The earliest ancestor of Romanovs
Jack Straw
Who is the earliest known ancestor of Romanovs?
I have one Glanda-Kambila Divanovich (13th cent.) What is known about him?
Thanks in advance,
Jack
Andrew S. Kalinkin
> Talking about Romanovs...
>
> Who is the earliest known ancestor of Romanovs?
One Andrey Ivanovich Kobyla ("Mare"), a boyar who served great prince
Simeon of Moscow, mentioned by several chronicles in the year 1347.
> I have one Glanda-Kambila Divanovich (13th cent.) What is known about him?
That he never existed.
Andrew
Vadim Verenich
>
> Who is the earliest known ancestor of Romanovs?
The origin of Romanovs is obscure, loosing its roots in the gloomy
darkness of medieval Russia. However, the one thing i know for sure -
it is that the conjectural official version of Gland-Kambila's forced
exodus from the Prussian wastelands should be mercilessly rejected due
to the dubbious sources behind it. The official version of Romanovs
origin was invented in XVII century and the observed discrepancies
between genealogies of families, claiming their descent from Andrei
Kobyla (Andrei the Mare) and his brother Fyodor Shevljaga (the Jaded)
serve as a sign of the fictious nature of early Romanov's ancestry
(prior 1350).
OFT,generally speaking the "creative genius" of an overage Russian
genealogist from XVII-XVIII centuries was inclined to recast old
family legends, which were brought in attention to him ,into the terms
of some fairy-tales and fables. Some are hard to believe in, some will
even make Harry Potter's mastermind to blush. Oh, they are fallacious,
too, even if they used to be considered a true and natural solution to
many puzzles, which in fact will always remain The Mystery for Russian
Genealogy.
In spite of it, i am going on telling your the fable behind what was
once thought to be a sufficient narrative explaining the story of
Gland's settling in Russia.
but not tonight
and in case you are interested
Jack Straw
> In spite of it, i am going on telling your the fable behind what was
> once thought to be a sufficient narrative explaining the story of
> Gland's settling in Russia.
>
> but not tonight
>
> and in case you are interested
>
Of course I am interested in fables!
I received a private communication stating that genuine descent of
Andrey Kobyla was as follows:
1) Ratsha=Ratislav (Christian name Stefan), senior judge in Kiev 1146
2) Yakun (Christian name Mikhail), governor of Novgorod, +after 1171
3) Alexa, boyar in Novgorod, +1215, buried in Khutynski Monastery,
canonized as St. Varlaam
4) Gavrilo Alexich, boyar of St. Alexander "Nevsky", +killed 1241
Koporye
5) Akynfy the Great, boyar of Mikhail I of Tver, +murdered 1304 near
Pereslavl
6) Ivan Akinfovich, boyar in Moscow 1339, +after 1349
7) ANDREY IVANOVICH "KOBYLA", born in 1304, boyar in Moscow 1346
How about this one, is it a fable too?
Jack
Vadim Verenich
>
> > In spite of it, i am going on telling your the fable behind what was
> > once thought to be a sufficient narrative explaining the story of
> > Gland's settling in Russia.
> >
> > but not tonight
> >
> > and in case you are interested
> >
>
> Of course I am interested in fables!
>
> I received a private communication stating that genuine descent of
> Andrey Kobyla was as follows:
The line of "genuine descent" you see below is a part of Ratshinich
(of whom Posuhkin decended, too) genealogy as interpreted by notorious
Rusiian historian Michail Pogodin and later reinforced by the modern
russian genealogist Yurij Konovalov(earlier generations differ
though).Well, i will be honest with you, saying that i feel it very
sympathetic to trace Andrei Kobyla from the "patrician" upper crust of
Novgorod's society. Andrei could be indeed related to one certain
Gavrilo living in the middle of 13th century (and his elder son
Gavrilo also known under typically Novgorodite name Gavsha).
> 1) Ratsha=Ratislav (Christian name Stefan), senior judge in Kiev
omit it as fallable, there is a time collision: it's barely logical to
substitute in genealogical puzzle one Ratsha, a noble from Novgorod
with another Ratsha, whom you called a judge ("tiun", rather a
baillif), guy, mudered by rebelious folk of Kiev in 1144.
> 2) Yakun (Christian name Mikhail), governor of Novgorod, +after 1171
once again, justomit it as fable, and feel yourself free, there is no
evidence that Michalko Stepankovich, a famous "posadnik" (governor),
forefather of Mikhalkinich dynasty of Novgorod's governors is the same
person with Yakun. There was a plenty of Yakuns living the same
period. Note also the Yakun is rather Novgorod onomastic derivation
from Yakov (Jakob,James).
> 3) Alexa, boyar in Novgorod, +1215, buried in Khutynski Monastery,
> canonized as St. Varlaam
St.Varlaam of Khutyn's birthname was Aleza Michalkovich,nevertheless,
it doesnt mean he was a son of Posadnik Michalko.This is beyond the
reasonable doubt. deconstruct it.
> 4) Gavrilo Alexich, boyar of St. Alexander "Nevsky", +killed 1241
> Koporye
i accept Gavrilo as the first proven ancestor, because various
medieval sources related to Ratshinich(Pushkins, Buturlins
etc),Prokshinich (Kutuzovs etc) and Vlazinich (Borozdin) genealogies
(especially church obitum records, so called "synodics")begin with
him. But .... there is a well known problem of time split between
lifespans of Gavrilo himself and that one of his own son Akinf, which
can be reduced only considering missing link. However, i will propose
another solution. Imho, Akinf was a son of another Gavrilo Yurievich,
a nephiew to Gavrilo Alexich. Another pivotal argument in favour of
this hypothesis based on a short passage from russian chronicla
narrating about one Gavrilo Yurievich, a boyar of Tver,and it makes
sence to identify this Gavrilo with father of Akinf (since the later
was a "great boyar" of Tver, the title usually inherited, rarely
granted).
