Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
BRITAIN'S ROYAL BABY WILL HAVE SURPRISING FAMILY TREE
755 views
Skip to first unread message
cl.uk
Jul 10, 2013, 1:05:21 PM7/10/13
to
Britain's royal baby will have surprising family tree
By Frederic Dumoulin
Published July 06, 2013
AFP
Even before the birth of the new British royal baby to Prince William and his wife Kate, genealogists are looking into its family tree, and are coming up with many surprises. (AFP)
PARIS (AFP) – Even before the birth of the new British royal baby to Prince William and his wife Kate, genealogists are looking into its family tree, and are coming up with many surprises.
The baby's relations will stretch from a simple Parisian actress via the Dracula princes in Romania, to even an Islamic sultan from Seville in Spain, who descended from the Muslim Prophet Mohammed, experts say.
The family tree of the baby's father Prince William, who is second in line to the throne, is strongly tied to the European Gotha line.
There one finds, alongside all Britain's kings, the sovereigns of Greece, Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Austria, Spain and a good number of German sovereigns.
The British family was called Saxe-Coburg-Gotha until 1917, date on which, mired in a war with Germany, it opted for the name Windsor.
On the side of the mother-to-be Kate Middleton, on the other hand, there is a majority of commoners.
The late "Queen Mum", the mother of Queen Elizabeth II, and Princess Diana, William's mother, were not born princesses.
But "William's alliance with Kate Middleton really managed to democratise the baby's family tree," the famous genealogist Jean-Louis Beaucarnot, who dissected the baby's ascendance in July in the "La Revue Francaise de Genealogie" (the French genealogy review) told AFP.
The future king or queen of the United Kingdom will be cousin with a large number of his or her subjects.
The paternal forefathers of Kate, who is known as the Duchess of Cambridge, were relatively well off.
However, "on her mother's side she has largely working class ancestry from the English north," Scott Steward, member of the New England Historic Genealogical Society (NEHGS) and the co-author in 2011 of a book on Catherine Middleton's family tree told AFP. Her family tree contains coalminers, a linen maid, bakers, and a London street sweeper. One also comes up with a certain Arthur Lupton who taught English to German poet, playwright and scientist Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
More unexpected, is the discovery of Edward Thomas Glassborough, who was put behind bars in 1881 in London's Holloway prison. The reason for his imprisonment remains a mystery to this day.
But there are other surprises in store in the royal family's family tree. Through Queen Mary, the wife of King George V, who ruled from 1910 to 1936, the line stretches back, according to Beaucarnot, right to the princes of Transylvania and Walachia in Romania.
That leads back in the fifteenth century to the Princes Dracula. Among them figures the Voivode Vlad III, also known by his patronymic name Dracula, who was posthumously dubbed Vlad the Impaler. He inspired, by his cruelty, the Irish writer Bram Stoker's famous vampire.
Another discovery: a certain Hyacinthe-Gabrielle, an actress at Paris' Palais Royal, brought to England during the revolution by her lover then husband, the Marquis of Wellesley and a direct ancestor of the "Queen Mum".
Via another French woman, a protestant noblewoman born in 1639 in France's region of Poitou, the child will even be a cousin of late French president Francois Mitterrand, while her mother is related to the first president of the United States, George Washington
Through its grandmother Diana, the royal baby will have a link with the families of Winston Churchill and Lord Marlborough, who inspired a popular French folk song.
On the side of celebrities, there are links to the American actress Ellen DeGeneres and the British film director Guy Ritchie, the former husband of Madonna.
But the most astonishing discovery is a little-known ascendancy of one of its distant ascendants, the queen of France, Marie de' Medici, descendant of Alphonse VI of Castillia, who died in 1109.
His fourth wife Zaida, who was an Islamic princess converted to Roman Catholicism, had as an ancestor, according to Beaucarnot, "a king of Seville considered a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed".
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/06/britain-royal-baby-will-have-surprising-family-tree/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz2Yf9rXXb3
By Frederic Dumoulin
Published July 06, 2013
AFP
Even before the birth of the new British royal baby to Prince William and his wife Kate, genealogists are looking into its family tree, and are coming up with many surprises. (AFP)
PARIS (AFP) – Even before the birth of the new British royal baby to Prince William and his wife Kate, genealogists are looking into its family tree, and are coming up with many surprises.
The baby's relations will stretch from a simple Parisian actress via the Dracula princes in Romania, to even an Islamic sultan from Seville in Spain, who descended from the Muslim Prophet Mohammed, experts say.
The family tree of the baby's father Prince William, who is second in line to the throne, is strongly tied to the European Gotha line.
There one finds, alongside all Britain's kings, the sovereigns of Greece, Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Austria, Spain and a good number of German sovereigns.
The British family was called Saxe-Coburg-Gotha until 1917, date on which, mired in a war with Germany, it opted for the name Windsor.
