Dear friends and list members: Some of you may have already received an e-mail from list-moms or listers regarding ancestry.com's decision to create a new "OneWorldTree" with the information that we all submitted, and then to charge $49.95 to access the information. If you have not received the e-mail and would like more information, you can follow this link http://www.ancestry.com/search/rectype/trees/owt/ . I did, and found out that the only information available to me (even from my own tree!), was the ancestor's name that I originally entered in the "search" box. Family information was listed, but was "grayed out" with a note stating "Gray text indicates information available to subscribers only." Well, I already have a broad-based subscription to ancestry's services, but apparently THIS subscription is in addition to that one. They have a wonderful discount on this service to those of us who subscribe already...only $39.95! Lucky us. This is just another in a string of problems I have had with Ancestry's services in recent months. I now realize that all of you who dissed ancestry in the past were correct. Shame on me for not listening sooner. Also, when taking all of this into consideration, also consider the fact that many, many of us who submitted trees did so with accidental errors, or unproven facts....so we're essentially being charged for "misinformation"? Tracy Howell Bend, OR P.S. If you wish to delete your submitted information, go to http://ancestry.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/ancestry.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_ faqid=1090 for instructions.

The internet is considered "Public domain" and therefore not subject to copyright infringement with the exception of resale. -----Original Message----- From: Barbara [mailto:ladybbug@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:56 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] OT, again Kevin - It was a TERRRRRRRRIFFFFFFFIC link! Sorry nobody told you Hope you don't get arrested Barbara ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Copyright states that infomation online can be sent to others. It's a freedom of speech deal. Under the law, it cannot be used for other publication or sold in any shape form or fashion. I speak this as a writer and cofounder of a new publishing company. When we construct our sales brochures, we pull copy of merchandise from other company websites along with product descriptions that we're going to sell. -----Original Message----- From: Barbara [mailto:ladybbug@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:56 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] OT, again Kevin - It was a TERRRRRRRRIFFFFFFFIC link! Sorry nobody told you Hope you don't get arrested Barbara ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Thanks for your friendship and kinship. We do stuff like that all the time at our office. We're a publishing house so we exchange info all the time here.. -----Original Message----- From: KBradford@lourdes-pad.org [mailto:KBradford@lourdes-pad.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:51 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [PDP] OT, again Bubba, I'm not quite certain myself, though apparently the signature file at the bottom of all outgoing messages from my corporate email address (the copyright notice) was more interesting to the list members than the link I sent. Oh well. All the best, Kevin "Wrenn, Bubba" <bwrenn@umpublishing.o To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com rg> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Medieval Fashion 05/04/2004 08:05 AM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L What is the importance of this? -----Original Message----- From: Clemi Blackburn [mailto:clemi@chipshot.net] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 7:49 PM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion I have received variations on what was included at the bottom of the message. It has nothing to do with the copyright of a hyperlink, but rather pertains to Kevin's messages as a whole. In fact, Kevin did not use the word copyright though all original messages are the property of the writer. What is intended by his "Confidentiality Notice" is simply to inform those reading that it is not to be forwarded without permission for it is his message and no one has permission to forward it. It also informs readers if they were not the intended recipient, please delete it. I have, actually received messages not intended for me and have complied with the request. No big deal. I would imagine Kevin and many others use this method trying to protect their creative work. It has nothing to do with the hyperlink per se. That was merely something he felt the list would find interesting. In other words, this message was intended only for the PDP list. The notice will likely be found at the bottom of any messages created entirely by him and should certainly be respected. The sad thing is when others disregard the request. Even sadder is to forward on the work of others whether or not there is a notice. Take care, clemi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dynamite" <dynamite@knology.net> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > Can a link to a URL be copyrighted? Just > wondering. The disclaimer at the foot of > this message would preclude sharing links. > > Helen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <KBradford@lourdes-pad.org> > To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:38 PM > Subject: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > > > > A look at what our ancestors wore, nicely categorized by chronology and > > occupation (54 slides, with a catchy midi file for your entertainment): > > > > http://romancereaderatheart.com/medieval/timeline/ > > > > Best, > > Kevin > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is > for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential > and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message. ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Bubba, I'm not quite certain myself, though apparently the signature file at the bottom of all outgoing messages from my corporate email address (the copyright notice) was more interesting to the list members than the link I sent. Oh well. All the best, Kevin "Wrenn, Bubba" <bwrenn@umpublishing.o To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com rg> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Medieval Fashion 05/04/2004 08:05 AM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L What is the importance of this? -----Original Message----- From: Clemi Blackburn [mailto:clemi@chipshot.net] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 7:49 PM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion I have received variations on what was included at the bottom of the message. It has nothing to do with the copyright of a hyperlink, but rather pertains to Kevin's messages as a whole. In fact, Kevin did not use the word copyright though all original messages are the property of the writer. What is intended by his "Confidentiality Notice" is simply to inform those reading that it is not to be forwarded without permission for it is his message and no one has permission to forward it. It also informs readers if they were not the intended recipient, please delete it. I have, actually received messages not intended for me and have complied with the request. No big deal. I would imagine Kevin and many others use this method trying to protect their creative work. It has nothing to do with the hyperlink per se. That was merely something he felt the list would find interesting. In other words, this message was intended only for the PDP list. The notice will likely be found at the bottom of any messages created entirely by him and should certainly be respected. The sad thing is when others disregard the request. Even sadder is to forward on the work of others whether or not there is a notice. Take care, clemi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dynamite" <dynamite@knology.net> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > Can a link to a URL be copyrighted? Just > wondering. The disclaimer at the foot of > this message would preclude sharing links. > > Helen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <KBradford@lourdes-pad.org> > To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:38 PM > Subject: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > > > > A look at what our ancestors wore, nicely categorized by chronology and > > occupation (54 slides, with a catchy midi file for your entertainment): > > > > http://romancereaderatheart.com/medieval/timeline/ > > > > Best, > > Kevin > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is > for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential > and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message. ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.