I will give you alternatate "genuine" (ironically speaking) descent of
Andrei Kobyla:
1)Vlas "Volos of Novgorod birch charters" circa middle of XII c.
2)Svyslav (Sbyshka) Voloshevich, a Novgorod voivod,killed in 1194 by
the people of Yugra (Finno-Ugric nation) near Ural mountains.
3)Aleksa Sbyshinich, an innocent victim of Miroshkinich party's
terror, treacherously murdered in 17.03.1205
4)Yuri Alexinich (a brother of Gavrilo Alexinich, see previous
posting) fled from Novgorod to prince Yaroslav's court in Pereslavl
and swore an allegiance to him thus becoming his boyar.I assume his
death near between 1240-1260.
5)Gavrilo,a boyar of Mikhail I of Tver living in 1294. According to
the official "Velvet Book", an ancestor of influential Tverian boyar
clan Zahkharin, progenitor for Borozdins and Shishkovs.Imho, he is a
lost missing link connecting significant part of russian noble
families into the larger unity. Namely, he probably could be father of
4 sons:
a)Ivan Morkhinya: ancestor for different branches of Pushkins and some
other families.
b)Akinf (see below):common ancestor of Chelyadnins, Khromys,
Buturlins,Sviblovs, Kamenskys,Kuritsins,Zamytskys,Zastolbskis,Sliznevys,
Zhulebins,Chulkovs,Myatlevs
c)Yuri Vlazinych (nicknamed after Vlas Volos, eponym of clan?),
ancestor of Borozdins and Shishkovs.
d)Andrej, direct ancestor of Kutuzovs (Koutouzovs, Coutouzovs)
> 5) Akynfy the Great, boyar of Mikhail I of Tver, +murdered 1304 near
> Pereslavl.
> 6) Ivan Akinfovich, first boyar in Tver, then boyar in Moscow 1339, +after 1349
> 7) ANDREY IVANOVICH "KOBYLA", born in 1304, boyar in Moscow 1346
Keeping in mind the tight connections his closest descendants had with
princes of Tver (one of them was related to them through marriage), i
suggest that Andrey could indeed descend from Tver boyars and even
further, from patricians of Novgorod aristocratic republic.
It's my own speculation
Shawn Potter
Since you are commenting about Pushkin's ancestry, I wonder if you can
answer a question that I posted here some time ago with no response?
My question is at the bottom of the message. I would like to know if
the lineage is accurate. It appears from a chronological perspective
that several generations must be missing.
Thanks,
Shawn Potter
Here is my earlier message:
From: shp...@comcast.net (Shawn Potter)
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Subject: Re: Royal Pushkin (was Re: Coloured descendents of European
royals)
Date: 27 Feb 2002 20:30:46 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <7004aa4b.02022...@posting.google.com>
References: <3a69c867.0202...@posting.google.com>
<20020224085304...@mb-ba.aol.com>
<b2d7a7a0.0202...@posting.google.com>
<d0ef514b.02022...@posting.google.com>
<3C7BF7...@cityline.ru>
<b2d7a7a0.02022...@posting.google.com>
<3C7D41...@cityline.ru>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.48.161.11
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1014870646 26010 127.0.0.1 (28 Feb 2002
04:30:46 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Feb 2002 04:30:46 GMT
"Andrew S. Kalinkin" <kali...@cityline.ru> wrote in message news:<3C7D41...@cityline.ru>...
Based upon information posted by Andrew S. Kalinkin and others it
appears that one suggested lineage between St. Vladimir I
Svyatoslavich, Grand Prince of Kiev, and Alexander S. Pushkin is as
follows:
St. Vladimir I Svyatoslavich of Kiev = Rogneda Rogvolodovna of Polotsk
Yaroslav I Vladimirovich of Kiev = Ingigerd Olafsdotter of Sweden
Vsyevolod I Yaroslavich of Kiev = Anna Monomakh of Byzantium
Vladimir II Vsyevolodovich Monomakh of Kiev = Gida of England
Yury Vladimirovich "Dolgoruki" of Suzdal = Elena of Byzantium
Vsevolod III Yur'yevich of Vladimir = Maria Shvarnovna of Ossetia
Yaroslav II Vsevolodovich of Vladimir = Rostoslava of Novgorod
Yaroslav III Yaroslavich of Tver = Ksyenia Yur'yevna of Tarusa
Mikhail II Yaroslavich of Tver = Anna Dmitrievna of Rostov
Alexander Mikhailovich of Tver = Anastasia Yur'yevna of Galicia
Vsevolod Alexandrovich of Kholm = Sofia Ivanovna of Ryazan
Yuri Vsevolodovich of Kholm = _____
Dmitrii Yurevich of Kholm = _____
Daniel Dmitrievich Kholmsky = Vasilisa Ivanovna Vsevolozhskaya
Anna Danilovna Kholmskaya = Ivan Vladimirovich "Golova" Khovrin
Peter Ivanovich Golovin = Maria Visilievna Odoevskaya
Peter Petrovich Golovin = Anna Ivanovna Shigona-Podzhogina
Peter "Menshoy" Petrovich Golovin = _____
Peter Petrovich Golovin = _____
Mikhail Petrovich Golovin = _____
Ivan Mikhailovich Golovin = Maria Bogdanovna Glebova
Eudokia Ivanovna Golovina = Alexander Petrovich Pushkin
Lev Alexandrovich Pushkin = Olga Vasilievna Chicherina
Sergey L'vovich Pushkin = Nadezhda Osipovna Hannibal
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin = Natalya Nikolaevna Goncharova
On the other hand, I wonder if several generations are missing. This
lineage contains 25 generations; St. Vladimir was born about 960; and
A.S. Pushkin was born in 1799; so the average number of years between
generations is 34.958 (839/24=34.958). This is about 7 years more per
generation that one might normally expect, leading me to wonder if
several (perhaps as many as 6) generations are missing from this
lineage. Have I missed several generations or taken a wrong turn?