On the side of the mother-to-be Kate Middleton, on the other hand, there is a majority of commoners.
The late "Queen Mum", the mother of Queen Elizabeth II, and Princess Diana, William's mother, were not born princesses.
But "William's alliance with Kate Middleton really managed to democratise the baby's family tree," the famous genealogist Jean-Louis Beaucarnot, who dissected the baby's ascendance in July in the "La Revue Francaise de Genealogie" (the French genealogy review) told AFP.
The future king or queen of the United Kingdom will be cousin with a large number of his or her subjects.
The paternal forefathers of Kate, who is known as the Duchess of Cambridge, were relatively well off.
However, "on her mother's side she has largely working class ancestry from the English north," Scott Steward, member of the New England Historic Genealogical Society (NEHGS) and the co-author in 2011 of a book on Catherine Middleton's family tree told AFP. Her family tree contains coalminers, a linen maid, bakers, and a London street sweeper. One also comes up with a certain Arthur Lupton who taught English to German poet, playwright and scientist Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
More unexpected, is the discovery of Edward Thomas Glassborough, who was put behind bars in 1881 in London's Holloway prison. The reason for his imprisonment remains a mystery to this day.
But there are other surprises in store in the royal family's family tree. Through Queen Mary, the wife of King George V, who ruled from 1910 to 1936, the line stretches back, according to Beaucarnot, right to the princes of Transylvania and Walachia in Romania.
That leads back in the fifteenth century to the Princes Dracula. Among them figures the Voivode Vlad III, also known by his patronymic name Dracula, who was posthumously dubbed Vlad the Impaler. He inspired, by his cruelty, the Irish writer Bram Stoker's famous vampire.
Another discovery: a certain Hyacinthe-Gabrielle, an actress at Paris' Palais Royal, brought to England during the revolution by her lover then husband, the Marquis of Wellesley and a direct ancestor of the "Queen Mum".
Via another French woman, a protestant noblewoman born in 1639 in France's region of Poitou, the child will even be a cousin of late French president Francois Mitterrand, while her mother is related to the first president of the United States, George Washington
Through its grandmother Diana, the royal baby will have a link with the families of Winston Churchill and Lord Marlborough, who inspired a popular French folk song.
On the side of celebrities, there are links to the American actress Ellen DeGeneres and the British film director Guy Ritchie, the former husband of Madonna.
But the most astonishing discovery is a little-known ascendancy of one of its distant ascendants, the queen of France, Marie de' Medici, descendant of Alphonse VI of Castillia, who died in 1109.
His fourth wife Zaida, who was an Islamic princess converted to Roman Catholicism, had as an ancestor, according to Beaucarnot, "a king of Seville considered a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed".
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/06/britain-royal-baby-will-have-surprising-family-tree/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz2Yf9rXXb3
taf
Jul 10, 2013, 2:10:01 PM7/10/13
to GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 10:05:21 AM UTC-7, cl.uk wrote:
> Britain's royal baby will have surprising family tree
> Britain's royal baby will have surprising family tree
> But the most astonishing discovery is a little-known ascendancy of one of
its distant ascendants, the queen of France, Marie de' Medici, descendant
of Alphonse VI of Castillia, who died in 1109.
>
>
> His fourth wife Zaida, who was an Islamic princess converted to Roman
Catholicism, had as an ancestor, according to Beaucarnot, "a king of
Seville considered a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed".
>
Not that one would expect any subtlety in this type of article, but 1) that
its distant ascendants, the queen of France, Marie de' Medici, descendant
of Alphonse VI of Castillia, who died in 1109.
>
>
> His fourth wife Zaida, who was an Islamic princess converted to Roman
Catholicism, had as an ancestor, according to Beaucarnot, "a king of
Seville considered a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed".
>
Zaida was the 4th wife of Alfonso is seriously disputed; 2) that Zaida has
any descendants is seriously disputed, even if she married Alfonso; 3) that
Zaida has an ancestor who was a king of Seville is outright speculation; 4)
that the 'kings' of Seville descended from Muhammad is almost certainly an
invention.
Other than that, the 'discovery' is perfectly accurate.
taf
Olivier
Jul 10, 2013, 3:01:48 PM7/10/13
to
I've found the link to Dracula on Internet
http://geneanjou.blog.lemonde.fr/2013/07/07/lien-entre-le-prince-william-et-dracula/
http://geneanjou.blog.lemonde.fr/2013/07/07/lien-entre-le-prince-william-et-dracula/
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 10, 2013, 3:31:32 PM7/10/13
to
>
> But the most astonishing discovery is a little-known ascendancy of one of its distant ascendants, the queen of France, Marie de' Medici, descendant of Alphonse VI of Castillia, who died in 1109.
>
>
That Maria of Medici was is directly descended from Alfonso VI, is not any surprise nor a sensation. Certainly not any astonishing discovery.
