Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne.
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
On Fri, 27 May 2022 11:35:35 -0700 (PDT), taf <taf.me...@gmail.com>
wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:[...]
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were aThe general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is that
junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.person the DNA derives from, but there is a distinct possibility that two lines of
As to matching DNA from two lines dubiously claiming male-line descent from Charlegmagne giving us his DNA, it would be possible that this was Charlemagne's DNA, simply because in the absence of evidence, any male from that time period could be the
obscure origin that happen to descend from someone else entirely would both pick Charlemagne as their ancestor of choice, while it is also possible the DNA match woudl reflect a much more recent false-paternity event involving the two families.
I have seen recently results with a triangulation close to year 1000,
with descendants from 2 families, one in Normandy and one in England
(they followed William the Conqueror there), with many Big Y
involved. So with enough paper trail and descendants to test, it is
possible to prove something. In this case, there are people in France
and other in England, so NPE is very unlikely.
2 descendants would probably not be enough, but I suppose with 4 or 5
from different families and living in different places (i.e. to be
sure that there is no NPE), it would be possible, providing there are
male descendants. But from the genealogics database, the last one is
around year 1100, so all this is theoretical.
As for NPE, I have seen a case with someone in USA matching someone
from Europe. Since one was from a small noble family who had lands in
the country of the other, they presumed the common ancestor was from
that era (a noble and the wife of a commoner). But in my opinion, one
of them was from a recent (after-1900) NPE so I fully understand the possibility.
Utopic because of lack of descendants, but nonetheless possible with
many descendants (and since none is known after 1200, then yet more
utopic).
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/ French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:[...]
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is thatrecently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
As to matching DNA from two lines dubiously claiming male-line descent from Charlegmagne giving us his DNA, it would be possible that this was Charlemagne's DNA, simply because in the absence of evidence, any male from that time period could be theperson the DNA derives from, but there is a distinct possibility that two lines of
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 3:39:03 PM UTC-4, Denis Beauregard wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2022 11:35:35 -0700 (PDT), taf <taf.me...@gmail.com>
wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:[...]
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were aThe general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
person the DNA derives from, but there is a distinct possibility that two lines ofjunior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
As to matching DNA from two lines dubiously claiming male-line descent from Charlegmagne giving us his DNA, it would be possible that this was Charlemagne's DNA, simply because in the absence of evidence, any male from that time period could be the
obscure origin that happen to descend from someone else entirely would both pick Charlemagne as their ancestor of choice, while it is also possible the DNA match woudl reflect a much more recent false-paternity event involving the two families.
I have seen recently results with a triangulation close to year 1000,
with descendants from 2 families, one in Normandy and one in England
(they followed William the Conqueror there), with many Big Y
involved. So with enough paper trail and descendants to test, it is possible to prove something. In this case, there are people in France
and other in England, so NPE is very unlikely.
2 descendants would probably not be enough, but I suppose with 4 or 5
from different families and living in different places (i.e. to be
sure that there is no NPE), it would be possible, providing there are
male descendants. But from the genealogics database, the last one is around year 1100, so all this is theoretical.
As for NPE, I have seen a case with someone in USA matching someone
from Europe. Since one was from a small noble family who had lands in
the country of the other, they presumed the common ancestor was from
that era (a noble and the wife of a commoner). But in my opinion, one
of them was from a recent (after-1900) NPE so I fully understand the possibility.
Utopic because of lack of descendants, but nonetheless possible with
many descendants (and since none is known after 1200, then yet more utopic).
Denis
--I assume they must exist, "because every European living today is a descendant of Charlemagne" (i.e., statistics and probability).
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I guess we are just trying to separate proven from unproven?
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:59:34 PM UTC-7, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 3:39:03 PM UTC-4, Denis Beauregard wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2022 11:35:35 -0700 (PDT), taf <taf.me...@gmail.com> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:[...]