Shawn Potter
Andrew S. Kalinkin
> darkness of medieval Russia. However, the one thing i know for sure -
> it is that the conjectural official version of Gland-Kambila's forced
> exodus from the Prussian wastelands should be mercilessly rejected due
> to the dubbious sources behind it. The official version of Romanovs
> origin was invented in XVII century
I think it was only in 18th century. And was this fable ever official?
At least all really official genealogies of 16th and 17th centuries
(such as Velvet book) start with Andrey Kobyla. Gland-Kambila probably
is just a product of personal vanity of his creator, who incidentally
was a Kolychev, and so probably was primarily interested to provide a
glorious ancestor for himself. It is a mere coincindence that he shared
patrilineal ancestry with Romanovs.
Andrew
Andrew S. Kalinkin
> Andrey Kobyla was as follows:
>
> 1) Ratsha=Ratislav (Christian name Stefan), senior judge in Kiev 1146
> 2) Yakun (Christian name Mikhail), governor of Novgorod, +after 1171
> 3) Alexa, boyar in Novgorod, +1215, buried in Khutynski Monastery,
> canonized as St. Varlaam
> 4) Gavrilo Alexich, boyar of St. Alexander "Nevsky", +killed 1241
> Koporye
> 5) Akynfy the Great, boyar of Mikhail I of Tver, +murdered 1304 near
> Pereslavl
> 6) Ivan Akinfovich, boyar in Moscow 1339, +after 1349
> 7) ANDREY IVANOVICH "KOBYLA", born in 1304, boyar in Moscow 1346
>
> How about this one, is it a fable too?
This descent is almost genuine. Ivan Akinfovich had a son Andrey, ancestor
of families Buturlins, Chelyadnins and others. However he had nothing to do
with Andrey Kobyla, except that both had the same name and lived roughly in
the same time. The ancestry of this Andrey "not Kobyla" up to Gavrilo
Alexich is correct. Traditional ancestry of Gavrilo Alexich, given in
genealogies (Alexa, Yakun, Ratsha) may be also genuine, but they are just
names, and this attempt to identify them with warious unrelated 12th century
persons has no foundation.
Andrew
Andrey Frizyuk
> Vadim,
>
> Since you are commenting about Pushkin's ancestry, I wonder if you can
> answer a question that I posted here some time ago with no response?
> My question is at the bottom of the message. I would like to know if
> the lineage is accurate. It appears from a chronological perspective
> that several generations must be missing.
>
> Vsevolod I Yaroslavich of Kiev = Anna Monomakh of Byzantium
Why Anna?
> Vladimir II Vsevolodovich Monomakh of Kiev = Gida of England
I don't think that Yury was the son of Gytha
> Yury Vladimirovich "Dolgoruki" of Suzdal = Elena of Byzantium
This alliance is speculative
> Vsevolod III Yur'yevich of Vladimir = Maria Shvarnovna of Ossetia
Apparently, there were two Marias: Maria Shvarnovna from Bohemia and
Maria of Ossetia
To check out the genealogy, I'll establish parallels between Pushkin's
ancestors and rulers of Muscovy/Russia from the same generation:
> Yaroslav II Vsevolodovich of Vladimir / Alexander "Nevsky"
> Yaroslav III Yaroslavich of Tver / Daniil of Moscow
> Mikhail II Yaroslavich of Tver / Ivan I of Moscow
> Alexander Mikhailovich of Tver / Ivan II of Moscow
> Vsevolod Alexandrovich of Kholm / Dmitry "Donskoy"
> Yuri Vsevolodovich of Kholm / Vasily I
> Dmitrii Yurevich of Kholm / Vasily II
> Daniel Dmitrievich Kholmsky / Ivan III
> Anna Danilovna Kholmskaya / Vasily III
> Peter Ivanovich Golovin / Ivan IV / Anastasia Romanova
> Peter Petrovich Golovin / Fyodor I / Patriarch Filaret
> Peter "Menshoy" Petrovich Golovin / Mikhail I
> Peter Petrovich Golovin / Alexis I
> Mikhail Petrovich Golovin / Peter I
> Ivan Mikhailovich Golovin / Elisabeth I
> Eudokia Ivanovna Golovina / Catherine II
> Lev Alexandrovich Pushkin / Paul I
> Sergey L'vovich Pushkin / Alexander I
> Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin = Natalia Nikolaievna Goncharova
As you may see for yourself, no generations are missing.
All best wishes, Andrey
Suzanne
Scheherazade, at this point, seeing that it was day, and knowing
that the Sultan always rose very early to attend the council,
stopped speaking.
"Indeed, sister," said Dinarzade, "this is a wonderful story."
"The rest is still more wonderful," replied Scheherazade...
Vadim Verenich
> perd...@hot.ee (Vadim Verenich) wrote in message news:<35dc4b7.03022...@posting.google.com>...
> > The origin of Romanovs is obscure, loosing its roots in the gloomy
> > darkness of medieval Russia. However, the one thing i know for sure -
> > it is that the conjectural official version of Gland-Kambila's forced
> > exodus from the Prussian wastelands should be mercilessly rejected due
> > to the dubbious sources behind it. The official version of Romanovs
> > origin was invented in XVII century
>
> I think it was only in 18th century. And was this fable ever official?
> At least all really official genealogies of 16th and 17th centuries
> (such as Velvet book) start with Andrey Kobyla.
Ivan the Terrible" (as Veselovsky fairly put it and this comment
speaks for itself ) of shattered genealogical fragments; moreover its
quality deserved better, since it was compiled under ideological
pressure by genealogy buffs akin to notorious pervaricator Mr.Spencer
Hines.
Should i say more?
Gland-Kambila probably
> is just a product of personal vanity of his creator,
Not at all. He is rather a victim of personal ambitions of Kolychev,
not a mere product of spoiled imagination.
Most certainly, taking 'Gland-Cambyla's russian connection" seriously
is the same thing as speaking seriously about Humpty-Dumpty.
