No, it was a forwarded post from gen-medieval-l that I thought people here might be interested in. I haven't investigated this material myself. I find Nat Taylor's article pretty convincing in debunking Zuckerman. I also don't accept the lines through the Irish kings. Too many ulterior motives to make the Kings relate to the Bible in Christian times. The only line I think has possibilities that I've seen is the one through Michael III, which I know you don't accept. I do think there are some good possibilities for more research through Spainish/Arab connections (not Zaida Denia, which is bogus). On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 19:44, JF wrote: > Gordon, > > I'm not sure if these were your comments, or if you wanted anyone else's > thoughts on them, but here are a couple of things to consider. > > Gordon Banks wrote: > > >While reading "The Stones Cry Out," by Randall Price, which describes > >archaeological discoveries that support the historicity of the Hebrew > >Scriptures, I thought how interesting it would be to discover ancient > >Judeans among Plantagenet forebears. I am aware of Zuckerman's > >speculation about Makhir of Septimania, as well as Nat Taylor's > >critical review of Zuckerman's theory; > > > Zuckerman's book was an extensive look into the possibility that such a > connection did exist. Even so, some questions remain unanswered in his > treatise--one being was Theoderic-Makhir the same as Natronai ben > Habibai, the deposed Exilarch? The author mentions in one passage that > Makhir may actually been his brother. But even so, both would have had > an unbroken line back to King David--a requirement to hold the position > of Exilarch. Having read both, Zuckerman's treatise is far more > convincing that Taylor's rebuttal. Even so, it remains to be seen if > anything more can be found in support of Zuckerman. David H. Kelly has > been working on the problem for some time and may publish something > someday. We'll have to wait and see if and when he does. Zuckerman is > aided in small part by a publication called the The Baghdad Haggadah, > published in 2000 in London. It does provide a list of Exilarchs and > does seem to verify some of Professor Zuckerman's information, but I > don't think it goes far enough to prove Zuckerman right. > > >and I know that many people say > >there is no evidence to support the fantastic Celtic and Scandinavian > >royal lineages that extend back to the House of David. But, are there > >any other credible Plantagenet ancestral lines that might connect to > >ancient Judea? > > > The ancestry of the Irish kings through Eochu Mugmedon stems purely from > Irish legend. That's not to say there might not have been such a > connection, just not one anyone can provide satisfactory evidence of. > > >Some have pointed out that religious prohibitions against interfaith > >marriage may have prevented such connections. On the other hand, Don > >Stone points out that new dynasties acquire legitimacy by marrying > >descendants of old dynasties, forging links that may be forgotten in > >time as attention turns from the old to the new. I wonder if this > >factor might open the possibility of a Plantagenet connection to > >ancient Judea? > > > There are actually any number of additional ways that such a connection > might be possible--Don Stone's comment certainly explains one of those. > It might also have been through a marriage to a someone who had > converted, an illegitimate child by a Jewish slave, a sultan's harem > containing Jewesses and a descendant by one of intermarrying with > Christians, etc. etc. > > >For example, is it possible that such a connection exists among > >pre-Christian Hungarian rulers? Some have posted notes to this > >newsgroup about the idea that Zoltan (b. c. 896 and d. c. 947) married > >a woman from Khazaria's aristocracy. If Khazaria's aristocracy, which > >originated in Siberia, converted to Judaeism one hundred or more years > >before Zoltan's marriage (scholars disagree about when Khazaria's > >aristocracy converted to Judaeism) and sought during that time to > >forge marriage alliances with prominent Middle Eastern Jewish > >families, then Zoltan's wife easily might have descended from ancient > >Judea--and even from the House of David. > > > The problem is that not all Khazars were converted, and there is no > record of any appreciable number of marriages with middle eastern Jews. > Even in the few instances where there may have been, such marriages > would not necessarily mean a line of descent to King David. There were > twelve tribes which maintained their own identity for a very long period > of time. There was a good deal of intermarriage between the tribes of > Judah and Benjamin, but not so much with the other ten tribes of Israel. > Then too, not every member of the tribe of Judah was descended from King > David. Keep in mind that even in the first century it had been > prophesied that the Christ would be of the house of David (in other > words, a direct decendant). If all Jews at that time were his > descendants, it would have been nothing special and not the least bit > noteworthy. So all things considered, and with no documented lineage > back to King David, this is a nonstarter. > > The best hope of a connection to David seems to be the one David H. > Kelly is working on and we'd have to see what's there if and when he > published something. > > Jim > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Well, you'd have to get the article to see what the evidence is. Lindsay Brook is a reputable genealogist. All genealogy except that proven with DNA is probabilistic. The further back you go, the less certain things get. But it's fun to read about and consider. On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 17:12, Marc Sanders wrote: > Gordon, > > >Last year I asked if anyone knew of "credible > >Plantagenet ancestral > >lines that might connect to ancient Judea." > >I've pasted that note > >below. Continuing with this thought, I note > >that the Foundation for > >Medieval Genealogy at http://fmg.ac/ in > >newsletter, vol. 1, issue 2, > >presents an interesting article by Lindsay L. > >Brook entitled "The > >Ebriaci of Pisa, Jewish ancestors of the > >Plantagents?" > > >Brook notes that: > > >The article does not provide the complete > >lineage between Pagano > >Ebriaci and Alasia di Saluzzo, wife of Richard > >Fitz Alan, Earl of > >Arundel. But, I suspect the lineage is > >something like the