That the baby is directly descended from Alfonso VI, is not any surprise nor a sensation.
Actually, when a British royal baby is in question, I would have first said that such a baby's well known descent from Alfonso VI comes through Eleanor of Castile, the first wife of king Edward I. Mentioning that after Edward I, no King ever afterwards on the English throne ever existed who was not a direct descendant of Eleanor of Castile and thusly of Alfonso VI.
Funny how some dorks in news outlets write the name of the country of Castile.
A poor translation of this very same AFP text appeared also in my country, in the news stream of our YLE television system. The one financed by taxpayers. They made all mistakes and exaggerations present in the English text, and additionally, their translation produced even a few additional mistakes. My careful feedback to the Responsible Editor of YLE made it clear to him that they should not publish unwarranted sensationalization nor all sorts of mistakes.
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 10, 2013, 3:33:46 PM7/10/13
to
>
> But there are other surprises in store in the royal family's family tree. Through Queen Mary, the wife of King George V, who ruled from 1910 to 1936, the line stretches back, according to Beaucarnot, right to the princes of Transylvania and Walachia in Romania.
>
>
Leo van de Pas
Jul 10, 2013, 7:12:40 PM7/10/13
to Olivier, Gen-Med
Dear Olivier,
I am trying to make the connections and am finding interesting things.
Shown is
Ruxandra
|
Polixena
|
Skolasztika Jaksa
|
Anna Zelemer
I started at the bottom, Andras Forgach (see euweb Forgach 2) married Anna
Kamaras de Zelemer, no parents shown for her, because there is no Kamaras de
Zelemer page.
However there is a Jaksic de Nagylak page.
Here Skolastiszka Jaksic is married twice (1) Domokos Dobo de Ruszka
(mentioned 1511, 1563) and (2) Laszlo Kamaras de Zelemer (died 1573)
We don't know why Domokos was mentioned in 1563 but this could be a problem.
_IF_ Domokos was alive in 1563, this should mean if Skolastiszka and Laslo
are the parents of Anna (born after 1563), this is very tight as Anna's son
Peter Forgach was born about 1580. Especially those times, this is quite
possible.
With the Jaksic family is shown
Istvan Jaksic de Nagylak, died before 1498
Married NN Belmosevic
|
Mark Jaksic de Nagylak, died June 1537
Married Polixena, mentioned 1527, 1549
|
Skolasztika
Polixena is not shown with a family name, nor with parents.
Her supposed (and quite likely) mother Ruxandra married (1) Dragomir (2) in
1513 Bogdan III of Moldovia
ES III/1 189/190 gives Bogdan's family and no children are shown for Bogdan
and Ruxandra, which suggests that Polixena is a daughter or Ruxandra and
Dragomir.
This all looks very acceptable, but are there other sources confirming these
links. It would be for me the first time that descendants of Dracula can be
traced till the present. ES gives about seven generations in the male line
and there are several female descendants who married, and so the likelihood
for more descendants till the present is pretty good.
Hope anyone can add.
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
I am trying to make the connections and am finding interesting things.
Shown is
Ruxandra
|
Polixena
|
Skolasztika Jaksa
|
Anna Zelemer
I started at the bottom, Andras Forgach (see euweb Forgach 2) married Anna
Kamaras de Zelemer, no parents shown for her, because there is no Kamaras de
Zelemer page.
However there is a Jaksic de Nagylak page.
Here Skolastiszka Jaksic is married twice (1) Domokos Dobo de Ruszka
(mentioned 1511, 1563) and (2) Laszlo Kamaras de Zelemer (died 1573)
We don't know why Domokos was mentioned in 1563 but this could be a problem.
_IF_ Domokos was alive in 1563, this should mean if Skolastiszka and Laslo
are the parents of Anna (born after 1563), this is very tight as Anna's son
Peter Forgach was born about 1580. Especially those times, this is quite
possible.
With the Jaksic family is shown
Istvan Jaksic de Nagylak, died before 1498
Married NN Belmosevic
|
Mark Jaksic de Nagylak, died June 1537
Married Polixena, mentioned 1527, 1549
|
Skolasztika
Polixena is not shown with a family name, nor with parents.
Her supposed (and quite likely) mother Ruxandra married (1) Dragomir (2) in
1513 Bogdan III of Moldovia
ES III/1 189/190 gives Bogdan's family and no children are shown for Bogdan
and Ruxandra, which suggests that Polixena is a daughter or Ruxandra and
Dragomir.
This all looks very acceptable, but are there other sources confirming these
links. It would be for me the first time that descendants of Dracula can be
traced till the present. ES gives about seven generations in the male line
and there are several female descendants who married, and so the likelihood
for more descendants till the present is pretty good.
Hope anyone can add.