Nevertheless, in Peter von Dusburg's "Chronicon Terra Prussiae", a
certain Gland Cambyla, leader of rebellious inhabitants of Sembia
(probably located on the border between Prussia and Lithuania)is
reported "in anno domini 1264". But i still have no idea, whether
Kolychev was familiar with this chronicle or not ?
Any suggestions?
Vadim Verenich
names.No need to go further, just open Stroev's glossary of personal
names, referenced in Karamzin's "Istorija gosudarstva Rossijskogo" and
you will see by yourself how many people in history of Novgorod who
bore those names.
and this attempt to identify them with warious unrelated 12th century
> persons has no foundation.
and it will never have any, 'til the day when someone will find
duiring the excavation works in "ancient birch-bark scroll charter"
with Ratsha's family tree scribbled upon it :))
ok. just keep digging
kindly regards
vadim
Vadim Verenich
> > I received a private communication stating that genuine descent of
> > Andrey Kobyla was as follows:
> >
> > 1) Ratsha=Ratislav (Christian name Stefan), senior judge in Kiev 1146
> > 2) Yakun (Christian name Mikhail), governor of Novgorod, +after 1171
> > 3) Alexa, boyar in Novgorod, +1215, buried in Khutynski Monastery,
> > canonized as St. Varlaam
> > 4) Gavrilo Alexich, boyar of St. Alexander "Nevsky", +killed 1241
> > Koporye
> > 5) Akynfy the Great, boyar of Mikhail I of Tver, +murdered 1304 near
> > Pereslavl
> > 6) Ivan Akinfovich, boyar in Moscow 1339, +after 1349
> > 7) ANDREY IVANOVICH "KOBYLA", born in 1304, boyar in Moscow 1346
> >
> > How about this one, is it a fable too?
>
> This descent is almost genuine. Ivan Akinfovich had a son Andrey, ancestor
> of families Buturlins, Chelyadnins and others. However he had nothing to do
> with Andrey Kobyla, except that both had the same name and lived roughly in
> the same time.
little bit disagree with you. The point is that i am partially agree
with you, i.e while i don't believe Andrei Kobyla and Andrei Ivanovich
Akinfovicha to be the same person, nevertheless i assume Gavrilo
(Yurievich, not Alexich) to be an ancestor of Andrei Kobyla.
P.o. i also reject the identification of Fyodor Byakont by some
Russian genealogist, can't recall his name though. As far as i
remember he identified Fyodor Byakont with another son of Akinf the
Great, Fyodor Akinfovich, and that seems to be false. Mistakes can
occur.
Igor Sklar
> > 2) Yakun (Christian name Mikhail), governor of Novgorod, +after 1171
> once again, justomit it as fable, and feel yourself free, there is no
> evidence that Michalko Stepankovich, a famous "posadnik" (governor),
> forefather of Mikhalkinich dynasty of Novgorod's governors is the same
> person with Yakun. There was a plenty of Yakuns living the same
> period. Note also the Yakun is rather Novgorod onomastic derivation
> from Yakov (Jakob,James).
Not true. Yakun is a gnarled form of Scandinavian Haakon. When first
Akuns/Yakuns appeared in Russian sources (ca 907), there was no
Novgorod dialect at all. The Novgorod onomastic derivation from Yakov
would be Yaksha (compare traditional Russian Yasha).
Regards, Igor
Igor Sklar
>
> of families Buturlins, Chelyadnins and others. However he had nothing to do
> with Andrey Kobyla, except that both had the same name and lived roughly in
> the same time.
Do we know anything but names of these persons to make such a
conclusion?
Assuming that Andrey Ivanovich Akinfov and Andrey "Kobyla" is the same
person, it's quite probable that medieval copyists would list some
part of his very copious progeny (Koshkins, Bezzubtsevs, etc) on a
separate list from the rest (Chelyadnins, Buturlins, etc). This would
explain why ignorant genealogists of later generations treated Andrey
Ivanovich and Andrey "Kobyla" as distinct persons. The former was
thought to be the ancestor of Chelyadnins and others, the latter was
treated as the author of Koshkins, Sheremetevs, etc.
Akinfy the Great is known to have another son, Feodor Akinfovich, who
was a boyar of Simeon I. You'll agree perhaps that Akinfy was by no
means a very popular name. Nevertheless, we meet another boyar called
Feodor Akinfovich ("Byakont") exactly at the same time! Could not
these two Feodors be in fact the same person? In this case, Andrey
"Kobyla" was the 1st cousin of St. Alexis, the patron saint of Moscow
City:
1) Akinfy the Great, great boyar of Mikhail I of Tver, +murdered 1304
near Pereslavl;
2) Feodor "Byakont", boyar in Moscow, +after 1348, buried in the
Epiphany Monastery (md Maria N);
3) Simeon, church name Alexis, metropolitan of Kiev 30.06.1354, regent
of Muscovy 1359, *born ca 1304, +12.02.1378, buried in the Chudov
Monastery, Kremlin, canonized as St. Alexis 1448
The chronology fits to a T.
Respects, Igor
Igor Sklar
> Most certainly, taking 'Gland-Cambyla's russian connection" seriously
> is the same thing as speaking seriously about Humpty-Dumpty.
> Nevertheless, in Peter von Dusburg's "Chronicon Terra Prussiae", a
> certain Gland Cambyla, leader of rebellious inhabitants of Sembia
> (probably located on the border between Prussia and Lithuania)is
> reported "in anno domini 1264". But i still have no idea, whether
> Kolychev was familiar with this chronicle or not ?
> Any suggestions?
>
I strongly suspect that the fantastic name Kambyla was invented to
give a prestigious foreign extraction to the ancestor of Romanovs, who
bore an offensively trivial name "Kobyla".
Regards, Igor
Andrey Frizyuk
perd...@hot.ee (Vadim Verenich) wrote in message news:<35dc4b7.03022...@posting.google.com>...