following. > > >Pagano Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1091/2 = ____ > >Ugo Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1115 = ____ > >Ugo Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1136 = ____ > >Maria Ebriaci di Pisa = Gonnario I, Giudice di > >Torres, m. bef. 1127 > >Barisone II, Giudice di Torres = Preziosa de > >Orru, d. after 1178 > >Comita I, Giudice di Torres, d. 1218 = Ispella > >d'Arborea > >Maria di Torres = Bonifacio III, Marquis di > >Saluzzo, m. 1202; d. 1212 > >Manfredo III, Marquis di Saluzzo = Beatrice di > >Savoy (or Sicily?) > >Tommaso I, Marquis di Saluzzo = Luisa di Ceva > >Alasia di Saluzzo = Sir Richard Fitz Alan, 7th > >Earl of Arundel > > For me this is somewhat interesting. The only > thought I have is that postings and articles like > these are more to tease than anything else. They > say "possible" ancestors. That doesn't do me any > good unless it can be proven. Even "probable" has > some evidence. > > Can anyone else here verify any of this proposed > line? TIA > > Marc > > PS what happened to the other Byzantine lines of > descent we were talking about? > > > > Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: > http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/ > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Gordon, I'm not sure if these were your comments, or if you wanted anyone else's thoughts on them, but here are a couple of things to consider. Gordon Banks wrote: >While reading "The Stones Cry Out," by Randall Price, which describes >archaeological discoveries that support the historicity of the Hebrew >Scriptures, I thought how interesting it would be to discover ancient >Judeans among Plantagenet forebears. I am aware of Zuckerman's >speculation about Makhir of Septimania, as well as Nat Taylor's >critical review of Zuckerman's theory; > Zuckerman's book was an extensive look into the possibility that such a connection did exist. Even so, some questions remain unanswered in his treatise--one being was Theoderic-Makhir the same as Natronai ben Habibai, the deposed Exilarch? The author mentions in one passage that Makhir may actually been his brother. But even so, both would have had an unbroken line back to King David--a requirement to hold the position of Exilarch. Having read both, Zuckerman's treatise is far more convincing that Taylor's rebuttal. Even so, it remains to be seen if anything more can be found in support of Zuckerman. David H. Kelly has been working on the problem for some time and may publish something someday. We'll have to wait and see if and when he does. Zuckerman is aided in small part by a publication called the The Baghdad Haggadah, published in 2000 in London. It does provide a list of Exilarchs and does seem to verify some of Professor Zuckerman's information, but I don't think it goes far enough to prove Zuckerman right. >and I know that many people say >there is no evidence to support the fantastic Celtic and Scandinavian >royal lineages that extend back to the House of David. But, are there >any other credible Plantagenet ancestral lines that might connect to >ancient Judea? > The ancestry of the Irish kings through Eochu Mugmedon stems purely from Irish legend. That's not to say there might not have been such a connection, just not one anyone can provide satisfactory evidence of. >Some have pointed out that religious prohibitions against interfaith >marriage may have prevented such connections. On the other hand, Don >Stone points out that new dynasties acquire legitimacy by marrying >descendants of old dynasties, forging links that may be forgotten in >time as attention turns from the old to the new. I wonder if this >factor might open the possibility of a Plantagenet connection to >ancient Judea? > There are actually any number of additional ways that such a connection might be possible--Don Stone's comment certainly explains one of those. It might also have been through a marriage to a someone who had converted, an illegitimate child by a Jewish slave, a sultan's harem containing Jewesses and a descendant by one of intermarrying with Christians, etc. etc. >For example, is it possible that such a connection exists among >pre-Christian Hungarian rulers? Some have posted notes to this >newsgroup about the idea that Zoltan (b. c. 896 and d. c. 947) married >a woman from Khazaria's aristocracy. If Khazaria's aristocracy, which >originated in Siberia, converted to Judaeism one hundred or more years >before Zoltan's marriage (scholars disagree about when Khazaria's >aristocracy converted to Judaeism) and sought during that time to >forge marriage alliances with prominent Middle Eastern Jewish >families, then Zoltan's wife easily might have descended from ancient >Judea--and even from the House of David. > The problem is that not all Khazars were converted, and there is no record of any appreciable number of marriages with middle eastern Jews. Even in the few instances where there may have been, such marriages would not necessarily mean a line of descent to King David. There were twelve tribes which maintained their own identity for a very long period of time. There was a good deal of intermarriage between the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, but not so much with the other ten tribes of Israel. Then too, not every member of the tribe of Judah was descended from King David. Keep in mind that even in the first century it had been prophesied that the Christ would be of the house of David (in other words, a direct decendant). If all Jews at that time were his descendants, it would have been nothing special and not the least bit noteworthy. So all things considered, and with no documented lineage back to King David, this is a nonstarter. The best hope of a connection to David seems to be the one David H. Kelly is working on and we'd have to see what's there if and when he published something. Jim

Gordon, Gordon Banks wrote: >By the way, CP, vol. vii, pp. 680-681, points out that Alasia, >daughter of Manfredo III, Marquis di Saluzzo, married Edmund de Lacy, >Earl of Lincoln. Do Alasia di Saluzzo and Edmund de Lacy have many >known descendants today? > The line went extinct. Sons Henry and John apparently died before their sister, Alice de Lacy. She married twice, but d.s.p. Nothing is known of John, presumably he d.s.p. Henry married twice and had a daughter by his first wife, Margaret Longspee, Countess of Salisbury. She was Alice de Lacy, Countess of Salisbury who d.s.p. in 1348, the last of this line. Also see CP I:23 >Alasia di Saluzzo and Richard Fitz Alan >surely have many descendants, including quite a few of those who >participate in this bulletin board. > Right on both counts. Jim

