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.

Great comment. I appreciate your sense of humor. Lady Belle ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara" <ladybbug@earthlink.net> To: <PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 10:26 AM Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors > 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. > In fact, there IS no ABSOLUTE proof of our ancestry. It's ALL supposition. > 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. > Love, > "Lady 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 >

In a message dated 4/30/2004 9:26:29 AM Mountain Daylight Time, VIRFM@aol.com writes: Why is it so impossible to believe something written with God inspired facts than something written by man? I have found sites with my line back to Noah and Adam and Eve I have no problem with that but I must admit I dont think everything in the line is correct just what Ive read in the Bible. Didnt mean to bring Christianity into this list but please dont bring the Bible in to trash it.>> I don't think that was the intention, Eve. Both items were written by humans. Humans wrote both books (accepted and unaccepted) and websites. Men wrote the inspirational stories and both men and women wrote gedcoms and websites. And BOTH change from time to time to reflect new things. Are there bits of truth in both? Yes. Can everything be taken as fact? No, of course not. The best way to solve anything in your database is to verify with evidence. Have I checked every name, date, place, children and parents in my own database? No, I haven't seen all of the original work. There is a lot that people have done before me, and I frankly do not have the time nor the resources to devote all my time to genealogy. But there are some excellent leads out there if I want to do more sound research, and I thank them for their time and effort... Affiliated families: Asbury, Ayres, Barker, Barnum, Bates, Bauder, Bowling, Briggs, Burton, Clark/Clarke, Dyer, Ecker, Finch, Flannery, Fox, Gardner, Geary, Goodale, Grim, Hall, Hardendorf, Harman, Harper, Hayes, Hurless, Keith, Marcy, Pier, Raney, Sawyer, Schenk, Shepard, Slocum, Strong, Summerfield, Tinkham, Vansant, Whitlam, Wilks, Wolford, Wood, Woolever Regards, Diane Wolford http://www.treelines.com

Might as well be. No, it is from a book called something like "Holy Blood, Holy Grail". The current bestseller "The Da Vinci Code" also is based on similar myths, viz. that Jesus had offspring by Mary Magdelene who were ancestors to the Merovignian kings of France. It's fun, but genealogical nonsense. On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 11:58, Donna Delgadillo wrote: > Is that Monty Python? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com> > Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:53:22 -0700 > To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors > > > This is from the "Holy Grail" books. It is myth, not documented. > >

Matthew: 1: The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. 2: Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; 3: And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; 4: And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; 5: And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; 6: And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; 7: And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; 8: And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; 9: And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; 10: And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias; 11: And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon: 12: And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel; 13: And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor; 14: And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; 15: And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; 16: And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Luke: 23: And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, 24: Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph, 25: Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge, 26: Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda, 27: Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri, 28: Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er, 29: Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, 30: Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim, 31: Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David, 32: Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson, 33: Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda, 34: Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor, 35: Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala, 36: Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech, 37: Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, 38: Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God. So which genealogy is correct? Q.E.D. On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 08:25, VIRFM@aol.com wrote: > " Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. > > What is hogwash? Not the Bible I hope you are not saying this. The Bible is > a lot more factual than a lot of the genealogy lists man has made. Why is it > so impossible to believe something written with God inspired facts than > something written by man? > I have found sites with my line back to Noah and Adam and Eve I have no > problem with that but I must admit I dont think everything in the line is correct > just what Ive read in the Bible. > Didnt mean to bring Christianity into this list but please dont bring the > Bible in to trash it. > 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

In a message dated 4/29/2004 7:08:06 PM Mountain Daylight Time, McCrm1976@aol.com writes: Sometime ago I had posted what I thought was my direct line to the PLANTAGENETs. Much to my dissmay, I was informed that my descent from the Rev. John HOWSE was not not vallid. Evedently I am not the only one who was miss informed. I have found several family trees on Rootsweb.com that list him with ties to the PLANTAGENETs. Is there anyway I can try a vallidate this? >> Who informed you that John Howse was not valid? Did they offer ANYTHING like a will or historical document that listed children of the individual in question? There are many informed and misinformed websites about many descedents. Few purposefully are meant to decieve. It is probably just a lack of hard documents and one jumping guess too many...often mistaking a "William White" with another "William White". There's a Leonard cousin that insists her line is the Leonard of Kent line...and doesn't want to listen to what documents I've read. You can only type for so long before giving up. Affiliated families: Asbury, Ayres, Barker, Barnum, Bates, Bauder, Bowling, Briggs, Burton, Clark/Clarke, Dyer, Ecker, Finch, Flannery, Fox, Gardner, Geary, Goodale, Grim, Hall, Hardendorf, Harman, Harper, Hayes, Hurless, Keith, Marcy, Pier, Raney, Sawyer, Schenk, Shepard, Slocum, Strong, Summerfield, Tinkham, Vansant, Whitlam, Wilks, Wolford, Wood, Woolever Regards, Diane Wolford http://www.treelines.com