> > 1) Ratsha=Ratislav (Christian name Stefan), senior judge in Kiev
> omit it as fallable, there is a time collision: it's barely logical to
> substitute in genealogical puzzle one Ratsha, a noble from Novgorod
> with another Ratsha, whom you called a judge ("tiun", rather a
> baillif), guy, mudered by rebelious folk of Kiev in 1144.
Apparently, Pushkin was sadly misled by his friend Pogodin when he
wrote in one of his least interesting poems:
"Moy predok Ratsha myshtsey brannoy
Svyatomu Nevskomu sluzhil..." ;-)
> > 5) Akynfy the Great, boyar of Mikhail I of Tver, +murdered 1304 near
> > Pereslavl.
> > 6) Ivan Akinfovich, first boyar in Tver, then boyar in Moscow 1339, +after 1349
> > 7) ANDREY IVANOVICH "KOBYLA", born in 1304, boyar in Moscow 1346
> Keeping in mind the tight connections his closest descendants had with
> princes of Tver (one of them was related to them through marriage), i
> suggest that Andrey could indeed descend from Tver boyars and even
> further, from patricians of Novgorod aristocratic republic.
IMHO, most of us have no idea who our distant relatives might be. I
don't think that Tolstoy was aware he was a fourth cousin of Pushkin.
Ivan IV was a distant nephew of his wife Anastasia:
Fyodor Koshka -> Ivan Koshkin -> Zakhariy Koshkin -> Yury Koshkin ->
Roman Zakharyin -> Anastasia Zakharyina, the 1st Russian Czarina
Fyodor Koshka -> Fyodor Koshkin "Goltiay" -> Maria Goltyayeva-Koshkina
(m. Yaroslav of Serpukhov) -> Maria of Borovsk (m. Vasily II) -> Ivan
III -> Vasily III -> Ivan IV, the 1st Russian Czar.
There was hardly anyone more hostile to Nicholas I than Alexander
Herzen. And yet Herzen descended from Fyodor Koshka in a straight male
line, while the Emperor (who bore the name of Romanov, BTW) did not.
Hmmm... It appears like any Russian noble was a relative of Czar. I'm
not a noble, but perhaps there is some connection too... Must consult
my notes. :)
All best, Andrey
Igor Sklar
> P.o. i also reject the identification of Fyodor Byakont by some
> Russian genealogist, can't recall his name though. As far as i
> remember he identified Fyodor Byakont with another son of Akinf the
> Great, Fyodor Akinfovich, and that seems to be false. Mistakes can
> occur.
The first genealogist to propose this identification was Petrov in
1886.
The only argument to the contrary is the notorious Life of St. Alexis
which mentions that the future metropolitan was born in Moscow (not
Tver) and describes his early life there. Fyodor Byakont (Byakota,
i.e. Stammerer?) is said to be a boyar from Chernigov who emigrated to
Moscow ca 1295.
IMHO, this work is more literary than historical.
Regards, Igor
Andrey Frizyuk
>
> Assuming that Andrey Ivanovich Akinfov and Andrey "Kobyla" is the same
> person, it's quite probable that medieval copyists would list some
> part of his very copious progeny (Koshkins, Bezzubtsevs, etc) on a
> separate list from the rest (Chelyadnins, Buturlins, etc). This would
> explain why ignorant genealogists of later generations treated Andrey
> Ivanovich and Andrey "Kobyla" as distinct persons. The former was
> thought to be the ancestor of Chelyadnins and others, the latter was
> treated as the author of Koshkins, Sheremetevs, etc.
This position is hard to maintain.
Andrey Ivanovich Akinfov had numerous children who left issue: the
famous Fyodor "Sviblo", Ivan "Khromoy", Alexander "Ostey", Ivan
"Buturlya", Andrey "Slizen", Mikhail "Chelyadnya", etc. Andrey
"Kobyla" also had many children who left copious issue. Some of them
bear the same Christian names as children of Andrey Akinfov, yet their
sobriquets are all different: Simeon "Zherebtsov", Alexander "Yolka",
Vasily "Vantey", Gavrilo/Gavsha, Fyodor "Koshka"... (a whole bunch of
horse sobriquets follows)
Apparently Andrey Akinfov/"Kobyla" was a singularly unimaginative
person, since he gave the same names to several of his supposed
children. It also appears that Andrey Akinfov/"Kobyla" holds the
all-time record for fertility among Russian aristocrats. IIRC, so far
this honour has belonged to Prince Yakov Ivanovich Lobanov, who had 14
sons and 14 daughters from only 2 marriages. :)
All best wishes, Andrey
Vadim Verenich
> skla...@yandex.ru (Igor Sklar) wrote in message news:<5a635d65.03022...@posting.google.com>...
> >
> > Assuming that Andrey Ivanovich Akinfov and Andrey "Kobyla" is the same
> > person, it's quite probable that medieval copyists would list some
> > part of his very copious progeny (Koshkins, Bezzubtsevs, etc) on a
> > separate list from the rest (Chelyadnins, Buturlins, etc). This would
> > explain why ignorant genealogists of later generations treated Andrey
> > Ivanovich and Andrey "Kobyla" as distinct persons. The former was
> > thought to be the ancestor of Chelyadnins and others, the latter was
> > treated as the author of Koshkins, Sheremetevs, etc.
>
>
> This position is hard to maintain.
were two distinct persons, otherwise the rest of issue are highly
contradictory. However,i see no obstacles to treat Andrei Kobyla and
Andrei Akinfov as distant relatives, probably second or third cousins
one removed.
Andrew S. Kalinkin
> kalinki...@mail.ru (Andrew S. Kalinkin) wrote in message news:<ebb42403.0302...@posting.google.com>...
> Ivan the Terrible" (as Veselovsky fairly put it and this comment
> speaks for itself ) of shattered genealogical fragments
You aparently confuse Velvet Book with its predecessor, "Gosudarev
rodoslovets". "GR" was compiled in 1555 during the reign of Ivan and
under supervision of Adashev. "VB" was compiled in 1687 during regency
of Sophia.