Marc Marc Sanders wrote: >Can anyone else here verify any of this proposed >line? TIA > Yes, the line can be verified back as far as Maria di Torres & Bonifacio III, Marquis di Saluzzo. His line can be traced back farther, but I've found nothing in ES to even provide her parents. Turton does provide 10 more generations of her ancestors, but unfortunately they don't agree with this proposed line. The names of her parents are similar, but the rest doesn't even resemble this proposed line. I'm a little nervous of using Turton unverified by other quality sources. He's right most of the time, but has been known to be off here and there. >PS what happened to the other Byzantine lines of >descent we were talking about? > I'm still working on my end of it. We're in the final week of the Summer Semester and things are a little hectic. I'll post what I have as I can, probably over the next couple of weeks or so. Jim

Gordon, >Last year I asked if anyone knew of "credible >Plantagenet ancestral >lines that might connect to ancient Judea." >I've pasted that note >below. Continuing with this thought, I note >that the Foundation for >Medieval Genealogy at http://fmg.ac/ in >newsletter, vol. 1, issue 2, >presents an interesting article by Lindsay L. >Brook entitled "The >Ebriaci of Pisa, Jewish ancestors of the >Plantagents?" >Brook notes that: >The article does not provide the complete >lineage between Pagano >Ebriaci and Alasia di Saluzzo, wife of Richard >Fitz Alan, Earl of >Arundel. But, I suspect the lineage is >something like the following. >Pagano Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1091/2 = ____ >Ugo Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1115 = ____ >Ugo Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1136 = ____ >Maria Ebriaci di Pisa = Gonnario I, Giudice di >Torres, m. bef. 1127 >Barisone II, Giudice di Torres = Preziosa de >Orru, d. after 1178 >Comita I, Giudice di Torres, d. 1218 = Ispella >d'Arborea >Maria di Torres = Bonifacio III, Marquis di >Saluzzo, m. 1202; d. 1212 >Manfredo III, Marquis di Saluzzo = Beatrice di >Savoy (or Sicily?) >Tommaso I, Marquis di Saluzzo = Luisa di Ceva >Alasia di Saluzzo = Sir Richard Fitz Alan, 7th >Earl of Arundel For me this is somewhat interesting. The only thought I have is that postings and articles like these are more to tease than anything else. They say "possible" ancestors. That doesn't do me any good unless it can be proven. Even "probable" has some evidence. Can anyone else here verify any of this proposed line? TIA Marc PS what happened to the other Byzantine lines of descent we were talking about? Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/

--=-T1hGyRurBSAAHmcWSDHE Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit People may be interested in this posting from geb-medieval-l. --=-T1hGyRurBSAAHmcWSDHE Content-Disposition: inline Content-Description: Forwarded message - One Possible Plantagenet Descent from Ancient Judea Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L-request@rootsweb.com> Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [207.40.200.39]) by cyan.propagation.net (8.9.3p2/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA20366 for <geb@gordonbanks.com>; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 18:38:06 -0500 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id h73Narp3028408; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 17:36:53 -0600 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 17:36:53 -0600 X-Original-Sender: news@newsarch.rootsweb.com Sun Aug 3 17:36:53 2003 From: shpxlcp@comcast.net (Shawn Potter) X-Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval Subject: One Possible Plantagenet Descent from Ancient Judea Date: 3 Aug 2003 16:29:26 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 93 Message-ID: <7004aa4b.0308031529.41524102@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Old-To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com Resent-Message-ID: <oSvo3C.A.g7G.VyZL_@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com> archive/latest/44276 X-Loop: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Last year I asked if anyone knew of "credible Plantagenet ancestral lines that might connect to ancient Judea." I've pasted that note below. Continuing with this thought, I note that the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy at http://fmg.ac/ in newsletter, vol. 1, issue 2, presents an interesting article by Lindsay L. Brook entitled "The Ebriaci of Pisa, Jewish ancestors of the Plantagents?" Brook notes that: - Emilio Cristiani, "Nobilta e Popolo nel Comune di Pisa: Dalle Origini del Podestariato alla Signoria dei Donoratico," (Naples, 1962) refers to a member of the Ebriaci family as an "Hebriacus de Hebriacis;" and - Maria Luisa Ceccarelli-Lemut, Pisan Consular Families in the Communal Age: The Anfossi and the Ebriaci in the Eleventh to Thirteenth Centuries, in Thomas W. Blomquist and Maureen F. Mazzaoui (eds), "The Other Tuscany: Essays in the History of Lucca, Pica and Siena during the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries," (Kalamazoo: 1994) describes the Ebriaci family as merchants "involved in ventures in Constantinople and the orient." Then the author asks if the founders of the Ebriaci family were Middle Eastern Jews who converted to Christianity and became members of the Pisan aristocracy--in the same way that the Jewish Pierleoni family was absorbed into the Roman nobility. Does anyone know more about this family? Precisely what does "Hebracus de Hebriacis" mean? Does "Ebriaci" mean "Hebrew?" The article does not provide the complete lineage between Pagano Ebriaci and Alasia di Saluzzo, wife of Richard Fitz Alan, Earl of Arundel. But, I suspect the lineage is something like the following. Pagano Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1091/2 = ____ Ugo Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1115 = ____ Ugo Ebriaci di Pisa, d. 1136 = ____ Maria Ebriaci di Pisa = Gonnario I, Giudice di Torres, m. bef. 1127 Barisone II, Giudice di Torres = Preziosa de Orru, d. after 1178 Comita I, Giudice di Torres, d. 1218 = Ispella d'Arborea Maria di Torres = Bonifacio III, Marquis di Saluzzo, m. 1202; d. 1212 Manfredo III, Marquis di Saluzzo = Beatrice di Savoy (or Sicily?) Tommaso I, Marquis di