Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Yasmine von Hohenstaufen Anjou Plantagenet

349 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

M Sjostrom

unread,
Apr 18, 2010, 7:27:01 AM4/18/10
to gen-me...@rootsweb.com
an invented name, as far as can be detected.

you must realize that world has always had these sorts of people who pretend
to some (invented) identity

and the efficacy of internet has brought a number of such to wider
circulation

taf

unread,
Apr 18, 2010, 1:08:46 PM4/18/10
to
On Apr 18, 4:15 am, Mézes de Debreczen et Rettegh <vons...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasmine_von_Hohenstaufen_Anjou_Plantagenet
>
> Wow, interresting fake. "A bit" funny the Hohenstaufen-Anjou-Plantagenet
> name. Why do not realize that's ridiculous?

I took a look at her web page. Wow! This is a woman who is severely
reality challenged when it comes to genealogy. She not only claims
descent from an invented son of Emp. Frederick II, but also from
"Griffen, son of Charles Martel". I bet this goes over well with her
colleagues in that collection of charlatans and freaks calling
themselves the European Council of Princes.

She is also in serious need of some guidance on web page design.

taf

Message has been deleted

WJho...@aol.com

unread,
Apr 18, 2010, 4:33:22 PM4/18/10
to t...@clearwire.net, gen-me...@rootsweb.com
In a message dated 4/18/2010 10:10:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
t...@clearwire.net writes:


> I took a look at her web page. Wow! This is a woman who is severely
> reality challenged when it comes to genealogy. She not only claims
> descent from an invented son of Emp. Frederick II, but also from
> "Griffen, son of Charles Martel".>>

------------------


The french Wikipedia here (in translation)

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&
u=http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffon_%28carolingien%29&ei=xWnLS4uRFYO2swPF48SQAw&sa=X&oi=translate&
ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CBAQ7gEwAg&
prev=/search%3Fq%3DGriffin,%2Bson%2Bof%2B%2522Charles%2BMartel%2522%26num%3D50%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client
%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DcvG%26sa%3DX%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official

states that a Griffin did exist who was son of Charles Martel.

Are you saying that:
1) No such Griffin existed, he is made up OR
2) A Griffin existed but he was not son of Charles Martel OR
3) He existed and he was son of Charles Martel but he left no children

Will, Prince of Seborga

Nathaniel Taylor

unread,
Apr 18, 2010, 5:27:42 PM4/18/10
to
In article <mailman.354.12716228...@rootsweb.com>,
WJho...@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 4/18/2010 10:10:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> t...@clearwire.net writes:
>
> > I took a look at her web page. Wow! This is a woman who is severely
> > reality challenged when it comes to genealogy. She not only claims
> > descent from an invented son of Emp. Frederick II, but also from
> > "Griffen, son of Charles Martel".>>
> ------------------
>

> The french Wikipedia here states that a Griffin did exist who was son of Charles Martel.


>
> Are you saying that:
> 1) No such Griffin existed, he is made up OR
> 2) A Griffin existed but he was not son of Charles Martel OR
> 3) He existed and he was son of Charles Martel but he left no children

Yes, there is a well-attested duke Griffo, son of Charles Martel. But
of him Settipani & Van Kerrebrouck say "no marriage or children are
known for him for certain, although, based on a commemorative list from
Remiremont, one might attribute to him two sons, named Griffo and
Charles, whose names immediately follow his own." (_La prehistoire des
Capetiens_, 178).

This 'Princess Yasmin' is a rather lame fantasist. She should NOT have
a Wikipedia page -- notability fail. Her only press notice comes from a
puff piece in the Telegraph ('O, those wacky foreigners') which was only
run as a followup to a previous puff piece on the tourist-micronation of
Seborga.

Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/

Message has been deleted

Denis Beauregard

unread,
Apr 19, 2010, 9:32:44 AM4/19/10
to
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:59:56 +0200, Mézes de Debreczen et Rettegh
<von...@gmail.com> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:

>Sometimes I can't understand the wikipedia, Why accept fake things about
>fake people? Nice...

wikipedia is the best and the worst at the same time.

The best since it will cover nearly all subjects after some time, and
with references in most cases.

The worst because anyone can write anything. I know someone who knows
about nothing in genealogy and history and who put his own biography
in wikipedia where he pretends to be an historian. Then he can use
this piece of invention as a part of his presentation. Nobody will
control this kind of selfish page.

Also, the worst because using rephrasing, they can make years of work
almost useless and remove users from your site.