Yes it was a nice link. I'm sure we could come up the bail if you do get arrested;) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara" <ladybbug@earthlink.net> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:56 AM Subject: RE: [PDP] OT, again > Kevin - > It was a TERRRRRRRRIFFFFFFFIC link! > Sorry nobody told you > Hope you don't get arrested > Barbara > > > > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 >

What is the importance of this? -----Original Message----- From: Clemi Blackburn [mailto:clemi@chipshot.net] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 7:49 PM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion I have received variations on what was included at the bottom of the message. It has nothing to do with the copyright of a hyperlink, but rather pertains to Kevin's messages as a whole. In fact, Kevin did not use the word copyright though all original messages are the property of the writer. What is intended by his "Confidentiality Notice" is simply to inform those reading that it is not to be forwarded without permission for it is his message and no one has permission to forward it. It also informs readers if they were not the intended recipient, please delete it. I have, actually received messages not intended for me and have complied with the request. No big deal. I would imagine Kevin and many others use this method trying to protect their creative work. It has nothing to do with the hyperlink per se. That was merely something he felt the list would find interesting. In other words, this message was intended only for the PDP list. The notice will likely be found at the bottom of any messages created entirely by him and should certainly be respected. The sad thing is when others disregard the request. Even sadder is to forward on the work of others whether or not there is a notice. Take care, clemi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dynamite" <dynamite@knology.net> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > Can a link to a URL be copyrighted? Just > wondering. The disclaimer at the foot of > this message would preclude sharing links. > > Helen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <KBradford@lourdes-pad.org> > To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:38 PM > Subject: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > > > > A look at what our ancestors wore, nicely categorized by chronology and > > occupation (54 slides, with a catchy midi file for your entertainment): > > > > http://romancereaderatheart.com/medieval/timeline/ > > > > Best, > > Kevin > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is > for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential > and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message. ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