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
taf
Jul 10, 2013, 10:02:16 PM7/10/13
to GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:31:32 PM UTC-7, mqs...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
>
> > But the most astonishing discovery is a little-known ascendancy of one
of its distant ascendants, the queen of France, Marie de' Medici,
descendant of Alphonse VI of Castillia, who died in 1109.
>
. . .
> >
>
> > But the most astonishing discovery is a little-known ascendancy of one
of its distant ascendants, the queen of France, Marie de' Medici,
descendant of Alphonse VI of Castillia, who died in 1109.
>
> > That Maria of Medici was is directly descended from Alfonso VI, is not
any surprise nor a sensation. Certainly not any astonishing discovery.
>
> That the baby is directly descended from Alfonso VI, is not any surprise
nor a sensation.
>
> Actually, when a British royal baby is in question, I would have first
said that such a baby's well known descent from Alfonso VI comes through
Eleanor of Castile, the first wife of king Edward I. Mentioning that after
Edward I, no King ever afterwards on the English throne ever existed who
was not a direct descendant of Eleanor of Castile and thusly of Alfonso VI.
>
>
paternal-line great-grandmother of Eleanor of Provence, wife of Henry III,
was daughter of Alfonso VII, in turn Alfonso VI's grandson but by Constance
of Burgundy, not by Zaida. Eleanor of Castile does bring in a novel
inamorata of Alfonso, his mistress Jimena Munoz.
I suspect that they are going through the Italian line specifically so that
they can get to Zaida. If one concludes that mistress Zaida, baptized
Isabel, is identical to a later Queen Isabel "now legitimately married to
Alfonso VI" (taken to imply that this was formerly not the case), and if
one likewise concludes that she is the same Queen Isabel who was mother of
Alfonso's daughter's Sancha and Elvira (II), then the only known lines of
descent from Zaida are 1) from Sancha: Juan Diaz, an apparent scion of the
Haro family who was a rather insignificant landholder in Castile and Toledo
5-generations down, and 2) from Elvira (II): the family of Roger, King of
Sicily. It is probably for this Sicilian connection that the line is being
traced via Italy, even though (if I recall correctly) Edward V and every
English monarch from Henry VIII forward also descend from Alfonso via this
Sicilian daughter of Queen Isabel.
taf
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2013, 1:11:14 AM7/11/13
to
As to relevancy to the throne of England,
Already Jacquetta of Luxembourg was directly descended from the Brienne, princes of Tarent & counts of Lecce, descendants of Roger II of Sicily and the mother of his eldest son Roger.
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2013, 2:00:12 AM7/11/13
to
> Already Jacquetta of Luxembourg was directly descended from the Brienne, princes of Tarent & counts of Lecce, descendants of Roger II of Sicily and the mother of his eldest son Roger.
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2013, 2:12:24 AM7/11/13
to
>
>
> > > That Maria of Medici was directly descended from Alfonso VI, is not
>
> any surprise nor a sensation. Certainly not any astonishing discovery.
>
> >
>
>
>
> any surprise nor a sensation. Certainly not any astonishing discovery.
>
> >
>
>
>
> I suspect that they are going through the Italian line specifically so that
>
> they can get to Zaida.
May I get to know how specifically Maria of Medici would have been directly descended from Tancredo di Lecce, King of Sicily ??
>
> they can get to Zaida.
Although Maria of Medici undoubtedly was of Italian birth, that fact does not guarantee her a direct descent from the specific Italian family of the 1100s.
I have not yet found any descent to Maria of Medici from the Lecce-Brienne family. So, if proof cannot be presented about a descent of Maria of Medici from don Ruggero di Altavilla, the Duke of Apulia, father of king Tancred, then the entire Maria of Medici namedropping is worthless in relation to Zaida.
I am and plenty of others are, well aware that Maria of Medici was directly descended from dona Juana la Loca, heiress of Castile and Aragon (she was Maria's great-grandmother),
but that fact does apparently not add anything better about Zaida to her ancestry than what already had Eleanor of Castile, queen of England. Which was zero as itself.
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2013, 3:30:23 AM7/11/13
to
>
> Ruxandra
>
> |
>
> Polixena
>
> |
>
> Skolasztika Jaksa
>
> |
>
> Anna Zelemer
>
>
>
>
>
> However there is a Jaksic de Nagylak page.
>
> Here Skolastiszka Jaksic is married twice (1) Domokos Dobo de Ruszka
>
> (mentioned 1511, 1563) and (2) Laszlo Kamaras de Zelemer (died 1573)
>
>
>
> We don't know why Domokos was mentioned in 1563 but this could be a problem.
>
> _IF_ Domokos was alive in 1563, this should mean if Skolastiszka and Laslo
>
> are the parents of Anna (born after 1563)
>
>
>
>
> Here Skolastiszka Jaksic is married twice (1) Domokos Dobo de Ruszka
>
> (mentioned 1511, 1563) and (2) Laszlo Kamaras de Zelemer (died 1573)
>
>
>
> We don't know why Domokos was mentioned in 1563 but this could be a problem.
