Descent from Adam
Adrian Channing
I belive King Philip II of Spain had his scholars work out his descent from
Adam, this is his descendants as shown in O'Harts Irish Pedigrees:
1. Adam. 2. Seth: 3. Henos: 4. Cainan: 5. Malaleel: 6. Iared: 7. Henoch: 8.
Mathusalam: 9. Lamech: 10. Noe: 11. Iapeth: 12. Iauan: 13.
Dodanin: 14. Hercules: 15. Thusco: 16. Altheo: 17. Blascon: 18. Cambo
Blascon: 19. Dardano: 20. Ericthonio: 21. Troe: 22. Iilo: 23.
Loomedonte: 24. Priamo: 25. Heleno: 26. Genger: 27. Franco: 28. Esdron: 29.
Gelio: 30. Rasabiliano: 31. Plaserio: 32. Plesron: 33.
Eliacor: 36. Gaberiano: 35. Plaserio: 36. Antenor: 37. Priamo: 38. Heleno:
39. Plesron: 40. Basabiliano: 41. Alexandre: 42. Priamo: 43.
Getmalor: 44. Almadion: 45. Diluglio: 16. Heleno: 47. Plaserio: 48.
Diluglio: 40. Marcomiro: 50. Priamo: 51. Heleno: 52. Antenor: 53.
Marcomiro: 54. Antenor: 55. Priamo: 56. Heleno: 57. Diocles: 58. Basano:
59. Clodomiro: 60, Nicanor: 61. Marcomiro: 62. Clodio: 63.
Antenor: 64. Clodomiro: 65. Merocado: 66. Casandre: 67. Antario: 68.
Franco: 69. Clogion: 70. Marcomiro: 71. Clodomiro: 72. Antenor: 73.
Paterio: 74. Richimero: 75. Odemara: 76. Marcomiro: 77. Clodomiro: 78.
Faraberto: 79. Sunon: 80. Hilderico: 81. Baltero: 82. Clodio: 83.
Valter: 84. Dagoverto: 85. Clogion: 86. Genebaldo: 87. Dagoverto: 88.
Clodion : 89. Marcomiro: 90. Faramundo: 91. Clodion: his son, 92.
Merobeo: 93. Childerico: 94. Clodoreo: 95. Clotario (or Olotario):96.
Sigisberto: 97. Thoeberto: 98. Bebo: 99. Roperto: 100. Amprinto:
101. Gontramo: 102. Luthardo: 103. Betgon: 104. Rapoto: 105. Berengario:
106. Othon: 107. Vernero: 108. Alberto Elrico: 109. Alberto, 2: 110.
Rodulpho: 111. Alberto, 3: 112. Alberto Elsabio: 113. Leopoldo: 114.
Ernosto: 115. Federico: 116. Maximiliano: 117. Don
Philipe, 1: 118. D. Charolus: 119. D. Philipe, 2: 120. D. Philipe, 3: 121.
D. Philipe, 4: 122. D. Philipe, 5:
Don't know where the inaccuracies creep in, but there seems to be an error
right at the end as I think there were a couple of generations between King
Philip IV and King Philip V.
Adrian (Surrey, UK) ACha...@CompuServe.Com
Rafal Heydel-Mankoo
The mythical descent from Adam which I possess is as follows(it seems to
repeat many of the names):
Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahaleel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech,
Noah, Shem, Arphaxad, Salah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, Terah,
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Zarah, Darda, Ericthnius, Tros, Ilus,
Ladomedon, Priam, Helenus, Plesron, Basibiliano, Alexandre, Priam,
Germator, Almadion, Diluglio, Helenus, Plaserio, Diluglio, Marcomir,
Helenus, Antenor, Marcomir, Clodius, Antenor, Clodomir II, Merodachus,
Cassander, Antharius, Francus, Clodius II, Marcormir III, Clodomir III,
Anternor IV, Ratherius, Richemer I, Odomar, Marcomir IV, Clodomir IV,
Farabert, Sunno, Hilderic, Batherus, Clodius III, Walter, Dagobert,
Genebald I, Dagobert, Clodius I, Marcomir, Pharamond, Clodio, Sigermerus
I, Gerreolus, Ausbert of Moselle, Arnoul, St. Arnulf, Ansgise, Pepin II,
Charles Martel, Pepin the Short, Charlemagne.