I initially raised the question because when I particularly like a link in someone's message, I may want to share it with other lists. Helen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wrenn, Bubba" <bwrenn@umpublishing.org> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 6:05 AM Subject: RE: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > What is the importance of this? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Clemi Blackburn [mailto:clemi@chipshot.net] > Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 7:49 PM > To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > > I have received variations on what was included at the bottom of the > message. It has nothing to do with the copyright of a hyperlink, but > rather pertains to Kevin's messages as a whole. In fact, Kevin did not > use the word copyright though all original messages are the property of > the writer. > > What is intended by his "Confidentiality Notice" is simply to inform > those reading that it is not to be forwarded without permission for it > is his message and no one has permission to forward it. > > It also informs readers if they were not the intended recipient, please > delete it. I have, actually received messages not intended for me and > have complied with the request. No big deal. > > I would imagine Kevin and many others use this method trying to protect > their creative work. It has nothing to do with the hyperlink per se. > That was merely something he felt the list would find interesting. In > other words, this message was intended only for the PDP list. The notice > will likely be found at the bottom of any messages created entirely by > him and should certainly be respected. > > The sad thing is when others disregard the request. Even sadder is to > forward on the work of others whether or not there is a notice. > > Take care, > clemi > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dynamite" <dynamite@knology.net> > To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 3:00 PM > Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > > > Can a link to a URL be copyrighted? Just > > wondering. The disclaimer at the foot of > > this message would preclude sharing links. > > > > Helen > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <KBradford@lourdes-pad.org> > > To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:38 PM > > Subject: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > > > > > > > A look at what our ancestors wore, nicely categorized by chronology > and > > > occupation (54 slides, with a catchy midi file for your > entertainment): > > > > > > http://romancereaderatheart.com/medieval/timeline/ > > > > > > Best, > > > Kevin > > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any > attachments, is > > for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain > confidential > > and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure > or > > > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, > please > > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the > original > > message. > > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > >

I have received variations on what was included at the bottom of the message. It has nothing to do with the copyright of a hyperlink, but rather pertains to Kevin's messages as a whole. In fact, Kevin did not use the word copyright though all original messages are the property of the writer. What is intended by his "Confidentiality Notice" is simply to inform those reading that it is not to be forwarded without permission for it is his message and no one has permission to forward it. It also informs readers if they were not the intended recipient, please delete it. I have, actually received messages not intended for me and have complied with the request. No big deal. I would imagine Kevin and many others use this method trying to protect their creative work. It has nothing to do with the hyperlink per se. That was merely something he felt the list would find interesting. In other words, this message was intended only for the PDP list. The notice will likely be found at the bottom of any messages created entirely by him and should certainly be respected. The sad thing is when others disregard the request. Even sadder is to forward on the work of others whether or not there is a notice. Take care, clemi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dynamite" <dynamite@knology.net> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > Can a link to a URL be copyrighted? Just > wondering. The disclaimer at the foot of > this message would preclude sharing links. > > Helen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <KBradford@lourdes-pad.org> > To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:38 PM > Subject: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > > > > A look at what our ancestors wore, nicely categorized by chronology and > > occupation (54 slides, with a catchy midi file for your entertainment): > > > > http://romancereaderatheart.com/medieval/timeline/ > > > > Best, > > Kevin > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is > for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential > and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original > message.

