Fw: Lines from Theuderic Makir? Any reliable written material ?
Kelly Graham
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com>
> To: <GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 5:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Lines from Theuderic Makir? Any reliable written material ?
>
>
> > Kelly Paul Graham wrote:
> > > Hello all :) A query..
> > >
> > > I have found quite a few internet-sources that link the line pf
the
> > > Edwards (Plantagenet) to
> > > Theuderic Makir, the Exilarch Duke (Dux?) of Toulouse (born, 730 -
died,
> > > 793). The lines in
> > > question fun through a supposed-daughter, Redbughe, through the Kings
of
> > > Wessex to
> > > Malcolme Canmore, from Redburghe to Geoffroy 1 "Grisegonnelle" of
Anjou
> to
> > > the
> > > Plantagenets, themselves, and- lastly, through the line of
> Raimond-Berenger
> > > of Barcalona!
> >
> > First of all, there is no Theuderic Makir. There was Theoderic,
> > Dux of Toulouse, and there was a Makir, Exilarch. They were
> > hypothesized to have been the same person by one author, but that
> > this thesis was flawed has been adequately demonstrated by
> > Nathaniel Taylor in The American Genealogist.
> >
> > There are numerous hypothesized descents from Theoderic. The
> > Counts of Toulouse almost certainly descend from them. The
> > second family of the Counts of Aquitaine perhaps descend from
> > him. The Counts of Provence possibly descend from him. However,
> > I don't recall having seen Redburgh placed in this family, nor is
> > there any evidence that allows her to be placed - everything is a
> > guess. As to Geoffrey Grisgonnelle and Raymond Berenger of
> > Barcelona, I don't think either descends from Redburgh, but would
> > have to see the lines in question.
> >
> > taf
> >
> > ______________________________
> >
>
> Thank you, Todd! I will admit, I found it a bit strange that a
Hebrew
> from Babylon would have had a Germanic name!! When did Theodoric
> and Makir first get mixed together ? And is there any way to seperate
> the facts about the two?
>
> Kelly Paul Graham
>
>
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Thank you, Todd! I will admit, I found it a bit strange that a Hebrew
>from Babylon would have had a Germanic name!! When did Theodoric
>and Makir first get mixed together ? And is there any way to seperate
>the facts about the two?
I cannot do better than to suggest you read Nat Taylor's article
in The American Genealogist. They were not so much mixed
together as forced together by an overenthusiastic historian, and
thus separating them is not a problem, as there was never any
conclusions, just "this person in this document is really
identical to that seemingly distinct person with a completely
different name, take my word for it".
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
but you can find the article I mentioned at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/pdfs/Makhir.pdf
Todd
Chris PHILLIPS
with related questions.
Was Solomon, Count of Roussillon, a Jewish King of Narbonne? (David Kelley)
[Abstract]
This study supports the hypothesis of Arthur Zuckerman that Solomon, Count
of Roussillon, was a Jewish king of Narbonne, but without definite evidence.
Zuckerman's further hypothesis that Solomon was identical with Bernard,
Count of Auvergne, is rejected.
The article is available online to the FMG's subscribers (yearly fee: 5
pounds sterling)
http://fmg.ac/FMG/Newsletter/01-02.htm
Chris Phillips
Shawn Potter
Thanks. David Kelley has written an interesting article, which
demonstrates that Zuckerman's observations deserve further analysis.
Shawn
Nathaniel Taylor
shp...@comcast.net (Shawn Potter) wrote:
Certainly, some of Zuckerman's observations deserve further analysis
simply because Zuckerman didn't analyze most of his observations
properly in that book. But David Kelley's interesting piece should not
be taken out of proportion in supporting Zuckerman's main thesis.
Kelley does not seek to rehabilitate the idea of Jewish descents via
Saint William, contrary to the now-misleading title of this thread.
When I have time*, I will write a longer response to Kelley's piece.
Like you I am intrigued, but I recognize that considerable
methodological ground (in both onomastics and the social / political
history of Septimania) remains uncovered in this presentation, which,
when properly considered, may prove Kelley's hypothesis about Solomon
untenable.
[*first week of classes; baby due in a month...]
Nat Taylor
Shawn Potter
Thanks for your thoughts. I look forward to your response to Kelley's
piece as well as to further articles by Kelley, since he suggests he
has more to say on the subject.
Shawn