All the best,
Rafal Heydel-Mankoo (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada)
kma...@sprint.ca
KHF333
In a message dated 5/25/98 6:17:44 PM, you wrote:
<<Don't know where the inaccuracies creep in, >>
90. Faramundo: 91. Clodion: his son,
Pharamond's ancestry is unknown. We only know about him through legends.
However, it is always good to know how people thought of themselves and their
past.
Kenneth Harper Finton
Editor/ Publisher
THE PLANTAGENET CONNECTION
_____________________HT COMMUNICATIONS____________________
PO Box 1401 Arvada, CO 80001 USA
Voice: 303-420-4888 Fax: 303-420-4548 e-mail: K...@AOL.com
Homepage: http://members.aol.com/TPConnect
Associated with: Thompson Starr International
[ Films ... Representation ... Publishing ...Marketing]
Kennwalrus
I'm doubtful that Pharamond (Faramund) existed -- I believe he appears, though,
in some annal of the fifth or sixth century (though it's probably been argued
that he's a late interpolation); and his one-time existence *is* very obliquely
suggested by the occurrence in the Gallic episcopal _fasti_ of a sixth-century
Bishop Faramod -- in that period, a significant proportion of the rather few
'German' bishops had names characteristic of the Frankish kings of the previous
century.
Chlodio, apparently (though not quite certainly) _stammvater_ of the
Merovingians, was almost certainly real, as shown by notices in Sidonius (c470)
and Gregory (c580). His ancestry is indeed unknown, but the later nomenclature
of the Merovingian house moderately strongly suggests earlier connections, as
is, in fact, implied by Gregory. Specifically, the radicals favored by the
Merovingians for their onomastic stock suggest the 4th-century Frankish general
Fl. Richomer, reasonably identified with Gregory's Frankish king, Richomer,
father of a Theudomer; and another 4th-century Frankish general, Fl.
Merobaudes. The name Merobaudes, itself, might suggest at least a claimed
descent from the stock of the 1st-century Germanic chieftain whose name was
recorded by the Romans as Maroboduus. (Linguists might dispute this, of
course.) Another claimed 'ancient' connection might be seen in Clovis' choice
of 'Ingomer' for his firstborn child by Clotilde -- another 1st-century
Germanic chieftain was recorded, again by the Romans, as 'Inguiomerus,' and was
a close relative of one 'Segimerus,' which latter name suggests the Germanic
princeling 'Sigi(s)mer,' noted by Sidonius c470, and often thought, on the
basis of S.'s minute description of the man's garb, gear, etc., to have been a
royal Frank.
The major respect in which the Merovingian onomastic departs from that of
earlier Frankish leaders is in the signature use, from the very beginning of
their (reasonably) certain ancestry, of the radicals 'chlod-' and 'wech.' If
the above suggestions -- noted independently by myself and Christian Settipani
-- did, in fact, reflect a genealogical reality, we might perhaps best think in
terms of onomastic transmission on the distaff side. Sad to say, further
documentation seems unlikely to turn up and shed light on the subject.
David Nash Ford
If anyone is interested in knowing the "traditional" descent of various royalty
and nobility from Adam & Eve, I suggest a visit to Luke Stevens' "Descent from
Adam" Site at:
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2444/descent.htm
David Ford
Binfield
Berklshire
UK
"Early British Kingdoms Web Site"
http://freespace.virgin.net/david.ford2/Early%20British%20Kingdoms.html
JKent10581
In a message dated 98-05-26 15:07:11 EDT, david...@virgin.net writes:
<< If anyone is interested in knowing the "traditional" descent of various
royalty
and nobility from Adam & Eve, I suggest a visit to Luke Stevens' "Descent
from
Adam" Site at:
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2444/descent.htm
>>
This is the bozo who excused away his few generations by saying people lived
longer back then. It has been said that Adam lived to be 900 years old. How
old was Eve when she had her last child? How old was Adam? How long people
live has nothing to do with the generation turn over rate. As Sgt. Joe Friday
once said "All I want is the facts".
Jno
KHF...@aol.com
In a message dated 5/26/98 10:26:19 AM, kennw...@aol.com wrote:
<<I'm doubtful that Pharamond (Faramund) existed -- I believe he appears,
though,
in some annal of the fifth or sixth century>>
That was from the Liber Historiae Franconium, 7th century, where is says that
Pharamund was "raised up as the long-haired king above them."