I knew this was going to happen when this whole thread started. I'm sure that no one is trying to "trash" the Bible. However, Eve said: Why is it so impossible to believe something written with God inspired facts than something written by man? Unfortunately, the Bible was written by man with God inspired facts. There were also the same biases as to which books to include in the Bible. We all like to think of it as an objective, factual text, but many scholars believe otherwise. I think that is all that should be said about the Bible unless you are referring to actual references regarding genealogical lines. If you have a problem with what I have posted, please feel free to flame me personally, and not on the list. I've seen too many people get upset when it comes to religious views and I don't think they belong on any genealogical list. Sincerely, Christie Williamson christiewilliamson@verizon.net

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

This is from the "Holy Grail" books. It is myth, not documented. On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 12:44, Donna Delgadillo wrote: > I'll have to check mine, but it seems there was a daughter of Joseph of Arimanthea (don't tear me up for the spelling, I'm doing this off the top of my head) who was the half-brother of Jesus. I just copied this stuff and laid it to the side because I figured there would never be a way to prove it. Now I'll have to dig and get names. Another project! > :-) Donna > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: JF <gen9@cox.net> > Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 12:27:45 -0700 > To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors > > > Hi Wendy, > > > > Priestlybride wrote: > > > > >I have only researched using what others have done. I found information > > >going way back to BC and to the tribe of Judah (Bible) through the twin > > >Zerah. I tried looking at other sources to verify this and found the same > > >information. I also got a copy of Queen Elizabeth's geneology because I > > >knew they traced the line through King David back to Judah through Zerah's > > >twin, Perez. > > > > > >According to this geneological chart of hers, she shows lines going back to > > >both Zerah AND Perez who were the sons of Judah. > > > > > >Is this what you were getting at?? > > > > > That's kind of the idea. Should you want to verify this line, or parts > > of it that can be verified, I was thinking we probably, collectively, > > have the resources here to do that. I'd probably try to figure out who > > was the gateway ancestor to the various tribes of Judah and start there. > > By gateway ancestor, we usually mean the one who emigrated to the > > American colonies or the U.S. if they came after the colonial period. > > But it also means the ancestor who connects from one group, say of > > Jewish heritage, to another, like someone of French or Germanic > > heritage. The one who bridges the gap between two groups which otherwise > > haven't been know to intermarry to any great extent. That's the ancestor > > you'd want to start with and work back finding who has verifying sources > > to see how valid such a line is. I just suggested it to see who wanted > > to participate and who didn't. > > > > Thanks > > > > Jim > > > >

I know of no documented descent from Judah to the Plantagenets. There are numerous mythologic ones, but these rely on oral histories, which can not be verified. On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 12:27, JF wrote: > Hi Wendy, > > Priestlybride wrote: > > >I have only researched using what others have done. I found information > >going way back to BC and to the tribe of Judah (Bible) through the twin > >Zerah. I tried looking at other sources to verify this and found the same > >information. I also got a copy of Queen Elizabeth's geneology because I > >knew they traced the line through King David back to Judah through Zerah's > >twin, Perez. > > > >According to this geneological chart of hers, she shows lines going back to > >both Zerah AND Perez who were the sons of Judah. > > > >Is this what you were getting at?? > > > That's kind of the idea. Should you want to verify this line, or parts > of it that can be verified, I was thinking we probably, collectively, > have the resources here to do that. I'd probably try to figure out who > was the gateway ancestor to the various tribes of Judah and start there. > By gateway ancestor, we usually mean the one who emigrated to the > American colonies or the U.S. if they came after the colonial period. > But it also means the ancestor who connects from one group, say of > Jewish heritage, to another, like someone of French or Germanic > heritage. The one who bridges the gap between two groups which otherwise > haven't been know to intermarry to any great extent. That's the ancestor > you'd want to start with and work back finding who has verifying sources > to see how valid such a line is. I just suggested it to see who wanted > to participate and who didn't. > > Thanks > > Jim > > > ============================== > 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