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were aThe general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
the person the DNA derives from, but there is a distinct possibility that two lines ofjunior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
As to matching DNA from two lines dubiously claiming male-line descent from Charlegmagne giving us his DNA, it would be possible that this was Charlemagne's DNA, simply because in the absence of evidence, any male from that time period could be
obscure origin that happen to descend from someone else entirely would both pick Charlemagne as their ancestor of choice, while it is also possible the DNA match woudl reflect a much more recent false-paternity event involving the two families.
I have seen recently results with a triangulation close to year 1000, with descendants from 2 families, one in Normandy and one in England (they followed William the Conqueror there), with many Big Y
involved. So with enough paper trail and descendants to test, it is possible to prove something. In this case, there are people in France and other in England, so NPE is very unlikely.
2 descendants would probably not be enough, but I suppose with 4 or 5 from different families and living in different places (i.e. to be
sure that there is no NPE), it would be possible, providing there are male descendants. But from the genealogics database, the last one is around year 1100, so all this is theoretical.
As for NPE, I have seen a case with someone in USA matching someone
from Europe. Since one was from a small noble family who had lands in the country of the other, they presumed the common ancestor was from that era (a noble and the wife of a commoner). But in my opinion, one
of them was from a recent (after-1900) NPE so I fully understand the possibility.
Utopic because of lack of descendants, but nonetheless possible with many descendants (and since none is known after 1200, then yet more utopic).
Denis
--I assume they must exist, "because every European living today is a descendant of Charlemagne" (i.e., statistics and probability).
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I guess we are just trying to separate proven from unproven?The question here isn't descendant, as we are all probably in one or the other.
But male-line-only. I.E. the Y-DNA test, not the Autosomal DNA tests
Y-DNA testing is *notoriously* difficult to prove even back five hundred years because of the very poor non-scientific work that has been so far by amateurs and wishful thinkers.
So Joe Gilliland says I descend from Arthur Gilliland born in 1500 and Michael Gilliland says hey I also descend from this same guy.
And voila there Y-DNA matches as well, within a certain predicted divergence.
So they form the Gilliland society and declare that every male-line descendant has to match them.
*However* back at the farm, as they say,...*both* of their lines were actually from a woman's prior husband and they just took that name of her next husband anyway.
And so they match each other.... but they are really both Smiths
And that's how the Y projects usually roll.
Extremely poor to mildly possible
Yes, MALE-LINE only is what I meant. Shouldn't probability indicate there are some still around, given the huge number of descents of all Europeans from Charlemagne?
The question here isn't descendant, as we are all probably in one or the other.
But male-line-only. I.E. the Y-DNA test, not the Autosomal DNA tests
Y-DNA testing is *notoriously* difficult to prove even back five hundred years because of the very poor non-scientific work that has been so far by amateurs and wishful thinkers.
So Joe Gilliland says I descend from Arthur Gilliland born in 1500 and Michael Gilliland says hey I also descend from this same guy.
And voila there Y-DNA matches as well, within a certain predicted divergence. >So they form the Gilliland society and declare that every male-line descendant has to match them.
*However* back at the farm, as they say,...*both* of their lines were actually from a woman's prior husband and they just took that name of her next husband anyway.
And so they match each other.... but they are really both Smiths
And that's how the Y projects usually roll.
Extremely poor to mildly possible
I have seen recently results with a triangulation close to year 1000,
with descendants from 2 families, one in Normandy and one in England
(they followed William the Conqueror there), with many Big Y
involved. So with enough paper trail and descendants to test, it is
possible to prove something. In this case, there are people in France
and other in England, so NPE is very unlikely.
A sexta-feira, 27 de maio de 2022 à(s) 19:32:43 UTC+1, joe...@gmail.com escreveu:
Also..Louis de Rouvroy, duc de Saint-Simon, a favorite of Louis XIV, claimed to be an agnatic descendant of the Carolingians through Eudes de Vermandois, the Insane, who was disinherited but this is believed to be a fraud.