<<Chlodio, apparently (though not quite certainly) _stammvater_ of the
Merovingians, was almost certainly real, as shown by notices in Sidonius
(c470)
and Gregory (c580). His ancestry is indeed unknown, but the later
nomenclature
of the Merovingian house moderately strongly suggests earlier connections, as
is, in fact, implied by Gregory.>>
Yes, Chlodio, his son is the first that can be shown with some certainty.
<<Another claimed 'ancient' connection might be seen in Clovis' choice
of 'Ingomer' for his firstborn child by Clotilde -- another 1st-century
Germanic chieftain was recorded, again by the Romans, as 'Inguiomerus,' and
was
a close relative of one 'Segimerus,'>>
That is close, omnastically, to Syagrius, the Roman that Gregory reported to
have ruled in Childeric's forced absence. He is mentioned in the
prosopographies, but no mention is made of his rule except by Gregory. Too bad
this era will be forever unclear. Certainly, the Ingomer name went on for
many generations and seems to point back to some ancient forbearer.
Nathaniel Taylor
>In a message dated 5/26/98 10:26:19 AM, kennw...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>I'm doubtful that Pharamond (Faramund) existed -- I believe he appears,
>>though, in some annal of the fifth or sixth century
>
>That was from the Liber Historiae Franconium, 7th century.
^^^^^^^^^^
_Liber historiae francorum_.
<snip>
>>Another claimed 'ancient' connection might be seen in Clovis' choice
>>of 'Ingomer' for his firstborn child by Clotilde -- another 1st-century
>>Germanic chieftain was recorded, again by the Romans, as 'Inguiomerus,' and
>>was a close relative of one 'Segimerus,'
>
>That is close, omnastically, to Syagrius, the Roman that Gregory reported to
>have ruled in Childeric's forced absence.
Segimerus and Syagrius are not at all onomastically close. The former is
an obvious two-stem Frankish name: Sigi[s] - mer [with -us as a dummy Lat.
nom. masc. ending]. 'Syagrius' is not a name of this type at all, but
very likely a true Latin name, in which the roots 'Si-' [?] and
'ager/agri' may figure.
Nat Taylor
Kennwalrus
Nat writes:
"'Syagrius' is ... very likely a true Latin name, in which the roots 'Si-' [?]
and 'ager/agri' may figure."
I profess no expertise in the linguistics underlying the classical languages,
but *have* read, FWIW, the hypothesis that 'Syagrius' was originally a Greek
_signum_, or cognomen (the explanations I've read, supposedly differentiating
these terms, end up making them sound like exactly the same thing), deriving
from 'suagros,' 'wild boar' (cp. 'aper' [?]), and terminally Latinated, in the
usual way, by turning '-os' into '-ius.' (The emperor Avitus' name
'Eparchius,' I only recently realized, similarly derives from the Greek
'eparkhos,' 'governor,' and was presumably also originally a cognomen -- and, I
strongly suspect, the title of office held by some ancestor at the other end of
the Mediterranean. [I even have a candidate in mind.]) This derivation of
'Syagrius' seems to me to gain a little credence from the variant spelling,
which I've seen somewhere in Gallic records -- episcopal? -- as 'Suagrius.'
While I'm on the subject of the Syagrii -- and, by an association of ideas,
those closely connected with them -- I also realized, not too long ago, that
'Tonantius' presumably derives from an epithet of Jupiter, 'Tonans,' 'the
thunderer.' It's a little surprising (to me) to see a name of this sort being
coined -- apparently -- in the (Christian) fourth century, but I might suggest
-- albeit *very* tentatively -- that it's a rendering into Latin of the New
Testament epithet of the 'sons of thunder.'
Segimer(us) is, of course, as Nat says, Sigi(s)mer, an attested 5th-century
Germanic name with royal connotations. I might have raised the question, with
the regard to the 'Ing-'-root of Ingomer, Clovis' eldest child by Clotilde -- a
root of considerable interest, precisely because it occurs nowhere else among
the Merovingians or, as far as I can recall, any other royal Germanic house of
the period -- whether it's related to an epithet of the god Freyr, 'Ingve,' or
to 'Yngling.' Commentary, please.
Henry Soszynski
At 23:24 28/05/98 GMT, Kennwalrus wrote:
>Segimer(us) is, of course, as Nat says, Sigi(s)mer, an attested 5th-century
>Germanic name with royal connotations. I might have raised the question,
with
>the regard to the 'Ing-'-root of Ingomer, Clovis' eldest child by Clotilde
-- a
>root of considerable interest, precisely because it occurs nowhere else among
>the Merovingians or, as far as I can recall, any other royal Germanic
house of
>the period -- whether it's related to an epithet of the god Freyr,
'Ingve,' or
>to 'Yngling.' Commentary, please.