A lot is known about these ancestors, but there is a lot of myth and misinformation also. Doing research here requires knowledge of Latin medieval documents and is not easily acquired. There is a lot of discussion on gen-medieval-l list, but a lot of fighting goes on there too. On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 10:30, JF wrote: > Hey fellow campers, > > I'm curious as to what is the extent of the research being conducted by > various members of the group. It's obvious by the discussions of late > that quite a few are working on colonial gateway ancestors and late > medieval ancestors leading up to the Plantagenet kings. But what are > each of us doing once we get there? How many, for example, are working > on the other end of our family tree? The ancestors of our Plantagenet > ancestors? Keep in mind, while we each have different connections to the > Plantagenets, from that point back they're all ours in common. And > depending on who has what to say, we could have some really interesting > possibilities for information sharing here. > > Jim > > > ============================== > 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

A friendly listserv bringeth forth joy in abundance (from fortune cookie). Kevin "Wrenn, Bubba" <bwrenn@umpublishing.o To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com rg> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors 04/30/2004 11:35 AM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L Thanks Kevin for focus. -----Original Message----- From: Wrenn, Bubba Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 11:15 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors This guy's really nice and has helped me lots. -----Original Message----- From: KBradford@lourdes-pad.org [mailto:KBradford@lourdes-pad.org] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:01 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors Chris, Mythic and traditional ancestries, while they continue to fascinate, are incapable of withstanding modern standards of proof. You raise a cogent point: the lives and families of our contemporaneously documented Plantagenet ancestors, and the ancestors of the Plantagenets (including St. Louis IX & El Cid, among a host of others), are detailed enough so that any serious family historian could spend years gaining a deeper understanding of their forebears and still only scratch the surface. Many people are not satisfied with deepening their understanding of the known, they try to push the bar higher and connect the dots in the dark. That's what mythic and legendary ancestries are all about: the What Ifs and Maybes of Genealogical Wonderland. The Internet continues to remind us of the fact that there are lots of dreamers in cyberspace. Kevin Chris Jay Becker <chrisjaybecker@yahoo. To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com com> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors 04/29/2004 06:18 PM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L Cousins, While it's all very fun to trace ourselves back to Adam and David and Mark Antony and Odin and all the other amazing and purported ancestors of our tribe, these "lines" are all based on things like "Darda son of Judah MAY BE the same person as Dardanus, founder of Troy" and "Tea Tephi was said to be the daughter of the King of Judah, brought to the Emerald Isle by the Prophet Jeremiah himself" and even "Theodoric of Toulouse, AKA Thierry of Autun is PROBABLY the same person as Natronai Al-Makhir, Exilarch of Judah." Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. Let's not forget, we Plantagenet descendants, through the Carolingians and the Merovingians are ALSO supposed to be descendants of Jesus Christ by Mary Magdalene!!! Yeah, right. We DO, however, have some pretty cool ancestors who are quite well documented. Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, several Kings of France (Capetians, Carolingians, and probably Merovingians,) and Spain (including Saint Ferdinand) and more ancient rulers of Scotland and Ireland than you can shake a shilalagh at. Several Holy Roman Emperors, even a couple of later Byzantine Emperors like Isaac Angelos. We don't need no stinkin' Cleopatra. We have Eleanor of Aquitaine and Saint Margaret of Scotland. Regards, Chris --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs ============================== 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 ============================== 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.

