Since making my post on Antonio Rei's paper regarding the Maia descent, I have laid hands on another paper of his, claiming to trace Iberian descents from Muhammad. “Descendência hispânica do Profeta do Islão – exploração de algumas linhas primárias”, in Armas e Troféus, IX série, 2011-2012, Instituto Português de Heráldica, Lisboa, pp. 31-59 I despair! At one point he makes Egilona, wife of Visigoth king Roderick then of conqueror Abd al-Aziz ibn Musa, a kinswoman of the Banu Qasi founder simply because "what could be more natural?" (and I note that this supposed relationship has found its way into Spanish Wikipedia as if it were authentic history). He then, I kid you not, indicates that the rest of that descent comes 'primarily from' Medieval Lands - this from an academic researcher, basing an entire paper on something he found on the internet. OD the three descents he includes, the first includes four connections (marriages or relationship of child to parent) that are completely invented, but he doesn't give this possibility the slightest consideration. As to the other two descents shown, one goes through a man who was an invention of an 18th century historian, and the other accepts an origin legend as absolute fact, he being completely unaware that the family in question didn't even exist at the time of the legend and the line he shows is based on the connect-the-dots, name's-the-same speculation by the same 18th century historian (Salazar y Castro). Sigh! taf

This is a pretty poor reflection of the portugese institute of heraldry of Lisbon. Is this a to poall level of editorial review for them?

On 11/07/2016 2:23 PM, taf via wrote: > Since making my post on Antonio Rei's paper regarding the Maia descent, I have laid hands on another paper of his, claiming to trace Iberian descents from Muhammad. > > “Descendência hispânica do Profeta do Islão – exploração de algumas linhas primárias”, in Armas e Troféus, IX série, 2011-2012, Instituto Português de Heráldica, Lisboa, pp. 31-59 > > I despair! > > At one point he makes Egilona, wife of Visigoth king Roderick then of conqueror Abd al-Aziz ibn Musa, a kinswoman of the Banu Qasi founder simply because "what could be more natural?" (and I note that this supposed relationship has found its way into Spanish Wikipedia as if it were authentic history). He then, I kid you not, indicates that the rest of that descent comes 'primarily from' Medieval Lands - this from an academic researcher, basing an entire paper on something he found on the internet. > But "what could be more natural"? Genealogy is so little regarded by many academics that when one does venture into the subject all bets (and most standards) are off. Medieval Lands is readily accessible and seems to carry the imprimatur - if not the outright sponsorship - of the "Foundation for Medieval Genealogy", which may appear a substantial referee in its favour. This exemplifies why I was so appalled at its promotion here in the first place, and at the continuing regular use of it by some who should know better. The work of anyone who wants to make a gold-standard wiki in this field has been made much harder, if not practically impossible, by the recourse of so many to the glister of fool's gold. Peter Stewart