>
>
There was a Segimer fl.15AD who was a paternal uncle of Thusnelda who
married Arminius (16BC-21AD) ruler of the Cherusci. His own father was
called Sigimer who had a brother called Inguiomer. What a descent that
would be!
Cheers,Henry
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GENEALOGICAL GLEANINGS - http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy
Royalty from Cambodia,Fiji,Tonga,Hawaii,Africa and now India.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kennwalrus
Henry writes:
"There was a Segimer fl. 15 AD who was a paternal uncle of Thusnelda who
married Arminius (16BC-21AD) ruler of the Cherusci. His own father was called
Sigimer who had a brother called Inguiomer. What a descent that would be!"
Yes, that's the group I had in mind. (Although I don't recall *two* S's, fa. &
s. -- most unusual [tho' not unheard of] for early German fa.-&-s. pairs to
share the same name -- I must look this up.) 'Arminius' has been thought to =
Herrmann.
It seems to me that the Merovingians were implicitly claiming descent from this
family group. Whether this was so, and if so, whether they were right, and if
so again, how, would seem permanently unanswerable questions. In this
connection, it is, perhaps, worth noting that the Franks of Clovis' day did
apparently preserve strong, though centuries-old, memories of their individual
*tribal* origins, *within* the Frankish confederacy. Note that Clovis is
termed 'Sicambrian' at his baptism by Remigius, and references by a historian
of c400 to 'Bructeri' and 'Chamavi' (I think). I believe I've read that
there's evidence of distinct memories of such tribal origins as late as
Charlemagne's day.
Am likewise interested in whether the Latinized 'Maroboduus' could reasonably
be thought to = the later 'Merobaudes,' itself a Latinization of, I suppose,
*Mer-bald. It's generally thought that 5th-century Germans transmitted names
by individual radical, not as whole di-radical units, and this is apparently at
least generally so; but nothing in either this general practice or their
presumptive motivations in following it would seem to me to preclude the
occasional bestowal upon a child of the *whole* name of an illustrious
ancestor.
Nathaniel Taylor
In article <199805282324...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
kennw...@aol.com (Kennwalrus) wrote:
>Nat writes:
>
>"'Syagrius' is ... very likely a true Latin name, in which the roots 'Si-' [?]
>and 'ager/agri' may figure."
>
>I profess no expertise in the linguistics underlying the classical languages,
>but *have* read, FWIW, the hypothesis that 'Syagrius' was originally a Greek
>_signum_, or cognomen (the explanations I've read, supposedly differentiating
>these terms, end up making them sound like exactly the same thing), deriving
>from 'suagros,' 'wild boar' (cp. 'aper' [?]),
> This derivation of
>'Syagrius' seems to me to gain a little credence from the variant spelling,
>which I've seen somewhere in Gallic records -- episcopal? -- as 'Suagrius.'
Sounds perfectly plausible to me.
>While I'm on the subject of the Syagrii -- and, by an association of ideas,
>those closely connected with them -- I also realized, not too long ago, that
>'Tonantius' presumably derives from an epithet of Jupiter, 'Tonans,' 'the
>thunderer.' It's a little surprising (to me) to see a name of this sort being
>coined -- apparently -- in the (Christian) fourth century, but I might suggest
>-- albeit *very* tentatively -- that it's a rendering into Latin of the New
>Testament epithet of the 'sons of thunder.'
A while ago you were toying with the idea that "Tonantius" was "Antonius"
spelt sideways, as it were--the juggling of syllables being a Germanic
habit, albeit this time applied to a Roman name. I'm not sure which of
these ideas has more plausibility to me. I'm a little uneasy with adding
"-tius" to a gerund epithet to get another form of a name; can you give
any other examples?
Nat Taylor
Kennwalrus
Nat writes:
"A while ago you were toying with the idea that "Tonantius" was "Antonius"
spelt sideways, as it were--the juggling of syllables being a Germanic habit,
albeit this time applied to a Roman name. I'm not sure which of these ideas
has more plausibility to me. I'm a little uneasy with adding "-tius" to a
gerund epithet to get another form of a name; can you give any other examples?"
True. Perhaps a little background is in order. (Not for Nat, but for a
general audience.)