Thanks Kevin for focus. -----Original Message----- From: Wrenn, Bubba Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 11:15 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors This guy's really nice and has helped me lots. -----Original Message----- From: KBradford@lourdes-pad.org [mailto:KBradford@lourdes-pad.org] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:01 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors Chris, Mythic and traditional ancestries, while they continue to fascinate, are incapable of withstanding modern standards of proof. You raise a cogent point: the lives and families of our contemporaneously documented Plantagenet ancestors, and the ancestors of the Plantagenets (including St. Louis IX & El Cid, among a host of others), are detailed enough so that any serious family historian could spend years gaining a deeper understanding of their forebears and still only scratch the surface. Many people are not satisfied with deepening their understanding of the known, they try to push the bar higher and connect the dots in the dark. That's what mythic and legendary ancestries are all about: the What Ifs and Maybes of Genealogical Wonderland. The Internet continues to remind us of the fact that there are lots of dreamers in cyberspace. Kevin Chris Jay Becker <chrisjaybecker@yahoo. To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com com> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors 04/29/2004 06:18 PM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L Cousins, While it's all very fun to trace ourselves back to Adam and David and Mark Antony and Odin and all the other amazing and purported ancestors of our tribe, these "lines" are all based on things like "Darda son of Judah MAY BE the same person as Dardanus, founder of Troy" and "Tea Tephi was said to be the daughter of the King of Judah, brought to the Emerald Isle by the Prophet Jeremiah himself" and even "Theodoric of Toulouse, AKA Thierry of Autun is PROBABLY the same person as Natronai Al-Makhir, Exilarch of Judah." Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. Let's not forget, we Plantagenet descendants, through the Carolingians and the Merovingians are ALSO supposed to be descendants of Jesus Christ by Mary Magdalene!!! Yeah, right. We DO, however, have some pretty cool ancestors who are quite well documented. Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, several Kings of France (Capetians, Carolingians, and probably Merovingians,) and Spain (including Saint Ferdinand) and more ancient rulers of Scotland and Ireland than you can shake a shilalagh at. Several Holy Roman Emperors, even a couple of later Byzantine Emperors like Isaac Angelos. We don't need no stinkin' Cleopatra. We have Eleanor of Aquitaine and Saint Margaret of Scotland. Regards, Chris --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs ============================== 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 ============================== 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

All facts were speculation until they were proven.... It is also a fact that oral history is more accurate than written history. There have been several studies which show "tellers" elaborate less on a story than those who write it down. We've all experienced errors and outright falsehoods in print. I say let people work on it and see what they come up with. It'll be fun if nothing else. Donna -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm

" Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. What is hogwash? Not the Bible I hope you are not saying this. The Bible is a lot more factual than a lot of the genealogy lists man has made. Why is it so impossible to believe something written with God inspired facts than something written by man? I have found sites with my line back to Noah and Adam and Eve I have no problem with that but I must admit I dont think everything in the line is correct just what Ive read in the Bible. Didnt mean to bring Christianity into this list but please dont bring the Bible in to trash it. Eve

It occurs to me that this entire thread has become, in Internet parlance, OT (off-topic). Best, Kevin Christie Williamson <christiewilliamson@ve To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com rizon.net> cc: Subject: Re: [PDP] Re:Hogwash??? 04/30/2004 11:01 AM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L I knew this was going to happen when this whole thread started. I'm sure that no one is trying to "trash" the Bible. However, Eve said: Why is it so impossible to believe something written with God inspired facts than something written by man? Unfortunately, the Bible was written by man with God inspired facts. There were also the same biases as to which books to include in the Bible. We all like to think of it as an objective, factual text, but many scholars believe otherwise. I think that is all that should be said about the Bible unless you are referring to actual references regarding genealogical lines. If you have a problem with what I have posted, please feel free to flame me personally, and not on the list. I've seen too many people get upset when it comes to religious views and I don't think they belong on any genealogical list. Sincerely, Christie Williamson christiewilliamson@verizon.net ============================== 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.