Anyway, both are based on information, submitted by the families themself,
so they couldn't be anything but compilations of genealogical fragments.
Andrew
Andrew S. Kalinkin
> little bit disagree with you. The point is that i am partially agree
> with you, i.e while i don't believe Andrei Kobyla and Andrei Ivanovich
> Akinfovicha to be the same person, nevertheless i assume Gavrilo
> (Yurievich, not Alexich) to be an ancestor of Andrei Kobyla.
Maybe, but what evidence you have for it ?
> P.o. i also reject the identification of Fyodor Byakont by some
> Russian genealogist, can't recall his name though. As far as i
> remember he identified Fyodor Byakont with another son of Akinf the
> Great, Fyodor Akinfovich, and that seems to be false. Mistakes can
> occur.
IIRC both identification of Byakont with Akinf's son and Kobyla with
Akinf's grandson was proposed by Petrov in his "History of lineages of
Russian nobility". IMHO this fact alone is more than enough to be sure
that this identification is false. <g>
Andrew
Andrew S. Kalinkin
> person, it's quite probable that medieval copyists would list some
> part of his very copious progeny (Koshkins, Bezzubtsevs, etc) on a
> separate list from the rest (Chelyadnins, Buturlins, etc). This would
> explain why ignorant genealogists of later generations treated Andrey
> Ivanovich and Andrey "Kobyla" as distinct persons. The former was
> thought to be the ancestor of Chelyadnins and others, the latter was
> treated as the author of Koshkins, Sheremetevs, etc.
Sorry, but I simply don't understand what you are talking about. Who are
these "medieval copiists" and "ignorant genealogists" ?
> Akinfy the Great is known to have another son, Feodor Akinfovich, who
> was a boyar of Simeon I. You'll agree perhaps that Akinfy was by no
> means a very popular name. Nevertheless, we meet another boyar called
> Feodor Akinfovich ("Byakont")
And where Fyodor Byakont is called "Akinfovich" ?
> exactly at the same time!
At the same time ? Fyodor Akinfovich, as you himself noted, was boyar of
Simeon I. Fyodor Byakont was associated with Simeon's father, Ivan Kalita.
Akinfoviches at that time still served in Tver.
> Could not
> these two Feodors be in fact the same person?
And what evidence you have to support it beyond the fact that both had
the same (very common) name ?
Regards,
Andrew
Andrew S. Kalinkin
IMHO before evaluating arguments to the contrary we should ask: what
evidence we have *for* proposed identification. I think there is nothing
whatsoever.
Igor Sklar
> skla...@yandex.ru (Igor Sklar) wrote in message news:<5a635d65.03022...@posting.google.com>...
> > Assuming that Andrey Ivanovich Akinfov and Andrey "Kobyla" is the same
> > person, it's quite probable that medieval copyists would list some
> > part of his very copious progeny (Koshkins, Bezzubtsevs, etc) on a
> > separate list from the rest (Chelyadnins, Buturlins, etc). This would
> > explain why ignorant genealogists of later generations treated Andrey
> > Ivanovich and Andrey "Kobyla" as distinct persons. The former was
> > thought to be the ancestor of Chelyadnins and others, the latter was
> > treated as the author of Koshkins, Sheremetevs, etc.
>
> Sorry, but I simply don't understand what you are talking about. Who are
> these "medieval copiists" and "ignorant genealogists" ?
You wrote:
> Anyway, both [the Velvet Book and the Rodoslovets] are based on information,
> submitted by the families themself, so they couldn't be anything but
> compilations of genealogical fragments.
So you suppose these genealogical fragments had not been copyied
generation after generation before their final incorporation into the
"Rodoslovets"? Perhaps they had been kept unrecorded? Or they had been
copyied by princes/boyars themselves? It's people who did that work
that I call 'medieval copyists'.
For my part, I don't believe that boyar families didn't consult more
'knowing men' in such important matters as genealogy. You shouldn't
forget that under rules of mestnichestvo nothing was more important
for public career than a good pedigree. We know that there were such
'knowing men' in the 16th cent. that they could falsify a whole
chronicle, let alone a genealogy. It's them I call 'ignorant
genealogists'.
Hopefully this helps.
> > Akinfy the Great is known to have another son, Feodor Akinfovich, who
> > was a boyar of Simeon I. You'll agree perhaps that Akinfy was by no
> > means a very popular name. Nevertheless, we meet another boyar called
> > Feodor Akinfovich ("Byakont")
>
> And where Fyodor Byakont is called "Akinfovich"?
In one of the Lives of St. Alexis!
> > exactly at the same time!
>
> At the same time ? Fyodor Akinfovich, as you himself noted, was boyar of
> Simeon I. Fyodor Byakont was associated with Simeon's father, Ivan Kalita.
> Akinfoviches at that time still served in Tver.
It's funny. Fyodor Byakont is associated with Ivan Kalita, because it
is claimed that he had been living in Moscow since 1295. Fyodor
Akinfovich went from Tver to Moscow in 1339, the next year Ivan Kalita
sent him as a voevoda to Smolensk, and the same year Ivan died. So
there was no time for any lengthy association.
I can hardly believe that Moscow was so attractive for boyars of other
princes in the 13th cent. It's likelier (there's some literature on
the subject) that Byakont went to Moscow ten years later, i.e. ca
1305. On the other hand, Fyodor Akinfovich left Tver as an aged man:
his father was killed 35 years earlier at an advanced age. Children of
Ivan Akinfovich and Byakont were contemporaries, so were their
fathers.
> > Could not
> > these two Feodors be in fact the same person?
>
> And what evidence you have to support it beyond the fact that both had
> the same (very common) name ?
It's hard to discuss a man of which virtually nothing but name is
known.
Regards, Igor
Igor Sklar
> > P.o. i also reject the identification of Fyodor Byakont by some
> > Russian genealogist, can't recall his name though. As far as i
> > remember he identified Fyodor Byakont with another son of Akinf the
> > Great, Fyodor Akinfovich, and that seems to be false. Mistakes can
> > occur.