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:04:01 PM UTC-4, Denis Beauregard wrote:
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne.There are none to my knowledge that claim a fully agnatic descent. Do you know of one?
--Joe C
Also..Louis de Rouvroy, duc de Saint-Simon, a favorite of Louis XIV, claimed to be an agnatic descendant of the Carolingians through Eudes de Vermandois, the Insane, who was disinherited but this is believed to be a fraud.
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:04:01 PM UTC-4, Denis Beauregard wrote:
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne.There are none to my knowledge that claim a fully agnatic descent. Do you know of one?
--Joe C
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 1:46:11 PM UTC-7, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
Yes, MALE-LINE only is what I meant. Shouldn't probability indicate there are some still around, given the huge number of descents of all Europeans from Charlemagne?
Setting aside that the whole 'everyone in Europe is descended from Charlemagne' claim is itself an overstatement, male- or female- line descent doesn't work the same way as general descent, and the fact that someone has a lot of descendants is no realindication of how their male line fares over time. I would suggest that the number of male children who had issue is a much better indicator of who living at the dawn of the 9th century is going to have surviving male lines than how many total
That said, I think it likely that Charlemagne does have surviving male-line descent because of the 'Mel Brooks factor' ('it's good to be the king' - with so many generations of Carolingian royalty, there were probably many more sons born to eachgeneration of Carolingian monarch than are documented).
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is thatrecently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
On 28-May-22 4:35 AM, taf wrote:
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
The hypothesis is not entirely recent - it was adumbrated in vol. 9 of _Gallia Christiana_ (1751), p. 259, where Odo of Warcq was identified as probably the son of Albert I of Vermandois, who certainly had a son ofThanks for this, Peter. What do you, yourself, think of that hypothesis?
that name although not certainly this same individual. Historians in the late-19th and early-20th century repeated the connection, and the case
for descent from him to the counts of Chiny was expounded by Michel Bur
in 1989. It is not universally accepted.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
On 28-May-22 1:26 PM, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:Thanks for this, Peter.
A sexta-feira, 27 de maio de 2022 à(s) 19:32:43 UTC+1, joe...@gmail.com escreveu:Also a fictitious lineage surnamed 'Sohier de Vermandois' has persisted
Also..Louis de Rouvroy, duc de Saint-Simon, a favorite of Louis XIV, claimed to be an agnatic descendant of the Carolingians through Eudes de Vermandois, the Insane, who was disinherited but this is believed to be a fraud.
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:04:01 PM UTC-4, Denis Beauregard wrote:
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne.There are none to my knowledge that claim a fully agnatic descent. Do you know of one?
--Joe C
in the literature since the 17th century, based on a series of false charters first printed by Le Carpentier in 1661 that he probably
concocted himself in an attempt to substantiate the alleged Carolingian agnatic ancestry of his patron Constantin Sohier, who paid for the publication of the work after receiving an Imperial barony in 1658.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
A sábado, 28 de maio de 2022 à(s) 05:34:11 UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au escreveu:that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
On 28-May-22 4:35 AM, taf wrote:
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
The hypothesis is not entirely recent - it was adumbrated in vol. 9 ofThanks for this, Peter. What do you, yourself, think of that hypothesis?
_Gallia Christiana_ (1751), p. 259, where Odo of Warcq was identified as
probably the son of Albert I of Vermandois, who certainly had a son of
that name although not certainly this same individual. Historians in the
late-19th and early-20th century repeated the connection, and the case
for descent from him to the counts of Chiny was expounded by Michel Bur
in 1989. It is not universally accepted.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Y-DNA testing is *notoriously* difficult to prove even back five hundred years because of the very poor non-scientific work that has been so far by amateurs and wishful thinkers.
So Joe Gilliland says I descend from Arthur Gilliland born in 1500 and Michael Gilliland says hey I also descend from this same guy.
And voila there Y-DNA matches as well, within a certain predicted divergence.