This guy's really nice and has helped me lots. -----Original Message----- From: KBradford@lourdes-pad.org [mailto:KBradford@lourdes-pad.org] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 9:01 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors Chris, Mythic and traditional ancestries, while they continue to fascinate, are incapable of withstanding modern standards of proof. You raise a cogent point: the lives and families of our contemporaneously documented Plantagenet ancestors, and the ancestors of the Plantagenets (including St. Louis IX & El Cid, among a host of others), are detailed enough so that any serious family historian could spend years gaining a deeper understanding of their forebears and still only scratch the surface. Many people are not satisfied with deepening their understanding of the known, they try to push the bar higher and connect the dots in the dark. That's what mythic and legendary ancestries are all about: the What Ifs and Maybes of Genealogical Wonderland. The Internet continues to remind us of the fact that there are lots of dreamers in cyberspace. Kevin Chris Jay Becker <chrisjaybecker@yahoo. To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com com> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors 04/29/2004 06:18 PM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L Cousins, While it's all very fun to trace ourselves back to Adam and David and Mark Antony and Odin and all the other amazing and purported ancestors of our tribe, these "lines" are all based on things like "Darda son of Judah MAY BE the same person as Dardanus, founder of Troy" and "Tea Tephi was said to be the daughter of the King of Judah, brought to the Emerald Isle by the Prophet Jeremiah himself" and even "Theodoric of Toulouse, AKA Thierry of Autun is PROBABLY the same person as Natronai Al-Makhir, Exilarch of Judah." Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. Let's not forget, we Plantagenet descendants, through the Carolingians and the Merovingians are ALSO supposed to be descendants of Jesus Christ by Mary Magdalene!!! Yeah, right. We DO, however, have some pretty cool ancestors who are quite well documented. Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, several Kings of France (Capetians, Carolingians, and probably Merovingians,) and Spain (including Saint Ferdinand) and more ancient rulers of Scotland and Ireland than you can shake a shilalagh at. Several Holy Roman Emperors, even a couple of later Byzantine Emperors like Isaac Angelos. We don't need no stinkin' Cleopatra. We have Eleanor of Aquitaine and Saint Margaret of Scotland. Regards, Chris --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs ============================== 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

...and what about the mess in Rome @ 100 - 10 BC with the whole Claudius scandals. When I first saw they were my grandparents, in the 49th to 55th, range I tried to sort out that "Peyton Place". Got to see the movie (I, Claudius)...maybe that will help.:) And don't ever remember seeing Cleo in that mess, but definitely Mark Antony, who was Octavia's husband. One thing is for certain, this all certainly makes for better entertainment (which is one of the reasons I don't have cable) than what's on TV today...Janet Jackson or not!! I guess it's because I "relate" to it :)! -----Original Message----- From: Chris Jay Becker [mailto:chrisjaybecker@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 7:19 PM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors Cousins, While it's all very fun to trace ourselves back to Adam and David and Mark Antony and Odin and all the other amazing and purported ancestors of our tribe, these "lines" are all based on things like "Darda son of Judah MAY BE the same person as Dardanus, founder of Troy" and "Tea Tephi was said to be the daughter of the King of Judah, brought to the Emerald Isle by the Prophet Jeremiah himself" and even "Theodoric of Toulouse, AKA Thierry of Autun is PROBABLY the same person as Natronai Al-Makhir, Exilarch of Judah." Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. Let's not forget, we Plantagenet descendants, through the Carolingians and the Merovingians are ALSO supposed to be descendants of Jesus Christ by Mary Magdalene!!! Yeah, right. We DO, however, have some pretty cool ancestors who are quite well documented. Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, several Kings of France (Capetians, Carolingians, and probably Merovingians,) and Spain (including Saint Ferdinand) and more ancient rulers of Scotland and Ireland than you can shake a shilalagh at. Several Holy Roman Emperors, even a couple of later Byzantine Emperors like Isaac Angelos. We don't need no stinkin' Cleopatra. We have Eleanor of Aquitaine and Saint Margaret of Scotland. Regards, Chris - ------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs ______________________________

