Le Princes de Gascogne_ as in turn
citing _Al Muktabis_ of ibn Hayyan for the quote "Garcia, son of
Lupus, [and] son of the sister of Vermudo, maternal uncle of
Alfonso [Ildefonse is the literal translation]"
"This would appear to be the origin of the connection shown in the
Vajay chart. Alfonso II (it is pretty clear this is the
individual ibn Hayyan is refering to) has a maternal uncle
Vermudo, and if you equate this Vermudo with the Deacon Vermudo,
it would suggest that Alfonso's mother was then daughter of
Fruela Perez and first cousin of her husband King Fruela."
Later in the same thread, on March 26, I wrote:
"Chico, maybe one of your arabist friends can help us here?
Specifically (apart from the evaluation question) ibn Hayyan
used a word which has been interpreted/translated to mean
"maternal uncle" -- how precise is the meaning of the arabic
word(s) actually used by ibn Hayyan?"
and Chico replied:
"I'm following this thread only (or nearly so) as a
lurker, because I've been extremely busy of late.
Yestarday I met by chance (perì tukhes...;-))) my
consultant Dr. Mohammed El-Hajji. I'll submit it to
him the next time we meet."
and at the same time TAF replied:
"Unfortunately, a full version of ibn Hayyan is, as far as I can
tell, nearly impossible to get one's hands on here. However,
several reprints and translations of specific portions have
appeared, and in this case, extracts of ibm Hayyan relevant to
the early years of Asturias were compiled and printed, apparently
with parallel spanish translation. I can lay my hands on this
next time I am in Salt Lake."
Father of Vermudo
____________|___________
| | |
Sister Vermudo Sibling === Fruela I
| (Munia) |
Lupus Alfonso II
|
Garcia
As TAF pointed out,this makes Vermudo a
brother of Munia, and their father must
be Fruela Perez, thus explaining Vajay's
identification of Alfonso II's mother as
"Munia _Froilaz_."
This of course says nothing one way or the
other about whether Vermudo the king was
different from and later than Vermudo the
Deacon (as Vajay's reconstruction shows),
but if ibn Hayyan is correctly translated
and factually correct it casts a deep shadow
of doubt over the general accuracy of the
Cronicle of Alfonso II, which excludes the
possibility that Alfonso II's mother was
a daughter of Fruela Perez.
As TAF also pointed out, however, "The
alternatives are pretty obvious (and endless);"
but before we try to invent yet another sister
of Vermudo, or take other imaginative measures
to reconcile Alfonso III with ibn Hayyan,
I think we should get the best grip we can
on the admissible scope of ibn Hayyan's
terminology.
Chico: Have you met with Dr. Mohammed El-Hajji yet?
TAF: Have you been to Salt Lake yet?
Maria Emma: Do you have access to the bilingual work TAF
referred to?
Thanks to all
Francisco Antonio Doria
No, Bryant, I haven't seen Dr. El-Hajji yet; perhaps
tomorrow, when I have scheduled lunch with some former
colleagues at Rio's Federal University. I'll then ask
him if i happen to meet him.
Let me just add that I've had a very interesting
exchange with Maria Emma, where she taught me a lot
about the origins of two great Portuguese lineages,
the Pereiras (now represented by the Duke of Braganza,
the (late) Duke of Cadaval and the Counts of Feira and
of Botelho) and the Vasconcellos.
chico
--- Bryant Smith <ski...@racsa.co.cr> escreveu: >
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd A. Farmerie
> TAF: Have you been to Salt Lake yet?
No.