Re: the following genealogical line: >I have come across another one of my suposed Plantagenet lines. Can anyone >tell me if this is a solid line? > >Geoffrey V "le Bon" Plantagenet b: 24 AUG 1113 d: 7 SEP 1151 > >Henry II "Plantagenet" King of England b: 5 MAR 1132/33 d: 6 JUL 1189 > >William "Longespee" Prince of England b: ABT 1173 d: 1225 > >William Longespee b: ABT 1212 d: 1249 > >Ela Longspee b: ABT 1226 d: 22 NOV 1299 > >Nicholas Audley b: 11 NOV 1289 d: ABT 1316 > >Alice Audley b: ABT 1315 d: BEF 1359 > >Ralph Bassett b: 1335 d: 10 MAY 1390 > Up to this point, and but for a few minor corrections, the line is generally OK. Geoffrey V's nicknames were 'Plantagenet' and 'la Belle' (the fair). The nickname 'le Bon' (the Good) was used by his 4th great-grandfather, Foulques (Fulk) II, Count of Anjou. William I 'Longspee', being an illegitimate child was probably not ever titled Prince of England, and would have been better known simply as William 'Longspee', Earl of Salisbury. [ES III:356A][CP I:338][CP IX:379-81][AR7:30, 122][MCS:143][Turton 119][BXP:122], et al. Your Alice Audley here is the daughter of Nicholas, Lord Audley of Heligh (d. 1316) and Joan Martin ( d. 1322) [CP I:339][CP VII:686-7] who was the son of Nicholas de Audley of Heleigh (1258-1299) and Katherine Giffard (1272-1322). This Nicholas was, in turn, the son of James de Audley, Justiciar of Ireland (1220-1272) and Ela Longspee (d c.1299) [CP I:337-8]. The main problem at this point is that Ralph Basset, Lord Basset of Drayton. b. c.1335, d. 10 May 1390 s.p. meaning he had no offspring. He was married twice, first to Joan Beauchamp, who herself d.s.p., and secondly, bef. 20 Oct 1385 to Jeanne de Montfort l'Amuary, Countess of Richmond [ES II:18] by whom he had no known children [CP II:3]. This does not preclude illegitimate children, it's just that I was unable to find any with what sources I have. Anyway, I hope this helps with your question. Jim >Jane Bassett b: ABT 1378 > >Elizabeth Edith Stourton b: 1394 d: 13 JUN 1441 > > >

Not sure about your current line (that's really up to you to verify), but a good place to glance over your more older people is http://www.dcs.hull.ac.uk/public/genealogy/royal/

In a message dated 5/1/2004 2:01:29 PM Mountain Daylight Time, dynamite@knology.net writes: Can a link to a URL be copyrighted? Just wondering. The disclaimer at the foot of this message would preclude sharing links.>> A link is a link. That's all. However, you cannot give out a link and claim it to be your work. Besides, it would be pretty easy to see through it. All you have to do is trace throw the ownership of a website.

Eve, That's all right. Perfectly understandable given the circumstances. Grace and peace, Chris VIRFM@aol.com wrote: Hi Chris Sorry if I misread what you meant by the Hogwash thing! Eve ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs

I have come across another one of my suposed Plantagenet lines. Can anyone tell me if this is a solid line? Geoffrey V "le Bon" Plantagenet b: 24 AUG 1113 d: 7 SEP 1151 Henry II "Plantagenet" King of England b: 5 MAR 1132/33 d: 6 JUL 1189 William "Longespee" Prince of England b: ABT 1173 d: 1225 William Longespee b: ABT 1212 d: 1249 Ela Longspee b: ABT 1226 d: 22 NOV 1299 Nicholas Audley b: 11 NOV 1289 d: ABT 1316 Alice Audley b: ABT 1315 d: BEF 1359 Ralph Bassett b: 1335 d: 10 MAY 1390 Jane Bassett b: ABT 1378 Elizabeth Edith Stourton b: 1394 d: 13 JUN 1441 Margaret Beauchamp b: 1410 d: 8 AUG 1482 John St. John b: ABT 1426 d: AFT 1488 John St. John b: 1450 d: 1525 John St. John b: 1498 Margaret Saint John b: 1533 d: 27 AUG 1562 William Francis Russell b: 1553 Mary Ann Russell b: 18 APR 1574 Thomas Roote b: 16 JAN 1604/05 d: 17 JUN 1694 Thomas Root b: 10 JUN 1646 d: 1730 Thomas Root b: 11 APR 1667 d: 19 JAN 1758 Samuel Root b: 17 OCT 1705 d: AFT 16 APR 1789 Phebe Root b: 31 JUL 1735 Rufus Stowell b: ABT 1778 Diadama Stowell b: 5 SEP 1804 d: 23 MAR 1881 William E. Newcomb b. 16 JAN 1826 Charles LeRoy Newcomb b. 19 MAR 1853 Carrie Newcomb b. 30 JUL 1878 Arthur James McIntosh b. 11 OCT 1910 d. 28 SEP 1962 Darlene Mae McIntosh b. 14 DEC 1934 d. 29 DEC 1980 Thank you, Amanda