So they form the Gilliland society and declare that every male-line descendant has to match them.
*However* back at the farm, as they say,...*both* of their lines were actually from a woman's prior husband and they just took that name of her next husband anyway.
And so they match each other.... but they are really both Smiths
And that's how the Y projects usually roll.
Extremely poor to mildly possible
By the way, I hereby claim that I am NOT a direct male-line descendant of Charlemagne, although I will also freely admit that I have no proof of this claim. I will gladly pay one hundred dollars to anybody who can provide clear and convincing proofthat this claim is wrong.
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 3:39:03 PM UTC-4, Denis Beauregard wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2022 11:35:35 -0700 (PDT), taf <taf.me...@gmail.com>
wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-7, Denis Beauregard wrote:[...]
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were aThe general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
person the DNA derives from, but there is a distinct possibility that two lines ofjunior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
As to matching DNA from two lines dubiously claiming male-line descent from Charlegmagne giving us his DNA, it would be possible that this was Charlemagne's DNA, simply because in the absence of evidence, any male from that time period could be the
obscure origin that happen to descend from someone else entirely would both pick Charlemagne as their ancestor of choice, while it is also possible the DNA match woudl reflect a much more recent false-paternity event involving the two families.
I have seen recently results with a triangulation close to year 1000,
with descendants from 2 families, one in Normandy and one in England
(they followed William the Conqueror there), with many Big Y
involved. So with enough paper trail and descendants to test, it is possible to prove something. In this case, there are people in France
and other in England, so NPE is very unlikely.
2 descendants would probably not be enough, but I suppose with 4 or 5
from different families and living in different places (i.e. to be
sure that there is no NPE), it would be possible, providing there are
male descendants. But from the genealogics database, the last one is around year 1100, so all this is theoretical.
As for NPE, I have seen a case with someone in USA matching someone
from Europe. Since one was from a small noble family who had lands in
the country of the other, they presumed the common ancestor was from
that era (a noble and the wife of a commoner). But in my opinion, one
of them was from a recent (after-1900) NPE so I fully understand the possibility.
Utopic because of lack of descendants, but nonetheless possible with
many descendants (and since none is known after 1200, then yet more utopic).
Denis
--I assume they must exist, "because every European living today is a descendant of Charlemagne" (i.e., statistics and probability).
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I assume they must exist, "because every European living today is a descendant of Charlemagne" (i.e., statistics and probability).No, actually these flow in opposite directions at this point. Every year, it is more likely that "everyone is descended from charlemagne" (the universal ancestors point moves ever forward in the future).
However, every year is it _less_ likely that an all-male live survives.
On 29-May-22 2:48 AM, Stewart Baldwin wrote:that this claim is wrong.
<snip>
By the way, I hereby claim that I am NOT a direct male-line descendant of Charlemagne, although I will also freely admit that I have no proof of this claim. I will gladly pay one hundred dollars to anybody who can provide clear and convincing proof
This will be the easiest $100 I ever made - as a newly-minted onomastics fanatic, I can determine beyond doubt that the name Balwdin proves you
must be an agnatic descendant of Charles the Bald.
Peter (also Bald) Stewart
On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 11:05:17 PM UTC-5, joe...@gmail.com wrote:contemporaries, the male lines of most have already died out, and as time advances, some increase and some decrease (or die out). Without evidence, it is impossible to tell which category is relevant to Charlemagne.
...
I assume they must exist, "because every European living today is a descendant of Charlemagne" (i.e., statistics and probability).No, actually these flow in opposite directions at this point. Every year, it is more likely that "everyone is descended from charlemagne" (the universal ancestors point moves ever forward in the future).
However, every year is it _less_ likely that an all-male live survives.
The first statement is valid, but the second is not true. As some male lines die out, the percentages of others increase slighly in compensation (as do the actual number if the population of males is increasing). So, Of all of Charlemagne's male
On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 8:29:56 PM UTC-5, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:that this claim is wrong.