>
> _IF_ Domokos was alive in 1563, this should mean if Skolastiszka and Laslo
>
> are the parents of Anna (born after 1563)
>
>
>
> With the Jaksic family is shown
>
> Istvan Jaksic de Nagylak, died before 1498
>
> Married NN Belmosevic
>
> |
>
> Mark Jaksic de Nagylak, died June 1537
>
> Married Polixena, mentioned 1527, 1549
>
> |
>
> Skolasztika
>
>
>
> Polixena is not shown with a family name, nor with parents.
>
>
>
> Her supposed (and quite likely) mother Ruxandra married (1) Dragomir (2) in
>
> 1513 Bogdan III of Moldovia
>
> ES III/1 189/190 gives Bogdan's family and no children are shown for Bogdan
>
> and Ruxandra, which suggests that Polixena is a daughter or Ruxandra and
>
> Dragomir.
>
>
the Jaksic family was from Croatia. Apparently, nobleman Marko Jaksic (d 1537) from Croatia was displaced from his ancestral lands because the Ottomans occupied so much of southern and central dominions of Hungary, including some parts of Croatia and Serbia, since 1526.
>
> Istvan Jaksic de Nagylak, died before 1498
>
> Married NN Belmosevic
>
> |
>
> Mark Jaksic de Nagylak, died June 1537
>
> Married Polixena, mentioned 1527, 1549
>
> |
>
> Skolasztika
>
>
>
> Polixena is not shown with a family name, nor with parents.
>
>
>
> Her supposed (and quite likely) mother Ruxandra married (1) Dragomir (2) in
>
> 1513 Bogdan III of Moldovia
>
> ES III/1 189/190 gives Bogdan's family and no children are shown for Bogdan
>
> and Ruxandra, which suggests that Polixena is a daughter or Ruxandra and
>
> Dragomir.
>
>
I venture a guess that it was specifically this sort of development which brought Marko Jaksic to contact with Transilvanian (Romanian) noble family (actually it might have been a Valachian noble family but recurring internecine troubles in Valachia over those centuries are known to have displaced several Valachian nobles, those who supported a losing side in whichever succession conflict of Valachia, and many of them fled to Romanian-speaking dominions of Hungary). So, this makes some plausibility that Marko Jaksic's wife Polixena might have been of Valachian-Transilvanian birth.
Nobleman Marko Jaksic was reportedly son of nobleman Stefan Jaksic, a Croatian noble, who was related with the Croatian Jelena Jaksic, the wife of the last of Brankovic princes of Serbian ethnos.
PDel...@aol.com
Jul 11, 2013, 3:50:46 AM7/11/13
to mqs...@gmail.com, GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
That means that through my Gingins I am also descended from the same
paternal lineage as Jacquetta...whooppee!
Does Baby Cambridge have Jewish ancestors? I have noticed that quite a few
Jewish businessmen became protestant in the 16th century, aside form some
examples in the Lyonnais area the classic example in my forebears are the
Perez and Lopez de Villanova (Louppes de Villeneuve, in France)families who
moved to the low countries in the latter part of the 15th century and
became, within two generations, protestant.
Peter
paternal lineage as Jacquetta...whooppee!
Does Baby Cambridge have Jewish ancestors? I have noticed that quite a few
Jewish businessmen became protestant in the 16th century, aside form some
examples in the Lyonnais area the classic example in my forebears are the
Perez and Lopez de Villanova (Louppes de Villeneuve, in France)families who
moved to the low countries in the latter part of the 15th century and
became, within two generations, protestant.
Peter
taf
Jul 11, 2013, 4:33:34 AM7/11/13
to GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 11:12:24 PM UTC-7, mqs...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I suspect that they are going through the Italian line specifically so
that
> > they can get to Zaida.
>
>
> May I get to know how specifically Maria of Medici would have been
directly descended from Tancredo di Lecce, King of Sicily ??
>
I don't know that she does. That is why I said that I suspected that was
> > I suspect that they are going through the Italian line specifically so
that
> > they can get to Zaida.
>
>
> May I get to know how specifically Maria of Medici would have been
directly descended from Tancredo di Lecce, King of Sicily ??
>
the motivation. It appears I was wrong, in which case the 'discovery' is
even worse - something that is not just not known to be true, but is
definitively known to be false. (although this doesn't affect the line I
mentioned beore, that brings it into the royal family via the Woodville
marriage).
There are two route's that historically have been taken to get to Zaida,
both of them false.
The first is through Teresa of Portugal, daughter of Alfonso VI by his
mistress. At least two authors I can think of concluded that since Zaida
was Alfonso's mistress, and Teresa was daughter of Alfonso by his mistress,
then Teresa was daughter of Zaida. for this deduction to be true, Alfonso
must only have had one mistress, but he had two and Jimena Munoz was
Teresa's mother.