Hi Chris Sorry if I misread what you meant by the Hogwash thing! Eve

Hi All Yes, this is a genealogy list and we should keep on course, but may I interject the Bible has a lot of genealogy in it! I must say the Book is definitely not hog wash or myths in my Christian opinion. Its a God inspired Book and I believe every word in it, remember Faith is what is needed, one day we will all know what's the truth and what isn't. Dont fall into the trap of not sticking up for what you believe in, one day the Book could be banned after all it does have the name God in it, that's quickly becoming something wrong today! Eve

Can a link to a URL be copyrighted? Just wondering. The disclaimer at the foot of this message would preclude sharing links. Helen ----- Original Message ----- From: <KBradford@lourdes-pad.org> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:38 PM Subject: [PDP] Medieval Fashion > > A look at what our ancestors wore, nicely categorized by chronology and > occupation (54 slides, with a catchy midi file for your entertainment): > > http://romancereaderatheart.com/medieval/timeline/ > > Best, > Kevin > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > >

Gordon, Gordon Banks wrote: >I agree completely. We know we all descend from people living in >Biblical times, the problem is to find the links, and we have to start >at our end. And, we may never find them. Very few documents from >ancient times have survived, and very few of our ancestors were literate >anyhow. In my opinion, our best chances lie through the mixing of >Iberian Muslims and Christians. We may yet find some links there. >Islamic culture was much more literate and much more has been preserved >of those days. (incidentally, the link to Zaida Denia in Royalty for >Commoners is in the opinion of most if not all of the experts, false.) > You may be right about possible Iberian connections. As for Zaida, it didn't take an expert to notice that RFC had her supposed mother Zaida born a year after she was. Then too, it turns out Zaida was not daughter of Muhammad II, but rather was the daughter of his deceased son, so Stuart went to all that work for nothing. Lastly, early Portuguese records turned up the fact that Teresa de Castile had as a lady in waiting in her court, Gontrode Munoz, a person she identifies as (trans) 'sister of my mother, Ximina Munoz'. Then Teresa's daughter Sancha appears in a charter donating lands she says she acquired (trans) 'of my grandmother Donna Ximena Munoz and of my mother (her daughter) queen Donna Teresa.' So both Teresa and her daughter Sancha seemed to know who Teresa's mother was. That was perhaps the biggest gaffe in that book. Jim