>
> IIRC both identification of Byakont with Akinf's son and Kobyla with
> Akinf's grandson was proposed by Petrov in his "History of lineages of
> Russian nobility". IMHO this fact alone is more than enough to be sure
> that this identification is false. <g>
This is a typically simplistic attitude. I understand that Petrov held
traditional records upon origin of noble families in very low esteem.
He thought that all the "Prussians" of the Velvet Book were in fact
Novgorodians, and he was right. Fantastic versions of foreign
extractions are sometimes plain laughable. Native origins proposed by
him were not always felicitous but they look more realistic than those
accepted for generations, e.g. Ivan Akinfovich is more suitable
candidate for Kobyla's father than Glanda-Kambila Divanovich.
Other guesses of Petrov, especially about origins of princely
families, are either mismatched or even more fantastic than the old
ones. But this doesn't apply to the theory of Kobyla's possible
Ratshid descent AFAIC. So far as nothing contradicts it, it should not
be rejected so readily.
Regards, Igor
Andrew S. Kalinkin
> kalinki...@mail.ru (Andrew S. Kalinkin) wrote in message news:<ebb42403.03030...@posting.google.com>...
> generation after generation before their final incorporation into the
> "Rodoslovets"?
Well, these particular genealogical fragments were not "copied". They were
prepared exactly for this occasion.
> Perhaps they had been kept unrecorded? Or they had been
> copyied by princes/boyars themselves?
The princes and boyars probably didn't do actual writing, but they knew
their ancestors and relatives. Such small distance (less than two centuries)
is well within the range of family tradition. We know that even much more
distantly related families (look at genealogy of Redega clan, for example)
still knew that they are related even when they forget exactly how. To
imagine that Koshkins knew about there relationship with Kolychevs, and
Buturlins with Chelyadnins, but any memory about relations across this
border was lost in some epidemy of collective sclerosis is simply
ridiculous.
> For my part, I don't believe that boyar families didn't consult more
> 'knowing men' in such important matters as genealogy.
Again, who are thes "knowing men" and how they get to know the family
history better than the family itself ?
> > At the same time ? Fyodor Akinfovich, as you himself noted, was boyar of
> > Simeon I. Fyodor Byakont was associated with Simeon's father, Ivan Kalita.
> > Akinfoviches at that time still served in Tver.
>
> It's funny. Fyodor Byakont is associated with Ivan Kalita, because it
> is claimed that he had been living in Moscow since 1295. Fyodor
> Akinfovich went from Tver to Moscow in 1339, the next year Ivan Kalita
> sent him as a voevoda to Smolensk, and the same year Ivan died. So
> there was no time for any lengthy association.
For Fyodor Akinfovich - yes, but not for Fyodor Byakont.
> I can hardly believe that Moscow was so attractive for boyars of other
> princes in the 13th cent. It's likelier (there's some literature on
> the subject) that Byakont went to Moscow ten years later, i.e. ca
> 1305. On the other hand, Fyodor Akinfovich left Tver as an aged man:
> his father was killed 35 years earlier at an advanced age.
"I can hardly believe" is hardly a valid argument. But even if it was correct,
how a man who went to Moscow in ca.1305 and a man who went there ca.1339 can
be the same person ?
> Children of
> Ivan Akinfovich and Byakont were contemporaries, so were their
> fathers.
And these contemporaries lived in two different cities and served two
different princely families, who were mortal enemies most of the time.
But they were the same person. Sure.
> > > Could not
> > > these two Feodors be in fact the same person?
> >
> > And what evidence you have to support it beyond the fact that both had
> > the same (very common) name ?
>
> It's hard to discuss a man of which virtually nothing but name is
> known.
In other words no evidence, just a fantasy.
Regards,
Andrew
Andrey Frizyuk
> skla...@yandex.ru (Igor Sklar) wrote in message news:<5a635d65.0303...@posting.google.com>...
> > Perhaps they had been kept unrecorded? Or they had been
> > copyied by princes/boyars themselves?
>
> The princes and boyars probably didn't do actual writing, but they knew
> their ancestors and relatives. Such small distance (less than two centuries)
> is well within the range of family tradition.
It's debatable. Some untitled families had already such a large
ancestry that it seems hard they could remember it all (at least it
would be a problem for me). I also think there were both blunders and
intentional misgivings in compiling genealogies. For example the
Bestuzhev family claimed their descent from one Best who went from
England to Moscow to serve grand duke Vasily I. I may understand the
family pride: nobody wants to have one Bestuzh (='Shameless') as
ancestor, Best sounds so much better (even if rules of Russian name
derivation have to be ignored).
But genealogy of the Pleshcheev family mentions one 'Bestuzh'
Pleshcheyev living at the same time in Novgorod. Bestuzh is said to
have had two sons called 'Peshok' and 'Tretyak-Sobaka'. Doesn't the
name 'Treatyak' (='the Third') implies there should have been the
third one? It's logical to conclude that Yakov Bestuzhev 'Ryuma' (the
alleged son of Best) was the brother of these two who was subsequently
omitted from genealogy to supply the Bestuzhevs with honourable
foreign extraction. That ancestors of the Bestuzhevs lived in Novgorod
is confirmed by the fact that they appear for the 1st time in
Muscovite records in 1477 when so many Novgorodians were being
deported to Moscow. The office of Matvey Bestuzhev in 1477 is rather
high: he was sent as an ambassador to khan Akhmat.
Surely there was much more deliberate fabrication. Cases when there is
enough evidence to expose a fake (or a blunder) are but rare.
> We know that even much more
> distantly related families (look at genealogy of Redega clan, for example)
> still knew that they are related even when they forget exactly how. To
> imagine that Koshkins knew about there relationship with Kolychevs, and
> Buturlins with Chelyadnins, but any memory about relations across this
> border was lost in some epidemy of collective sclerosis is simply
> ridiculous.