I suspect, though that it was the second, tracing through Sancha, daughter
of Queen Isabel. She married Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara, but then it becomes
a little bit murky. She had one known daughter who married Ermengol, Count
of Urgel, from whom the Juan Diaz I mentioned descends. However, Luis de
Salazar y Castro, writing in the 1690s, inserted a son. He had a couple of
sisters with the patronymic Rodriguez that some traditions had made Laras,
but they were much too young to be children of Rodrigo Gonzalez. Finding a
Rodrigo Rodriguez in one document that also named known Laras, he concluded
that this Rodrigo Rodriguez was son of Rodrigo Gonzalez by Sancha, and in
turn was father of the two Rodriguez sisters. One of these married Martin
Gomez de Silva, the other Gonzalo Ruiz Giron, and you can trace a line from
the Giron marriage (via Guzman, a Castile bastard & Portugal) down to Juana
la Loca. This must be the line being followed. The problem is that there
is no reason whatsoever to conclude that the Rodrigo Rodriguez in that
document is really a Lara (these documents almost always identified such
people as "son of the count', but he is not so identified), and more
importantly the records of the religious foundation patronized by the
family of the two sisters document that they were not Laras at all - they
were daughters of count Rodrigo Fernandez de Torono.
Thus this 'genealogist' has 'discovered' either a line that was only ever
put in print due to ignorance, incompetence or confusion, or else a line
that was ginned up by a well-meaning but overly-enthusiastic genealogist
300 years ago, but which has been known to be false for at least several
decades. Well done!
taf
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2013, 6:15:46 AM7/11/13
to
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2013, 6:22:06 AM7/11/13
to
On Thursday, July 11, 2013 11:33:34 AM UTC+3, taf wrote:
> It appears I was wrong, in which case the 'discovery' is
>
> even worse - something that is not just not known to be true, but is
>
> definitively known to be false.
>
> It appears I was wrong, in which case the 'discovery' is
>
> even worse - something that is not just not known to be true, but is
>
> definitively known to be false.
>
> importantly the records of the religious foundation patronized by the
>
> family of the two sisters document that they were not Laras at all - they
>
> were daughters of count Rodrigo Fernandez de Torono.
>
>
>
> Thus this 'genealogist' has 'discovered' either a line that was only ever
>
> put in print due to ignorance, incompetence or confusion, or else a line
>
> that was ginned up by a well-meaning but overly-enthusiastic genealogist
>
> 300 years ago, but which has been known to be false for at least several
>
> decades. Well done!
>
>
>
> taf
"the famous genealogist Jean-Louis Beaucarnot" seems to have his database more of less of like quality as some FABPEDIGREE and somesuch.
>
> family of the two sisters document that they were not Laras at all - they
>
> were daughters of count Rodrigo Fernandez de Torono.
>
>
>
> Thus this 'genealogist' has 'discovered' either a line that was only ever
>
> put in print due to ignorance, incompetence or confusion, or else a line
>
> that was ginned up by a well-meaning but overly-enthusiastic genealogist
>
> 300 years ago, but which has been known to be false for at least several
>
> decades. Well done!
>
>
>
> taf
Perhaps there in those genealogies also is a direct line from Mary Magdalen and her husband Jesus via a child of theirs all through centuries in Gaul to the present day. Genealogical source: the famous genealogy published by Brown, Dan.
Olivier
Jul 11, 2013, 10:33:52 AM7/11/13
to
> I have not yet found any descent to Maria of Medici from the Lecce-Brienne family. So, if proof cannot be presented about a descent of Maria of Medici from don Ruggero di Altavilla, the Duke of Apulia, father of king Tancred, then the entire Maria of Medici namedropping is worthless in relation to Zaida.
Roger de Hauteville, duc de Pouille ca 1121-1148
|
Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
|
Maria Albina de Hauteville ca 1175
|
Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico
|
Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra
|
Jacopa della Marra +1312/
|
Sueva des Baux
|
Anastasia Orsini
|
Francesco Orsini, signore di Monterotondo
|
Orso Orsini, signore di Monterotondo +1424
|
Giacomo Orsini
|
Clarice Orsini ca 1450-1488
|
Lucrezia de' Medici 1470-1553
|
Maria Salviati 1499-1543
|
Cosimo I de' Medici, grand-duc de Toscane 1519-1574
|
Francesco I de' Medici, grand-duc de Toscane 1541-1587
|
Maria de' Medici, reine de France 1575-1642
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 11, 2013, 10:54:53 AM7/11/13
to
On Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:33:52 PM UTC+3, Olivier wrote:
(intriguingly, in the genealogy offered to us the renditions of names and titles makes a very crippled gaunt oscillating incoherently between the languages, French and Italian)
>
> Roger de Hauteville, duc de Pouille ca 1121-1148
>
> |
>
> Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
>
> |
>
> Maria Albina de Hauteville ca 1175
>
> |
>
> Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico
>
> |
>
> Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra
>
> |
>
> Jacopa della Marra +1312/
>
> |
Proof of these filiations?