What a GREAT list! Jim, you are so right. For a moment earlier I was thinking like my mother. Kings indeed! Hooray for Olaf - and the courageous mother of his many children. No wonder you were thinking of Olaf - farming and weeding are both hard work....especially if you considered using a scepter for the job! Sorry for the glib humor. This list has brought the brightest moments to my day, poor hard-working commoner that I am. But I never forget the simple people. My Pa's folks rode here in a leaky boat and one fell overboard on the way. One half of their group died the first months on these shores and if it weren't for the Native Americans sharing food and helping them I wouldn't be writing this. I still think having a lady in waiting or two would make life more fun. But I'm not overly impressed by the lifestyle. (Well, the Power, maybe - but then look at Lady Jane Grey) Besides, Jesus was a carpenter. That's good enough for me. Barbara -----Original Message----- From: JF [mailto:gen9@cox.net] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 4:10 PM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors Barbara, Barbara wrote: >Of course, whatever one's genealogical chart might show of our >"contemporaneously documented Plantagenet ancestors", notwithstanding >"Modern standards of proof" there is always the distinct possibility that >one or two out of those many generations of offspring was not - shall I >delicately say - strictly from the demonstrated marital alliance - human >nature being what it is. In actuality, if DNA were available from some of >these guys, we might find we are all descended from the gardener and not the >kings at all. > It's interesting to note that when we do mention false paternity, that this was in a group which comprised the upper 2% of that society, perhaps some 40 or so families at any given time who were completely interrelated. If and when a false paternity event did occur, it was among a group that was already so interrelated it wouldn't have even caused a ripple in their gene pool. You have to understand there was no such thing as privacy for royal and noble families. They lived surrounded by others, many of whom were close relatives, 24/7. The gardener and the queen probably never even met. Most people today aren't remotely aware of living conditions in medieval upper class society. How would we be expected to anyway? The typical world history classes offered in high schools? The ever popular medieval history classes we all took in college? Add to that soap operas, reality TV, and learning about both DNA and marital fidelity on the Maury Povich show. >In fact, there IS no ABSOLUTE proof of our ancestry. It's ALL supposition. > > First, "absolute proof" of anything is an impossible standard to hold anything to. When you cash a check and provide two forms of identity, does the clerk cashing the check have absolute proof of your identity? Is there absolute proof the bank will reimburse them the funds from the checking account? I would think not or we wouldn't have check forgers. Is even a DNA sample, absolute proof of one's identity? Not unless you have an absolute chain of custody. Even then mistakes (contamination, mislabeling, etc.) are possible, if even only remotely. Genealogists originally used the standard "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," the same as used in our legal system. But became apparent that standard could be subjectively applied and as such, was not sufficient for genealogical purposes. That brought in the Genealogical Proof Standard. It's basically a 5-step approach to determine if a thing can be said to have been proved. I think anyone reading and understanding what is involved in this unique standard would find it more than adequate to the task. >I just like the thought of having a king, a notably romantic part of world >history, for a grampa. And mowing the weeds in my yard in my tiara from time >to time has earned me a certain status, if you will, in my neighborhood. >I prefer to think our real inheritance from our forebears is attitudinal and >cultural. (And, when there's an ancestor who particularly embarrasses me I >can always claim illegitimacy in my mind.) >It's nice I have such nice smart cousins on this list who are so >genealogically generous. > Personally, and I hope this isn't blasphemy here, I don't think being descended from the Plantagenet family itself is anything special at all. What is special, is that I am able to find the information that allows me to learn who my ancestors were, what they did, and just perhaps, what they were like. And the only thing that makes them special is that they were written about. My ancestor Olaf, standing in his field, minding his own business and not going off with his Viking neighbors was, unfortunately, never written about. He wasn't famous, he wasn't even infamous, and he didn't invade and rule another country. He just raised a family and died quietly on his farm after a lifetime of hard work. Now there's someone I'd have liked to have known more about. Jim PS, I rarely carry my scepter when pulling weeds, I'd be too tempted to use it on the weeds themselves. ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Gordon you brought up a great point. I was thinking about that today while having lunch. I remember reading about the Picts and how they had no history, and forgive me for being so vague without looking this all up again, so someone created one for them. I'm sure a lot of "poetic license" was used when these ancient genealogies were written down for the reigning Royal famillies...to do exactly that...give them legitimacy and a connection with the "Greats" that preceeded them. So it would be interesting to ascertain approximately when the transition from reality to folklore, fairy tale, mythology...what ever we would like to call it, occurred. Gordon wrote: "King Priam may have existed, but the links to European Royalty are mythical. You will also find we are descended from the Norse gods, such as Odin. Kings liked to have genealogies that went back to gods, characters such as Aeneas and Priam, and (later) Biblical characters. It made them more legit." On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:44, SnowBeri@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 4/29/2004 3:57:31 PM Mountain Daylight Time, > gym4jim@bellsouth.net writes: > And did King Priam of Troy (my 75th ggf) really exist? Was his son Helenus > also > called Paris as in the upcoming movie "Troy"? And Noah? When does real > life end and myths and Bible stories take over. I am seriously curious. > As we learn in this "hobby", verifying and double verifying sources is > important. Any thoughts?>> > > > Yes, King Priam and Troy really existed. Once they were thought of as part > of Homer's stories until the site of the city was discovered. We have > archaeological proof of the city, and also the "massive burning of the city" which > gives direct correlation to the story of the Trojan horse. There are also sites > where ships were sunken, giving more support of the fleet involved. Was > EVERYTHING in Homer true? Of course not. Just like the Bible books. It's a > story, to teach, to amuse. Are there shreds of truth in some of what is written. > Yes. Does it make everything true? <G> Nope. Just like a lot of mistaken > websites out there. > > PS--I don't know if the movie Troy is based on history or what Homer wrote. > But I'm eager to see it. It certainly looks more historically accurate than > the Troy movie on cable recently. Having soldiers dressed in Roman uniforms > is just too much of a stretch. > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 ______________________________