Why NOT feel free to formulate hypotheses - as long as they are clearly labeled as such. Had we not dreamed the moon was accessible to us, we would not now be seeking ways to expand our reach to Mars. The caveat is - that we cannot claim to have been there without actually having made the trip. It is only dangerous to dream when we attempt to convince others that what we only imagined was realty. For instance, my Dad, who devoted his professional life to the loving message of Jesus would be thoroughly amused and delighted with the mere thought his wife was somehow related through her line to Charlemagne - no matter how unlikely or lacking in b-m-d documentation. But, as a scholar, he would NEVER be fool enough to claim it to be fact without extraordinary proof. Just a thought Barbara Dudley Washburn -----Original Message----- From: KBradford@lourdes-pad.org [mailto:KBradford@lourdes-pad.org] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 10:01 AM To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors Chris, Mythic and traditional ancestries, while they continue to fascinate, are incapable of withstanding modern standards of proof. You raise a cogent point: the lives and families of our contemporaneously documented Plantagenet ancestors, and the ancestors of the Plantagenets (including St. Louis IX & El Cid, among a host of others), are detailed enough so that any serious family historian could spend years gaining a deeper understanding of their forebears and still only scratch the surface. Many people are not satisfied with deepening their understanding of the known, they try to push the bar higher and connect the dots in the dark. That's what mythic and legendary ancestries are all about: the What Ifs and Maybes of Genealogical Wonderland. The Internet continues to remind us of the fact that there are lots of dreamers in cyberspace. Kevin Chris Jay Becker <chrisjaybecker@yahoo. To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com com> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors 04/29/2004 06:18 PM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L Cousins, While it's all very fun to trace ourselves back to Adam and David and Mark Antony and Odin and all the other amazing and purported ancestors of our tribe, these "lines" are all based on things like "Darda son of Judah MAY BE the same person as Dardanus, founder of Troy" and "Tea Tephi was said to be the daughter of the King of Judah, brought to the Emerald Isle by the Prophet Jeremiah himself" and even "Theodoric of Toulouse, AKA Thierry of Autun is PROBABLY the same person as Natronai Al-Makhir, Exilarch of Judah." Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. Let's not forget, we Plantagenet descendants, through the Carolingians and the Merovingians are ALSO supposed to be descendants of Jesus Christ by Mary Magdalene!!! Yeah, right. We DO, however, have some pretty cool ancestors who are quite well documented. Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, several Kings of France (Capetians, Carolingians, and probably Merovingians,) and Spain (including Saint Ferdinand) and more ancient rulers of Scotland and Ireland than you can shake a shilalagh at. Several Holy Roman Emperors, even a couple of later Byzantine Emperors like Isaac Angelos. We don't need no stinkin' Cleopatra. We have Eleanor of Aquitaine and Saint Margaret of Scotland. Regards, Chris --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs ============================== 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

Chris, Mythic and traditional ancestries, while they continue to fascinate, are incapable of withstanding modern standards of proof. You raise a cogent point: the lives and families of our contemporaneously documented Plantagenet ancestors, and the ancestors of the Plantagenets (including St. Louis IX & El Cid, among a host of others), are detailed enough so that any serious family historian could spend years gaining a deeper understanding of their forebears and still only scratch the surface. Many people are not satisfied with deepening their understanding of the known, they try to push the bar higher and connect the dots in the dark. That's what mythic and legendary ancestries are all about: the What Ifs and Maybes of Genealogical Wonderland. The Internet continues to remind us of the fact that there are lots of dreamers in cyberspace. Kevin Chris Jay Becker <chrisjaybecker@yahoo. To: PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANTS-PROJECT-L@rootsweb.com com> cc: Subject: RE: [PDP] Ancestors of our ancestors 04/29/2004 06:18 PM Please respond to PLANTAGENET-DESCENDANT S-PROJECT-L Cousins, While it's all very fun to trace ourselves back to Adam and David and Mark Antony and Odin and all the other amazing and purported ancestors of our tribe, these "lines" are all based on things like "Darda son of Judah MAY BE the same person as Dardanus, founder of Troy" and "Tea Tephi was said to be the daughter of the King of Judah, brought to the Emerald Isle by the Prophet Jeremiah himself" and even "Theodoric of Toulouse, AKA Thierry of Autun is PROBABLY the same person as Natronai Al-Makhir, Exilarch of Judah." Unfortunately, it's all a lot of hogwash. Let's not forget, we Plantagenet descendants, through the Carolingians and the Merovingians are ALSO supposed to be descendants of Jesus Christ by Mary Magdalene!!! Yeah, right. We DO, however, have some pretty cool ancestors who are quite well documented. Charlemagne, Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, several Kings of France (Capetians, Carolingians, and probably Merovingians,) and Spain (including Saint Ferdinand) and more ancient rulers of Scotland and Ireland than you can shake a shilalagh at. Several Holy Roman Emperors, even a couple of later Byzantine Emperors like Isaac Angelos. We don't need no stinkin' Cleopatra. We have Eleanor of Aquitaine and Saint Margaret of Scotland. Regards, Chris --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs ============================== 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.