I sincerely hope the proof is not a famous 'sourcing from Fabpedigree', or 'an anonymous editor of Wikipedia'.
As related discoveries :) there seems to be some dispute whether the Sanseverino marriage of Maria/Albinia di Altavilla produced any sustainable progeny.
By the way, Genealogics has a descent from another son of that husband Sanseverino, but in that case Maria/Albinia is not presented as the mother:
1 Giacomo Sanseverino
Conte di Tricarico d. Abt 1229
+ Elvira (Albinia) of Sicily d. Aft 1216
- (NN)
2 Giacomo di Tricarico
3 Giordana di Tricarico d. Aft 1298
Aldoino Filangieri, 1.Signore di Candida b. Abt 1240 d. 1283
4 Riccardo III Filangieri, 2.Signore di Candida b. est 1270 d. Aft 20 Feb 1321
Francesca Della Marra d. Aft 1324
5 Filippo I Filangieri, 3.Signore di Candida b. Abt 1310 d. 15 Feb 1372
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00093491&tree=LEO
(intriguingly, in the genealogy offered to us the renditions of names and titles makes a very crippled gaunt oscillating incoherently between the languages, French and Italian)
>
> Roger de Hauteville, duc de Pouille ca 1121-1148
>
> |
>
> Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
>
> |
>
> Maria Albina de Hauteville ca 1175
>
> |
>
> Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico
>
> |
>
> Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra
>
> |
>
> Jacopa della Marra +1312/
>
> |
I sincerely hope the proof is not a famous 'sourcing from Fabpedigree', or 'an anonymous editor of Wikipedia'.
As related discoveries :) there seems to be some dispute whether the Sanseverino marriage of Maria/Albinia di Altavilla produced any sustainable progeny.
By the way, Genealogics has a descent from another son of that husband Sanseverino, but in that case Maria/Albinia is not presented as the mother:
1 Giacomo Sanseverino
Conte di Tricarico d. Abt 1229
+ Elvira (Albinia) of Sicily d. Aft 1216
- (NN)
2 Giacomo di Tricarico
3 Giordana di Tricarico d. Aft 1298
Aldoino Filangieri, 1.Signore di Candida b. Abt 1240 d. 1283
4 Riccardo III Filangieri, 2.Signore di Candida b. est 1270 d. Aft 20 Feb 1321
Francesca Della Marra d. Aft 1324
5 Filippo I Filangieri, 3.Signore di Candida b. Abt 1310 d. 15 Feb 1372
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00093491&tree=LEO
Leo van de Pas
Jul 13, 2013, 7:41:31 PM7/13/13
to Olivier, gen-me...@rootsweb.com
This line looks pretty good BUT needs more sources to support this line, see
in between
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Olivier
Sent: Friday, 12 July 2013 12:34 AM
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: BRITAIN'S ROYAL BABY WILL HAVE SURPRISING FAMILY TREE
tafel 206 and vol III tafel 681, she had three husbands, the second was
Giacomo Sanseverino, conte di Tricario, So far I have not found any children
for their marriage.
|
Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico -----are there sources that
establish him as the son of the previous and father of the next generation ?
|
Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra -----as NN di Serino she is
recorded by Turton in his The Plantagenet Ancestry, sadly Marlyn Lewis could
not find any additional information.
|
Hopefully someone can establish either way whether this is correct.
With best wishes
in between
-----Original Message-----
From: gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com
[mailto:gen-mediev...@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Olivier
Sent: Friday, 12 July 2013 12:34 AM
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: BRITAIN'S ROYAL BABY WILL HAVE SURPRISING FAMILY TREE
> I have not yet found any descent to Maria of Medici from the Lecce-Brienne
family. So, if proof cannot be presented about a descent of Maria of Medici
from don Ruggero di Altavilla, the Duke of Apulia, father of king Tancred,
then the entire Maria of Medici namedropping is worthless in relation to
Zaida.
Roger de Hauteville, duc de Pouille ca 1121-1148
|
Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
|
Maria Albina de Hauteville ca 1175 -------she can be found in ES vol II
family. So, if proof cannot be presented about a descent of Maria of Medici
from don Ruggero di Altavilla, the Duke of Apulia, father of king Tancred,
then the entire Maria of Medici namedropping is worthless in relation to
Zaida.
Roger de Hauteville, duc de Pouille ca 1121-1148
|
Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
|
tafel 206 and vol III tafel 681, she had three husbands, the second was
Giacomo Sanseverino, conte di Tricario, So far I have not found any children
for their marriage.
|
Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico -----are there sources that
establish him as the son of the previous and father of the next generation ?
|
Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra -----as NN di Serino she is
recorded by Turton in his The Plantagenet Ancestry, sadly Marlyn Lewis could
not find any additional information.
|
Hopefully someone can establish either way whether this is correct.