Saluzzo = Luisa di Ceva Alasia di Saluzzo = Sir Richard Fitz Alan, 7th Earl of Arundel By the way, CP, vol. vii, pp. 680-681, points out that Alasia, daughter of Manfredo III, Marquis di Saluzzo, married Edmund de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln. Do Alasia di Saluzzo and Edmund de Lacy have many known descendants today? Alasia di Saluzzo and Richard Fitz Alan surely have many descendants, including quite a few of those who participate in this bulletin board. Shawn Potter ------------------------- 2002-03-17 14:41:36 PST; http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3551261124d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=7004aa4b.0203171441.70eb99cb%40posting.google.com While reading "The Stones Cry Out," by Randall Price, which describes archaeological discoveries that support the historicity of the Hebrew Scriptures, I thought how interesting it would be to discover ancient Judeans among Plantagenet forebears. I am aware of Zuckerman's speculation about Makhir of Septimania, as well as Nat Taylor's critical review of Zuckerman's theory; and I know that many people say there is no evidence to support the fantastic Celtic and Scandinavian royal lineages that extend back to the House of David. But, are there any other credible Plantagenet ancestral lines that might connect to ancient Judea? Some have pointed out that religious prohibitions against interfaith marriage may have prevented such connections. On the other hand, Don Stone points out that new dynasties acquire legitimacy by marrying descendants of old dynasties, forging links that may be forgotten in time as attention turns from the old to the new. I wonder if this factor might open the possibility of a Plantagenet connection to ancient Judea? For example, is it possible that such a connection exists among pre-Christian Hungarian rulers? Some have posted notes to this newsgroup about the idea that Zoltan (b. c. 896 and d. c. 947) married a woman from Khazaria's aristocracy. If Khazaria's aristocracy, which originated in Siberia, converted to Judaeism one hundred or more years before Zoltan's marriage (scholars disagree about when Khazaria's aristocracy converted to Judaeism) and sought during that time to forge marriage alliances with prominent Middle Eastern Jewish families, then Zoltan's wife easily might have descended from ancient Judea--and even from the House of David. Does anyone have any thoughts (and evidence) about Taksony's mother (Taksony was a son of Zoltan and an ancestor of Edward I, King of England), or about any other possible Plantagenet links to ancient Judea? Shawn Potter --=-T1hGyRurBSAAHmcWSDHE--

Leo van de Pas has just announced his database of medieval genealogy is online. It looks superb and has biographies and references to many people of interest to this group. Here is the URL: http://www.genealogics.org

Gordon, Gordon Banks wrote: >Constantine VII says Basil wasn't a peasant. Do you know the >contemporary source your modern scholarly sources are using to >contradict Constantine (whom I admit had ulterior motive for saying >otherwise)? > The story behind Procopius's _Secret History_ , written c.550 and not published until after his death, illustrates the extremely serious nature of daring to criticize, contradict , or even correct a sitting Emperor. In his case the emperor he told more about was Justinian and his wife Theodora. I'm sure Procopius would have met an immediate and rather unpleasant end had he published it in his own lifetime. Another example is when the funeral procession of Eudocia was winding its way through the streets of Constantinople, a servant girl who was observing the procession from an upper window, accidentally spat on her coffin. Basil had her dragged to the cemetery and executed over the the Empress's grave. A not too subtle reminder that the Emperor was to be considered a god on earth. Certainly Constantine could have easily had ulterior motives for glorifying his family's origins. Many kings and their chroniclers did the same thing. But in this case, more than most, Constantine did so with complete impunity. Whatever he said or wrote was beyond question--in his own lifetime at least. One of the common denominators between Norwich, Ostrogorsky, and Treadgold, is Symon Logothetes, whose tenth century chronicle picked up where Theophanes had left off--c.813. Other than that, it isn't footnoted specifically in any of the four works I cited, but generally attributed along with other information of that period to Logothetes's Chronicle. While looking, I stumbled on something I hadn't noticed before in Norwich's "Byzantium; The Apogee." On p. 79, where the author mentions Michael III's habit of surrounding himself with favorites and cronies, he mentions a couple of things pertinent to the last couple of messages. First, he pins down the date of Basil's arrival in Constantinople saying he made his first appearance in 857 or thereabouts. So that's later than I thought and nearly half a century off from the source you mentioned. But next he verifies, to a certain extent, the story of Basil's family being taken prisoner by Krum, then transported beyond the Danube to an area known as Macedonia--probably due to the number of Macedonians who had suffered a similar fate. Basil spent most of his childhood there, and it is probably from that experience he got the epithet 'the Macedonian.' Norwich mentions that he was named such even though he was Armenian and had not a drop of Macedonian blood in him. He spoke Armenian, and Greek, with a heavy Armenian accent. He was completely illiterate and remained so all his life. His only real assets were that he was good with horses and had Herculean strength. At the time Western Europe was in the depths of what later scholars called a dark age, Byzantium was an oasis of learning. Literacy was widespread, not just among churchmen and the nobility, but a considerable part of the Byzantine Empire was literate. Even for members of a noble family of lesser means, there was still education. The fact Basil was completely illiterate further illustrates his humble peasant origins. Jim

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 16:45, JF wrote: > Ignoring the several scholarly sources which clearly say Basil was from > a peasant family, Constantine VII says Basil wasn't a peasant. Do you know the contemporary source your modern scholarly sources are using to contradict Constantine (whom I admit had ulterior motive for saying otherwise)?