The worst because if the general or average opinion about a fact is
wrong, then someone writing something true (even with an explanation
or an analysis) will be considered as vandalizing the page or will
require a lot of debates to set the case.


Denis

--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/
French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/
Sur cédérom à 1775 - On CD-ROM to 1775

Diana Gale Matthiesen

unread,
Apr 19, 2010, 8:00:38 PM4/19/10
to GEN-ME...@rootsweb.com
If you think someone has posted false information on Wikipedia, the answer is to
correct it (i.e., register and edit it). Wikipedia does not blindly accept
challenged information, nor does it allow people to upload their own
biographies. If you object to an entry, you can initiate a debate behind the
scenes.

Diana

wjho...@aol.com

unread,
Apr 20, 2010, 4:56:12 AM4/20/10
to gen-me...@rootsweb.com

The issue isn't really "accepting" it's "documenting".
That an article exists in Wikipedia doesn't mean it's accepted as reality by Wikipedians.
The event occurred and the article documents the event or the person, that's all.


-----Original Message-----
From: Mézes de Debreczen et Rettegh <von...@gmail.com>
To: Nathaniel Taylor <nlta...@nltaylor.net>; gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Sent: Mon, Apr 19, 2010 5:59 am
Subject: Re: Yasmine von Hohenstaufen Anjou Plantagenet

Sometimes I can't understand the wikipedia, Why accept fake things about
fake people? Nice...


2010/4/18 Nathaniel Taylor <nlta...@nltaylor.net>

> -------------------------------
> 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
>

-------------------------------
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


greenpri...@gmail.com

unread,
Jul 29, 2020, 10:47:51 AM7/29/20
to
Il giorno domenica 18 aprile 2010 22:33:22 UTC+2, wjhonson ha scritto:
> In a message dated 4/18/2010 10:10:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> t...@clearwire.net writes:
>
>
> > I took a look at her web page. Wow! This is a woman who is severely
> > reality challenged when it comes to genealogy. She not only claims
> > descent from an invented son of Emp. Frederick II, but also from
> > "Griffen, son of Charles Martel".>>Ma chi sono questi 4 accattoni che si permettono di criticare i veri RE!Quattro mafiosi di m...si permettono di opinare su mille secoli di imperatori.Quattro spacciatori di frottole imbroglioni di un borgo improvvisatosi come accattoni, su un trono di millesecoli d'imperatori, operano deterrenza diffamatoria, che è come una masturbazione di eunuchi impotenti!Siete solo un malloppo di patetici imbroglioncelli, mistificatori, accattoni di merda .Avete sputtanato la mistica graalica del borgo con le vostre corone di cartone e di improvvisate massaia con la spocchia di serve rampanti che vogliono sostituire i veri Re.Fatevi le seghe !I veri Re restano re e voi non siete un cazzo!Buffoni di merda! Siete solo attori della peggiore pro loco del pessimo gusto!Solo creatori di una giostra che ha persino stufato...Buffoni di periferia!

Yasmin von Hohenstaufen

unread,
Oct 28, 2022, 7:47:38 AM10/28/22
to
Ehi mezzoseghino , spuntato come fungo in una notte!
Chi cazzo sei per opinare ipotizzando! Ringrazia Dio se non ti hanno querelato... poichè da informazioni sei solo mezzoseghino...niente con il nulla..
.Chi ci ha provato , ancora lamenta i dolori e lo strazio delle tasche rimaste vuote e bucate, con pendenze di reato di diffamazione :questa è arbitrarea diffamazione di parte!
Sei niente , tra compari di merenda. Degno di querela, ma sei solo squattrianto... e ci limitiamo ad una pernacchia... Risparmiamo dispendio di altre energie!La principessa da otto secoli sui suoi documenti anamnestici è Aprile von Hohenstaufen Puoti.Lei è Lei , ossia la pronipote di Federico II ed Isabella d'Inghilterra e dei re Longobardi Gens Potitia , dell'antica Roma!E tu... non sei un cazzo!

Will Johnson

unread,
Oct 28, 2022, 2:04:06 PM10/28/22
to
The Google translation is hilarious

Hey half saw, popped like a mushroom overnight!
Who the fuck are you to opine assuming! Thank God if you have not sued you ... as from information you are only half-saw ... nothing with nothing ..
Those who have tried, still complain of the pain and the agony of the pockets left empty and pierced, with the pending crime of defamation: this is arbitrary partisan defamation!
You are nothing, among friends of a snack. Worthy of a lawsuit, but you are just penniless ... and we limit ourselves to a raspberry ... We save waste of other energies! The princess for eight centuries on her anamnestic documents is Aprile von Hohenstaufen Puoti. II and Isabella of England and of the Longobard kings Gens Potitia, of ancient Rome! And you ... you are not a dick!