With best wishes
mqs...@gmail.com
Jul 22, 2013, 9:20:44 AM7/22/13
to
On Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:33:52 PM UTC+3, Olivier wrote:
>
>
> Roger de Hauteville, duc de Pouille ca 1121-1148
>
> |
>
> Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
>
> |
>
> Maria Albina de Hauteville ca 1175
>
> |
>
> Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico
>
> |
>
> Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra
>
> |
>
> Jacopa della Marra +1312/
>
> |
>
> Sueva des Baux
in several genealogies, Risone I della Marra is mentioned as having married twice. Adelizia di Sanseverino is the second wife in those. Presumably, there's some near-contemporary record of the two marriages and/or elder children of Risone being not born of Adelizia.
>
> |
>
> Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
>
> |
>
> Maria Albina de Hauteville ca 1175
>
> |
>
> Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico
>
> |
>
> Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra
>
> |
>
> Jacopa della Marra +1312/
>
> |
>
> Sueva des Baux
Genealogies tend to say that Adelizia's only 'certain' child was the son Niccolo della Marra, a younger son of her husband. Niccolo became the (2nd) Lord of Serino.
Jacoba/Giacometta della Marra's mother could have been the said first wife, right.
On the other hand, is there any reliable evidence that Adelizia would have been the mother of said Jacoba ?
PDel...@aol.com
Jul 22, 2013, 9:48:54 AM7/22/13
to mqs...@gmail.com, GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
What would be of more interest would be the discovery of interesting
ascendances on Kate Middleton's mother's side of the family - What Horace Round
propounded was that if an individual could claim three generations of
English ancestry he could find gentry, noble or royal blood irrespective of the
family's socio economic background. Now that would be quite a coup for a
genealogist, true beavering away.... One elderly gent i met at a bus stop in
Somerset many years ago (about 40) showed me how Horace Round found his
family, Moon, was in fact a corruption of Mohun and the trail that led back to
that family. Harry Moon came from a long line of pit workers in Somerset.
Peter
ascendances on Kate Middleton's mother's side of the family - What Horace Round
propounded was that if an individual could claim three generations of
English ancestry he could find gentry, noble or royal blood irrespective of the
family's socio economic background. Now that would be quite a coup for a
genealogist, true beavering away.... One elderly gent i met at a bus stop in
Somerset many years ago (about 40) showed me how Horace Round found his
family, Moon, was in fact a corruption of Mohun and the trail that led back to
that family. Harry Moon came from a long line of pit workers in Somerset.
Peter
mqs...@gmail.com
Dec 10, 2013, 11:27:51 PM12/10/13
to
> >
>
> > Tancrède de Hauteville, re di Sicilia 1135-1194
> > |
> > Maria Albina de Hauteville ca 1175
> > |
> > Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico
> > |
> > Adelicia Sanseverino, Signora di Solofra
>
>
>
>
>
> there seems to be some dispute whether the Sanseverino marriage of Maria/Albinia di Altavilla produced any sustainable progeny.
>
>
about the maternity of various children (attested or alleged) of Giacomo = Jacopo de Sanseverino, count of Tricarico (since 1205 the second husband of the abovementioned 'albina' = Albiria of Lecce of Hauteville):
>
>
> there seems to be some dispute whether the Sanseverino marriage of Maria/Albinia di Altavilla produced any sustainable progeny.
>
>
one Jacopo de Sanseverino, count of Tricarico, is attested to have married (on 6 Nov 1188) another lady named: Mabilia de Ceccano (mentioned in 1188). This Jacopo is highly likely the same who is mentioned in 1205 as having contracted a new marriage. (Presumably the countess Mabilia had died between those two years.)
Be the identicality as it may, however it should be noted that any children of such a count Jacopo bearing the name Sanseverino and/or Tricarico, children active in the early decades of the 1200s (such as, in 1220s) could as well be children of Mabilia and that count Jacopo she married,
and consequently not children of Albiria by any means, it being immaterial in that regard that she married the count Jacopo.
Above we are told about someone named
Guglielmo Sanseverino, conte di Tricarico
as presumably son of count Jacopo.
In an extract of a near-contemporary document, I have seen that such man, count Jacopo, had yet a son
Simone de Sanseverino de Tricarico.
Elsewhere in genealogies, there are
Giacomo de Sanseverino de Tricarico
as son (or direct descendant) of such a count Jacopo de Sanseverino, count of Tricarico.
But as I said, any of them,
Guglielmo, Simone, Giacomo,
may well have been progenited by countess Mabilia and thusly not be children of Albiria de Lecce de Altavilla.
(So, are there any near-contemporary sources to say adequately which, if any, children this Albiria bore to her (second =) Tricarico husband ?)
0 new messages