Dear Jim and cousins, I am curious to know who took care of the children of George Duke of Clarence after his murder? I was curious as to took care of Edward IV's family after his death. Certainly Richard III didn't do much to help the situation. Thanks for your help, Bubba Wrenn -----Original Message----- From: JF [mailto:gen9@cox.net] Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 6:46 PM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PDP] new Byzantium question Gordon, Gordon Banks wrote: >As a child, Basil was >captured with his parents in the sack of Adrianople by the Bulgar Khan >Krum (813). His parents died in captivity, but some 8 to 10 years after >their death, Basil was released and made his way to Constantiople, where >he eventually came to the attention of the imperial family, and finally >of the emperor Michael III. > Ignoring the several scholarly sources which clearly say Basil was from a peasant family, Basil was born c.812 in Thrace, in the _region_ of Adrianople, and so would have been an infant, about 1 year old, when the sack of Adrianople occurred. None of the authoritative sources mention anything about his family being at Adrianople at the time of the sacking. As for making his way Constantinople some 8 to 10 years later, he'd have been a young boy between 9 and 11 years old. In fact, Leo appeared in Constantinople during the reign of Michael III which didn't begin until 842 (and ended with his murder by Basil in 867). So the very earliest he appears in Constantinople would have been 29 years after the sacking of Adrianople, leaving these dates suspiciously off by a good deal. >Adontz proposed that the Armenian Leo, whose daughter married Maiactes >was later Leo V, the Armenian. > >Stone presents arguments for and against Adontz. > >For: >1) Many names are shared between the families of Basil and Leo. >Counter: But they aren't Armenian names. > One of the problems of Byzantine studies is that a great number of personal names are remarkably similar. >2) Maiactes and Leo were of similar social standing, being sons of >Armenian nobility > I can't speak to this Miaactes because he does not appear in any of the authoritative sources. But Leo (later Leo V) was, in fact, the son of a Bardas, who was himself of an Armenian princely family, probably the Gnuni [Warren Treadgold, The Byzantine Revival; 780-842, Stanford University Press, 1988, p. 196] >Against: >3) Constantine VII doesn't say that Leo was the same as Leo V >Counter: Leo V was an iconoclast and out of favor in Constantine's time, >so he might not want to draw attention to this. > Or simply that Leo was a very popular Armenian name. If we're theorizing let's not rule out the obvious. >4) Leo V's eldest son was only a child on Leo's accession to the throne >in 813, probably 10 years old, thus it was unlikely that Leo V had a >marriageable daughter in 780-797, when Constantine VII has them married. > True, Leo's first marriage was in 802/03. By his first wife he had an only son, Symbaticus-Constantine [Treadgold, idem., pp. 10, 203]. Also, look at Leo's age. He was born in 775. He could not have had a daughter of marriageable age by 797. >Counter: Constantine's chronology is off, since that would make Basil I >older than Michael III by 30 years or so, and they were likely near the >same age. It may be the it was Basil's father who was captured in the >sack of Adrianople as a child, not Basil. > Michael was, in fact, some 30 years junior to Basil [Treadgold, idem. p. 439 n397]. Constantine's dates weren't off by more than the usual year most Byzantine dates differ by. And yes, you can speculate it was Basil's father who was captured in the sack of Adrianople. But as a child, is unlikely since Basil himself was born in 812, one year prior to the sacking. So Basil's date of birth screws up both theories. >5) Warren Treadgold (The Byzantine Revival, Stanford, 1988) proposed >that Leo V had an earlier wife, called "Barca," (which is an insult, >meaning "fatty") daughter of Bardanes Turcas, stratgus of the >Anatolics. She could have borne earlier children, perhaps daughters. > Read pp. 10 & 123. He did marry a Barca as his first wife, and she was the sister to Thecla, Michael II's wife. But they weren't married until 802/03. [Treadgold, idem., pp. 10, 203] >I don't read French or have access to any of these books, but if any of >you do or know any more about these issues, please comment. As I said, >Stone has about 4 pages on this. I think the evidence is somewhat thin, >myself, so our hope for a descent from antiquity rests more on Michael >III being Leo VI's father. > I agree with you, the evidence is very thin for any of these alternative origins for Basil. But here's the main problem with the Michael III theory, officially, Basil I was Leo VI's father which is confirmed by Leo's son, Constantine VII. And Constantine wrote a very flattering biography of his (supposed) grandfather. It's clear he embellished Basil's deeds more than a little, and perhaps invented a more noble beginning for the man he believed was his grandfather. After all, it gave him more prestige too-- his grandfather having have come from an Armenian noble family instead of peasant stock. Armenians were foreigners in Constantinople and only Armenian nobles would have any standing at all among the elitist Byzantine population. If, Leo V had a daughter she would have to have had to have been born after 804, the date birth of his oldest child. So she could not have been Basil's mother--at best (if she existed) she could only be 7 years old when Basil was born. Even so, if he had such a daughter, she would have been rounded up along with his second wife, Theodosia, and tonsured. His four sons weren't as kindly treated. All four were castrated to prevent any later uprisings against the new Emperor, Michael II (grandfather of Michael III). The youngest son died under the knife and was buried with his father [Treadgold, Idem. 224]. It was clearly the Emperor's wish that Basil's line ended then and there with Basil--he took all steps necessary to insure no member of that family could continue his line. All things considered, it's highly unlikely anyone is a descendant of Leo V. Jim ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Gordon, Gordon Banks wrote: >As a child, Basil was >captured with his parents in the sack of Adrianople by the Bulgar Khan >Krum (813). His parents died in captivity, but some 8 to 10 years after >their death, Basil was released and made his way to Constantiople, where >he eventually came to the attention of the imperial family, and finally >of the emperor Michael III. > Ignoring the several scholarly sources which clearly say Basil was from a peasant family, Basil was born c.812 in Thrace, in the _region_ of Adrianople, and so would have been an infant, about 1 year old, when the sack of Adrianople occurred. None of the authoritative sources mention anything about his family being