Will Johnson

unread,
Oct 28, 2022, 5:46:34 PM10/28/22
to
On Friday, October 28, 2022 at 11:04:06 AM UTC-7, Will Johnson wrote:
>
> Hey half saw, popped like a mushroom overnight!
> Who the fuck are you to opine assuming! Thank God if you have not sued you ... as from information you are only half-saw ... nothing with nothing ..
> Those who have tried, still complain of the pain and the agony of the pockets left empty and pierced, with the pending crime of defamation: this is arbitrary partisan defamation!
> You are nothing, among friends of a snack. Worthy of a lawsuit, but you are just penniless ... and we limit ourselves to a raspberry ... We save waste of other energies! The princess for eight centuries on her anamnestic documents is Aprile von Hohenstaufen Puoti. II and Isabella of England and of the Longobard kings Gens Potitia, of ancient Rome! And you ... you are not a dick!

Amamnestic is a very odd word, it does not mean anything like what she thinks in this context.
I wonder if she could not have meant onomastic
That would at least be a tiny bit closer although I don't know what an "onomastic document" could possibly be

On another note are the Lombard kings supposed to have some connection to the Roman Gens Potitia?

Will Johnson

unread,
Oct 28, 2022, 5:49:19 PM10/28/22
to
From reviewing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potitia_gens

it appears the answer is no. No suggested connection to the Longobard kings

taf

unread,
Oct 28, 2022, 6:47:25 PM10/28/22
to
On Friday, October 28, 2022 at 2:46:34 PM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 28, 2022 at 11:04:06 AM UTC-7, Will Johnson wrote:
> >
> > The princess for eight centuries on her anamnestic documents is Aprile von Hohenstaufen Puoti. II and Isabella of England and of the Longobard kings Gens Potitia, of ancient Rome! And you ... you are not a dick!
> Amamnestic is a very odd word, it does not mean anything like what she thinks in this context.
> I wonder if she could not have meant onomastic

'anamnestici' is an Italian masculine plural adjective, reflecting 'anamnesi', the definitions of which include 'reminiscence' and 'remembrance'. Not that knowing this makes the paragraph appreciably more coherent, but it probably indeed was the word intended.

taf

Peter Stewart

unread,
Oct 28, 2022, 11:00:11 PM10/28/22
to
A photograph of a lady oddly captioned "Princess Yasmin Aprile von
Hohenstaufen Shop" can be seen here
http://principessagelsominadisvevia.blogspot.com/2008/11/, along with
her purported ancestry.

According to this, Emperor Frederick II had a son born in 1240 to his
third wife Isabella who was burdened with the names "Frederick Avril de
Burey d'Anjou de Saint Genis Saintonge de Niphi Nerà Avril d'Imavrincour
de Masquinade Weiblinghen Hohenstaufen Plantagenet". Golly, Avril
squared for him yet Princess Yasmin Aprile has to be content with being
called after the month just once.

You would think that Emperor Frederick might have remembered at least
one of these many names when he wrote his testament, but of course no
such son was mentioned by him - presumably due to the small problem of
non-existence.

The "pedigree" continues with roughly equal plausibility, including a
Caesar's salad of European royal and aristocratic surnames, defaulting
to Habsburgs wherever imagination ran short.

Enviably detached from sub-lunar reality.

Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

Peter Stewart

unread,
Oct 29, 2022, 2:40:13 AM10/29/22
to
On 29-Oct-22 2:00 PM, Peter Stewart wrote:

<snip>

> According to this, Emperor Frederick II had a son born in 1240 to his
> third wife Isabella

It is worth noting that some historians consider there may have been a
namesake son of Frederick by Isabella living in 1240, obviously an
infant if so, but that he must have died young since the only evidence
for the existence of such a child is the copy of a mandate dated 3 April
in indiction 13 (1240) regarding arrangements for empress I. and the
emperor's beloved son F. who was clearly hers too.

Some other historians have rejected this as a copying error. There is
certainly no evidence whatsoever that such a personage grew up much less
left descendants who never figure in the record, who never claimed any
skerrick of the imperial inheritance, who were never recognised by their
relatives over more than eight centuries despite having bizarre
"dynastic" names, and who never asserted rights beyond a single hilltop
village in Italy that was allegedly scrounged somehow from monastic
ownership.
0 new messages