Agreed. I expected that a skeptic like you would say that there could
be a 'conspiracy' of families who being ignorant of their actual
origin (or reluctant to profess it) fabricated their commmon
ancient/foreign extraction by submitting genealogies converging in the
same mythical person. I suspect, for example, that the Redegids were
not related at all but conspired to set forth themselves as the most
ancient non-titled clan of Russia. Alleged descendants of Indris
(Tolstoys, Durnovos, Wassiltchikovs) also come to mind. Don't you
think that such underhand practices could be quite widespread? It was
just like that with prominent Lithuanian families (Holszanski,
Gasztold, Radziwill) who not being descended from Gedyminas
energetically promoted the idea of their common descent from even more
ancient rulers of Lithuania. IMHO people were readier to believe in
fantastic ancestors when data of several unrelated families converged
in one point.
> > Children of
> > Ivan Akinfovich and Byakont were contemporaries, so were their
> > fathers.
>
> And these contemporaries lived in two different cities and served two
> different princely families, who were mortal enemies most of the time.
> But they were the same person. Sure.
Agreed again. Have you any guess who real ancestors of Andrey "Kobyla"
and Fyodor "Byakont" could be? For my part, I'm inclined to agree that
Byakont was an immigrant Chernigov boyar whose further lineage is
impossible to trace. Andrey "Kobyla" could belong to one of Muscovite
leading families (perhaps descending from boyars of Alexander Nevsky
and hence from Rostov and Kiev, since many boyars followed their lords
from one city to another), but exact lineage is also impossible to
establish.
All best wishes, Andrey
Igor Sklar
> >
> > their ancestors and relatives. Such small distance (less than two centuries)
> > is well within the range of family tradition.
>
> It's debatable. Some untitled families had already such a large
> ancestry that it seems hard they could remember it all (at least it
> would be a problem for me). I also think there were both blunders and
> intentional misgivings in compiling genealogies. For example the
> Bestuzhev family claimed their descent from one Best who went from
> England to Moscow to serve grand duke Vasily I. I may understand the
> family pride: nobody wants to have one Bestuzh (='Shameless') as
> ancestor, Best sounds so much better (even if rules of Russian name
> derivation have to be ignored).
First British (Scottish, in fact) nobles chronicled on Russian service
were the 17-century soldiers Learmonth (the ancestor of Lermontovs)
and Hamilton (the ancestor of Gamentovs/Khomutovs). Here are some more
apposite passages from Unbegaun:
"Thus the family legend of the Bestuzevs (whose name actually derives
from the adjectival nickname besstuzij 'shameless') has manufactured
an English ancestor, a certain Gabriel Best, who is said to have
entered the Russian service of the Great-Prince of Moscow early in the
sixteenth century. The legend does not concern itself with the
particle -uz-".
"The Naryskins, who belonged to the small gentry, remained quite
obscure until Tsar Alexis married a Natalja Naryskina in 1671. An
ancient, and needless to say foreign, origin had to be found for the
Tsarina. This was achieved by making the Naryskins descend from the
Germanic tribe of Naristi, mentioned by Tacitus (Germania, xlii). The
Russian genealogists not implausibly placed the Naristi in the
north-west corner of Bohemia, looked around for a town in the area,
and found the imperial city of Eger (in Czech Cheb), whose arms they
attributed to the Naryskins. Thus a Russian family received and
retained as its coat of arms the imperial eagle with the lower part of
its body covered by a grille - symbolizing the fact that the incomes
of the city of Eger were once placed in pawn by the Emperor. The true
etymology of the surname is uncertain: it may simply be a variant of
Jaryskin (from jaryzka 'servant'), as some of the Naryskins' enemies
were pleased to suggest as early as the seventeenth century."
Regards, Igor
Andrew S. Kalinkin
Apologies if it will finally appear several times.
fri...@yahoo.com (Andrey Frizyuk) wrote in message news:<5534a4c5.03030...@posting.google.com>...
> kalinki...@mail.ru (Andrew S. Kalinkin) wrote in message news:<ebb42403.03030...@posting.google.com>...
> > The princes and boyars probably didn't do actual writing, but they knew
> > their ancestors and relatives. Such small distance (less than two centuries)
> > is well within the range of family tradition.
>
> It's debatable. Some untitled families had already such a large
> ancestry that it seems hard they could remember it all (at least it
> would be a problem for me).
While it is true, the memory tends to be selective. In such large families
some branches often loose their status and place at court and fall to the
level of provincial jentry. Such unfortunates were often forgotten by their
more prosperous cousins. But when the families continue to hold their
positions at court and remain at top level of aristocracy, why would they
suddenly forget about their close relationship ?
> I also think there were both blunders and
> intentional misgivings in compiling genealogies.
Certainly. But there are different kinds of errors and falsehoods. It is not
surprising when some upstarts try to attach themself to the pedigree of an
unrelated, but ancient and prestigeous family. But the "theory" that Andrey
Kobyla = Andrey Akinfov requires exactly opposite error. Why cut off a valid
and very prestigeous ancestral line without any reason ? Such error makes no
sence as deliberate falsification, and with so numerous and prosperous progeny
on both sides of supposed break it is extremely unlikely that it could happen
through blunder.
> Agreed again. Have you any guess who real ancestors of Andrey "Kobyla"
> and Fyodor "Byakont" could be? For my part, I'm inclined to agree that
> Byakont was an immigrant Chernigov boyar whose further lineage is
> impossible to trace. Andrey "Kobyla" could belong to one of Muscovite
> leading families (perhaps descending from boyars of Alexander Nevsky
> and hence from Rostov and Kiev, since many boyars followed their lords
> from one city to another), but exact lineage is also impossible to
> establish.
I agree on both counts. Although the story of Byakontis based on probably
not very best sources, it doesn't look as an outright invention. Some details
in it may be fictional, but probably not the whole account. And our data
on boyar families (outside of Novgorod) in 13th and early 14th centuries is
so sparce and fragmentary, it is not surprising that ancestry of Kobyla is
impossible to trace any further.
Regards
Andrew