at Adrianople at the time of the sacking. As for making his way Constantinople some 8 to 10 years later, he'd have been a young boy between 9 and 11 years old. In fact, Leo appeared in Constantinople during the reign of Michael III which didn't begin until 842 (and ended with his murder by Basil in 867). So the very earliest he appears in Constantinople would have been 29 years after the sacking of Adrianople, leaving these dates suspiciously off by a good deal. >Adontz proposed that the Armenian Leo, whose daughter married Maiactes >was later Leo V, the Armenian. > >Stone presents arguments for and against Adontz. > >For: >1) Many names are shared between the families of Basil and Leo. >Counter: But they aren't Armenian names. > One of the problems of Byzantine studies is that a great number of personal names are remarkably similar. >2) Maiactes and Leo were of similar social standing, being sons of >Armenian nobility > I can't speak to this Miaactes because he does not appear in any of the authoritative sources. But Leo (later Leo V) was, in fact, the son of a Bardas, who was himself of an Armenian princely family, probably the Gnuni [Warren Treadgold, The Byzantine Revival; 780-842, Stanford University Press, 1988, p. 196] >Against: >3) Constantine VII doesn't say that Leo was the same as Leo V >Counter: Leo V was an iconoclast and out of favor in Constantine's time, >so he might not want to draw attention to this. > Or simply that Leo was a very popular Armenian name. If we're theorizing let's not rule out the obvious. >4) Leo V's eldest son was only a child on Leo's accession to the throne >in 813, probably 10 years old, thus it was unlikely that Leo V had a >marriageable daughter in 780-797, when Constantine VII has them married. > True, Leo's first marriage was in 802/03. By his first wife he had an only son, Symbaticus-Constantine [Treadgold, idem., pp. 10, 203]. Also, look at Leo's age. He was born in 775. He could not have had a daughter of marriageable age by 797. >Counter: Constantine's chronology is off, since that would make Basil I >older than Michael III by 30 years or so, and they were likely near the >same age. It may be the it was Basil's father who was captured in the >sack of Adrianople as a child, not Basil. > Michael was, in fact, some 30 years junior to Basil [Treadgold, idem. p. 439 n397]. Constantine's dates weren't off by more than the usual year most Byzantine dates differ by. And yes, you can speculate it was Basil's father who was captured in the sack of Adrianople. But as a child, is unlikely since Basil himself was born in 812, one year prior to the sacking. So Basil's date of birth screws up both theories. >5) Warren Treadgold (The Byzantine Revival, Stanford, 1988) proposed >that Leo V had an earlier wife, called "Barca," (which is an insult, >meaning "fatty") daughter of Bardanes Turcas, stratgus of the >Anatolics. She could have borne earlier children, perhaps daughters. > Read pp. 10 & 123. He did marry a Barca as his first wife, and she was the sister to Thecla, Michael II's wife. But they weren't married until 802/03. [Treadgold, idem., pp. 10, 203] >I don't read French or have access to any of these books, but if any of >you do or know any more about these issues, please comment. As I said, >Stone has about 4 pages on this. I think the evidence is somewhat thin, >myself, so our hope for a descent from antiquity rests more on Michael >III being Leo VI's father. > I agree with you, the evidence is very thin for any of these alternative origins for Basil. But here's the main problem with the Michael III theory, officially, Basil I was Leo VI's father which is confirmed by Leo's son, Constantine VII. And Constantine wrote a very flattering biography of his (supposed) grandfather. It's clear he embellished Basil's deeds more than a little, and perhaps invented a more noble beginning for the man he believed was his grandfather. After all, it gave him more prestige too-- his grandfather having have come from an Armenian noble family instead of peasant stock. Armenians were foreigners in Constantinople and only Armenian nobles would have any standing at all among the elitist Byzantine population. If, Leo V had a daughter she would have to have had to have been born after 804, the date birth of his oldest child. So she could not have been Basil's mother--at best (if she existed) she could only be 7 years old when Basil was born. Even so, if he had such a daughter, she would have been rounded up along with his second wife, Theodosia, and tonsured. His four sons weren't as kindly treated. All four were castrated to prevent any later uprisings against the new Emperor, Michael II (grandfather of Michael III). The youngest son died under the knife and was buried with his father [Treadgold, Idem. 224]. It was clearly the Emperor's wish that Basil's line ended then and there with Basil--he took all steps necessary to insure no member of that family could continue his line. All things considered, it's highly unlikely anyone is a descendant of Leo V. Jim

Well, there are about 4 pages of discussion in Stone's book about it and I don't have time to type them all in, but will try to summarize. Stone refers to a book by Cyril Toumanoff, published in 1990 in French, called: Les dynasties de la Caucasie chretienne de l'Antiquite jusqu'au XIX siecle. Tables genealogiques et chronologiques, and an article in French by Nicolas Adontz, Byzantion 8:475-500 and 9: 223-260 (1933). Adontz apparently cited Constantine VII, alleged grandson of Basil, who claimed the following: Basil's grandfather, Maiactes, was of noble Armenian descent, and married the daughter of an Armenian resident in Constantinople called Leo, in the reign of Constantine VI (780-797). As a child, Basil was captured with his parents in the sack of Adrianople by the Bulgar Khan Krum (813). His parents died in captivity, but some 8 to 10 years after their death, Basil was released and made his way to Constantiople, where he eventually came to the attention of the imperial family, and finally of the emperor Michael III. Adontz proposed that the Armenian Leo, whose daughter married Maiactes was later Leo V, the Armenian. Stone presents arguments for and against Adontz. For: 1) Many names are shared between the families of Basil and Leo. Counter: But they aren't Armenian names. 2) Maiactes and Leo were of similar social standing, being sons of Armenian nobility Counter: There were other Leos of Armenian origin during this period, e.g. Leo Skleros. Many Armenians came to Constantinople in this period. Against: 3) Constantine VII doesn't say that Leo was the same as Leo V Counter: Leo V was an iconoclast and out of favor in Constantine's time, so he might not want to draw attention to this. 4) Leo V's eldest son was only a child on Leo's accession to the throne in 813, probably 10 years old, thus it was unlikely that Leo V had a marriagable daughter in 780-797, when Constantine VII has them married. Counter: Constantine's chronology is off, since that would make Basil I older than Michael III by 30 years or so, and they were likely near the same age. It may be the it was Basil's father who was captured in the sack of Adrianople as a child, not Basil. 