The essential difficulty in finding names to give to newborns is that two
opposing ends are usually in mind. (This should be true across most societies
in most eras.) _Sc._, one wants names that (a) identify the newborn as a
member of a particular family (however defined) -- which implies a name *like*
that of other members of the family -- but (b) differentiate him from other
(living ) members of the family, so that when one refers to, say, 'John,' one's
audience won't ask 'which of five living 'Johns' is he talking about?' (Which
implies names that are *unlike* those of other family members.)
Aristocratic Romans of the 2nd and 3rd centuries resolved these contrary needs
by carrying polyonymy to an extreme -- an individual was given a great slate of
names (five or six was apparently quite typical, and some are on record with
*forty* or more names). These names were typically chosen from among the
child's wealthier and more powerful ancestors, on both paternal and maternal
sides, and sometimes for a surprising number of generations back. This
accomplished the aim of identifying the child as a member of a broadly defined
lineage, and, not irrelevantly, also emphasized ties of kinship to powerful
living cousins, some of them rather distant. At the same time, although a
father and his sons might share a high proportion of names, one non-shared name
would typically be used to refer to each -- the so-called 'diacritical' name,
which was not infrequently the last.
The trouble with this system was obvious: its sheer cumbersomeness. (Which
had grown, with time, into absurdity.) Perhaps partly in response to this,
Roman aristocrats began toying with a new angle in the 4th century:
orthographic and acoustic variation of single names, with affinities to
Germanic practices of front- and end-variation of *their* single names. This
would be accomplished by repeatedly tweaking one name, highly characteristic of
the family, and passing it along in ever-new variations. The classic example
(pardon the pun!) is that of 'Probus' among the Petronii, which varies to
Proba, Probinus, and Probianus, and, given time, could easily have become
Probius, Probinius, and Probinianus. (I occasionally wonder whether
'Parovius,' seen a bit later in Gaul, could be a related form.) (The
diminutive '-ulus' and '-olus' served similar functions.) None of this, of
course, disimplies the use of a reduced degree of polyonymy at the same time.
For reasons I won't elaborate here, basically because I've more or less
abandoned the idea, I considered the possibility, in '94, that Tonantius might
be an acoustic variation, along the above lines, of Antonius, using metathesis,
or Spoonerism. I had a candidate ancestor in mind, too. The trouble is, I
haven't noted any other examples of metathesis as the principal of an onomastic
variation among the late Romans. (Which doesn't mean there aren't any, of
course.)
I know 'much too little' of Latin grammar to judge whether there are any
problems with the idea that Tonantius derives from Tonans, thus can't say
whether there are any valid parallels. (Will need to think about this and take
advice.) Would Gerontius and Amantius count, or are these from a different
part of speech?
Nathaniel Taylor
In article <199805291555...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
kennw...@aol.com (Kennwalrus) wrote:
>Nat writes:
>
>>I'm a little uneasy with adding "-tius" to a gerund epithet to get
>>another form of a name; can you give any other examples?"
>
>Would Gerontius and Amantius count, or are these from a different
>part of speech?
Gerontius (Tolkien's little pun, using this name for the Old Took [the
longest-lived Hobbit before Bilbo] nods to the [Greek?] root that has to
do with old age, as in 'gerontology') does not correspond to a verb gerund
stem; the vowel 'o' is not used in this location in this part of speech.
However, Amantius *would* count, if it derives from 'Amans' as an epithet
('Loving', or loosely 'the Lover'), from amo, amas...
Nat Taylor
Stewart Baldwin
kennw...@aol.com (Kennwalrus) wrote:
>Henry writes:
>"There was a Segimer fl. 15 AD who was a paternal uncle of Thusnelda who
>married Arminius (16BC-21AD) ruler of the Cherusci. His own father was called
>Sigimer who had a brother called Inguiomer. What a descent that would be!"
[snip]
The recent subject matter of this thread has now drifted considerably
from the former very off-topic stuff on Adam and Eve to subjects that
have nothing to do with fake descents from Adam and Eve, and are in
fact now on-topic for this newsgroup. However, I suspect that a
number of individuals who might be interested are missing these
postings entirely because the subject line still reads off-topic, and
nobody has bothered to change it to something that is actually related
to the topic being discussed.
Thus, a reminder seems to be in order. When the topic of a thread has
drifted so much that the original name is no longer relevant, the
subject line should be changed to something more appropriate.
Stewart Baldwin