5) Warren Treadgold (The Byzantine Revival, Stanford, 1988) proposed that Leo V had an earlier wife, called "Barca," (which is an insult, meaning "fatty") daughter of Bardanes Turcas, stratgus of the Anatolics. She could have borne earlier children, perhaps daughters. I don't read French or have access to any of these books, but if any of you do or know any more about these issues, please comment. As I said, Stone has about 4 pages on this. I think the evidence is somewhat thin, myself, so our hope for a descent from antiquity rests more on Michael III being Leo VI's father. On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 19:54, Marc Sanders wrote: > Gordon- > > There is Leo V in Basil's line if you believe > Settipani, which I guess > many of you don't, if you accept that he was a > peasant. > > > Leo V is an ancestor of the Basil I? Would you > show me the connection and cite the sources? TIA > > Marc > > Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: > http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/ > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Marc Marc Sanders wrote: >It seems everyone is in agreement that we do not know who the father of Leo VI was. I have >another question along the same lines. How many Emperors of Byzantium are there in the >Plantagenet family tree? TIA > I'm showing 13 in my database, although how many lines that is I'll have to look. Meanwhile, as I'm sure you're going to ask for names and sources, here is the first line--that of Alexius I Comnenus. It actually has several connections into the Plantagenet family, for example, Philippa of Hainaut is also a direct descendant. But this is the most direct line. Jim (1) Alexius I Comnenus , Byzantine Emperor[1],[2],[3],[4] bd. 1056[5] dd. 15 Aug 1118[6],[4] & Irene "Augusta" Ducas , Byzantine Empress[1],[7],[8],[4] bd. 1066[9],[4] dd. ca 19 Feb 1123, a convent as a nun[4] m. ca 1078[7],[4] (2) John II Comnenus , Byzantine Emperor[10],[11],[12],[13] bd. 13 Sep 1087[14] dd. 8 Apr 1143, Cilicia[10],[14] & Pyriska (Irene) , Princess of Hungary[15],[16],[13] bd. abt 1088[10] dd. 13 Aug 1134, Bithyna, as the nun Xene[10],[14] m. 1104/05[14] (3) Manuel I Comnenus , Byzantine Emperor*[10],[17],[18],[19],[20] bd. ca 15 Aug 1118[21] dd. 24 Sep 1180[10],[21],[18] & Maria of Antioch de Poiters , Byzantine Empress[10],[21],[20] bd. 1145[22],[21] dd. 22 Aug 1182, murdered[10],[21] m. 25 Jul 1161[21] (4) Eudoxia Comnena,[10],[24] bd. abt 1162[22] dd. aft 4 Nov 1202, she was a nun & William VIII , Seigneur de Montpellier,[22],[24],[21] bd. abt 1158 dd. 1218, Rome,[22] m. 1181[25] (5) Maria , Countess of Montpellier*[10],[24],[26],[25] dd. 21 Apr 1218, Rome[10],[25] & Pedro II "the Catholic" King of Aragon[10],[24],[26] bd. 1172[26] dd. 12 Sep 1213, battle at Muret, Haute-Garonne, France[22] m. 15 Jun 1204, Montpellier, Herault, France[24],[26] (6) Jaimie I "the Conquerior" , King of Aragon*[27],[10],[26] bd. 1-2 Feb 1208, Montpellie, France[10] dd. 25 Jul 1276, Valencia, Spain[10] & Yolande , Princess of Hungary[28],[29] bd. 1216[10] dd. 1251[10] m. 8 Sep 1235[10] (7) Isabella , Infanta de Aragon[30],[24],[31] bd. 1247[31] dd. 28 Jan 1271, Cosenza/Kalabrien, from a fall from a horse[31],[32] & Philip III "le Hardi" Capet , King of France[34],[24],[31] bd. 1 May 1245, Poissy, France[22],[31] dd. 5 Oct 1285, Perpignan[22],[31] m. 28 May 1262, Mit Dispens die Papstes (with dispensation of the Pope)[24],[31] (8) Philip IV " the Fair" , King of France[7],[36],[31] bd. 1268, Fontainebleau, France[31] dd. 29 Nov 1314, Fontainebleau, France[31] & Jeanne of Navarre , Princess of Navarre[7],[36],[31] bd. Jan 1272, France[31] dd. 2 Apr 1305, Chateau-de-Vincennes, France[31] m. 16 Aug 1284[31] (9) Isabella de France , Queen of England*[33],[27],[22],[31] bd. 1292, Paris, France[31] dd. 22 Aug 1357, Roseing[31] & Edward II "of Caernarvon" , King of England[33],[22],[31] bd. 25 Apr 1284, Caernarvon Castle, Wales[33] dd. 21 Sep 1327, Berkeley Castle, Gloucestershire (Murdered)[33] m. 28 Jan 1308, Boulogne[31] 1. Anna Comnena, The Alexiad of Anna Comnena, Translated by E.R.A. Sewter, Penguin Books, 1969, passim. 2. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993, Line 45, 105A. 3. George Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, Translated by Joan Hussey, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J., 1999, pp. 356-375. 4. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band II: Die Ausserdeutschen Staaten Die Regierenden Häuser der Übrigen Staaten Europas, 1984, Tafel 178. 5. Anna Comnena, The Alexiad of Anna Comnena, Translated by E.R.A. Sewter, Penguin Books, 1969, passim 6. Anna Comnena, The Alexiad of Anna Comnena, Translated by E.R.A. Sewter, Penguin Books, 1969, p. 525. 7. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993, Line 45. 8. George Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, Translated by Joan Hussey, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J., 1999, p. 349. 9. George Andrews Moriarty, The Plantagenet Ancestry of King Edward III and Queen Philippa, Mormon Pioneer Genealogy Society, Salt Lake City, UT, 1985, p. 138 "c.1065". 10. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993, Line 105A. 11. George Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, Translated by Joan Hussey, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J., 1999, pp. 376-80. 12. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band II: Die Ausserdeutschen Staaten Die Regierenden Häuser der Übrigen Staaten Europas, 1984, Tafel 175, 177. 13. W.H. Turton, The Plantagenet Ancestry, Genealogical Publishing Co., Baltimore, 1968, p. 208. 14. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band II: Die Ausserdeutschen Staaten Die Regierenden Häuser der Übrigen Staaten Europas, 1984, Tafel 175. 15. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993, Line 105A, 244A. 16. George Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, Translated by Joan Hussey, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J., 1999, pp. 376-77 overleaf. 17. George Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, Translated by Joan Hussey, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J., 1999. 18. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band I: Die Deutschen Staaten, 1980, Tafel 10. 19. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band II: Die Ausserdeutschen Staaten Die Regierenden Häuser der Übrigen Staaten Europas, 1984, Tafel 174. 20. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band III Teilband 1, Herzogs und Grafenhäuser des Heiligen Römischen Reiches Andere Europäiche Fürstenhäuser, 1984, Tafel 154. 21. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band II: Die Ausserdeutschen Staaten Die Regierenden Häuser der Übrigen Staaten Europas, 1984, Tafel 177. 22. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993. 24. Henry John Chaytor, A History of Aragon and Catalonia, Methuen, 1933, http://libro.uca.edu/chaytor/achistory.htm. 25. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band III Teilband 3, Andre Grosse Europäische Familien Illegitime Nachkommen Spanischer und Portugiesischer Königshäuser, 1985, Tafel 446. 26. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band II: Die Ausserdeutschen Staaten Die Regierenden Häuser der Übrigen Staaten Europas, 1984, Tafel 70. 27. Mike Ashley, The Mammoth Book of British Kings & Queens, Carol & Graf Publishers, Inc., NY, 1999. 28. Mike Ashley, The Mammoth Book of British Kings & Queens, Carol & Graf Publishers, Inc., NY, 1999, p. 496. 29. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993, Line 105, 105A. 30. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993, Line 105. 31. Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Marburg, Germany: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, Band II: Die Ausserdeutschen Staaten Die Regierenden Häuser der Übrigen Staaten Europas, 1984, Tafel 12. 32. Steven Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers, A History of The Mediterranean World in the Later Thirteenth Century, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995, 1998, p. 143. 33. John Burke & Sir Bernard Burke, C.B., Burke's Peerage, Baronetage, and Knightage, Edited by Peter Townsend, Burke's Peerage Ltd.,London, MCMLXIII (1963), p. ix. 34. Frederick Lewis Weis, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists, Who Came To America before 1700, Additions and Corrections by Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr., Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., Seventh Edition 1992, 1993, Line 101. 36. David Faris, Plantagenet Ancestry of Seventeenth-Century Colonists, New England Historic Genealogical Society, Second Edition, 1999, p. 284.

Gordon- There is Leo V in Basil's line if you believe Settipani, which I guess many of you don't, if you accept that he was a peasant. Leo V is an ancestor of the Basil I? Would you show me the connection and cite the sources? TIA Marc Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/

This is what I have in my database: if you believe Michael III was father of Leo VI, then there are Theophilus and Michael II, his father and grandfather. There was Leo's son Constantine VIII and his son Romanus II. This line presumes Romanus' daughter Ann was spouse of Grand Prince Vladimir of Kiev. (Lewis, Ancestry of Elizabeth of York). There is Leo V in Basil's line if you believe Settipani, which I guess many of you don't, if you accept that he was a peasant. Some of the Comnenuses link into the later Plantagenets, but since I am related to none later than Edward I, I can't tell you exactly where they link. There are also some false Comnenus linkages through Spanish Royalty in RFC, which I think have been debunked, but I can't tell you exactly which they are off the top of my head. On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 10:12, Marc Sanders wrote: > It seems everyone is in agreement that we do not know who the father of Leo VI was. I have > another question along the same lines. How many Emperors of Byzantium are there in the > Plantagenet family tree? TIA > > Marc > > > Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: > http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/ > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Yes, of course I bought Stone's charts. I will query Settipani on Gen-medieval-L and see if he can comment. As I said, I don't read French and his book is $200. If I don't get a reply, I'll see if I can find a copy in the library and try to puzzle out what his evidence is. On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 20:09, Marc Sanders wrote: > Gordon- > > Again, the best English sources are Stone, which > I sourced before, and > discussions in the archives gen-medieval-L. In > French, Christian > Settipani, also sourced before, has the most > extensive discussion > > You did not cite them, you mentioned them. > > > Leo's father was most probably either Michael or > Basil. We don't know > which. But these were not peasants, but came > from the same Armenian > royal ancestry several generations back, so the > ancient part of Leo's > tree doesn't depend on which Emperor was his > father, only that one of > them was, which is quite likely. > > You have not provided any specific information as > evidence. > > Please get Stone, though. If you are a > descendant of Edward I, you > can't fail to be interested in this work. He > will send you copies of > some of his pages and reviews in scholarly > journals if you will email > him, so you can see if it is worth your $40. > > Sorry but you have not given me any good reason > to purchase these charts except your opinion. Did > you buy a set? > > Marc > > Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: > http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/ > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

It seems everyone is in agreement that we do not know who the father of Leo VI was. I have another question along the same lines. How many Emperors of Byzantium are there in the Plantagenet family tree? TIA Marc Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/

Jim- If all the available evidences pointed in one direction, we could then say he was probably the son of whoever the evidence pointed to. But it doesn't in this case, as there are evidences pointing both ways. That probably best sums all this up. Even Gordon said we do not know. Good research in answering the question. Thanks Marc Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/

Gordon- Again, the best English sources are Stone, which I sourced before, and discussions in the archives gen-medieval-L. In French, Christian Settipani, also sourced before, has the most extensive discussion You did not cite them, you mentioned them. Leo's father was most probably either Michael or Basil. We don't know which. But these were not peasants, but came from the same Armenian royal ancestry several generations back, so the ancient part of Leo's tree doesn't depend on which Emperor was his father, only that one of them was, which is quite likely. You have not provided any specific information as evidence. Please get Stone, though. If you are a descendant of Edward I, you can't fail to be interested in this work. He will send you copies of some of his pages and reviews in scholarly journals if you will email him, so you can see if it is worth your $40. Sorry but you have not given me any good reason to purchase these charts except your opinion. Did you buy a set? Marc Help the planet each day! It's free and easy: http://www.Care2.com/dailyaction/