On 29-May-22 2:48 AM, Stewart Baldwin wrote:
<snip>
By the way, I hereby claim that I am NOT a direct male-line descendant of Charlemagne, although I will also freely admit that I have no proof of this claim. I will gladly pay one hundred dollars to anybody who can provide clear and convincing proof
This will be the easiest $100 I ever made - as a newly-minted onomastics
fanatic, I can determine beyond doubt that the name Balwdin proves you
must be an agnatic descendant of Charles the Bald.
Peter (also Bald) Stewart
Are you sure that the descent is in the direct male line? After all, the daughter of Charles was married to a Baldwin.
On 28-May-22 8:06 PM, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
A sábado, 28 de maio de 2022 à(s) 05:34:11 UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au escreveu:
On 28-May-22 4:35 AM, taf wrote:
The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
I think my opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans.The hypothesis is not entirely recent - it was adumbrated in vol. 9 ofThanks for this, Peter. What do you, yourself, think of that hypothesis?
_Gallia Christiana_ (1751), p. 259, where Odo of Warcq was identified as >> probably the son of Albert I of Vermandois, who certainly had a son of
that name although not certainly this same individual. Historians in the >> late-19th and early-20th century repeated the connection, and the case
for descent from him to the counts of Chiny was expounded by Michel Bur >> in 1989. It is not universally accepted.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
For what it isn't worth, Bur made a plausible case that fell short of
fully convincing proof.
The onomastics are unhelpful, relying on the name Louis that did not
occur in the Vermandois lineage as somehow indicating a Carolingian
heritage for the Chiny family, so that the argument should occur to
zealous onomacists as little short of nonsense - and yet predictably
they have seized on this particularly unsupportable way of crediting it.
Peter Stewart
On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 1:38:16 PM UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
On 28-May-22 8:06 PM, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A sábado, 28 de maio de 2022 à(s) 05:34:11 UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au escreveu:
On 28-May-22 4:35 AM, taf wrote:
The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
I think my opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans.The hypothesis is not entirely recent - it was adumbrated in vol. 9 of >>>> _Gallia Christiana_ (1751), p. 259, where Odo of Warcq was identified as >>>> probably the son of Albert I of Vermandois, who certainly had a son of >>>> that name although not certainly this same individual. Historians in the >>>> late-19th and early-20th century repeated the connection, and the case >>>> for descent from him to the counts of Chiny was expounded by Michel Bur >>>> in 1989. It is not universally accepted.Thanks for this, Peter. What do you, yourself, think of that hypothesis?
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
For what it isn't worth, Bur made a plausible case that fell short of
fully convincing proof.
The onomastics are unhelpful, relying on the name Louis that did not
occur in the Vermandois lineage as somehow indicating a Carolingian
heritage for the Chiny family, so that the argument should occur to
zealous onomacists as little short of nonsense - and yet predictably
they have seized on this particularly unsupportable way of crediting it.
Peter Stewart
Is the onomastic argument something like, these noble families
called a son Louis to indicate a carolingian descent? Why not call him Charles after Charlemagne if that is the case, why Louis? Apart from Louis of
Chiny [d1025] there are other Louis in the 11th century, that is well after the
expiry of the Carolingian male line and their loss of kingship.
Louis of Mousson 1042-71
Louis the Bearded ancestor of the Landgraves of Thuringia 1039-1056
Neither of them seem to have had a carolingian descent.
In the onomastics cult that I joined yesterday in order to win this
prize, the default setting is _always_ male-line descent from the most famous namesake, and of course names and indeed syllables were strictly proprietry within lineages. These are articles of faith handed down from Joseph Depoin and Maurice Chaume, not open to question by nasty little people like the Peter Stewart of the past.
On 31-May-22 1:33 AM, mike davis wrote:that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 1:38:16 PM UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
On 28-May-22 8:06 PM, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A sábado, 28 de maio de 2022 à(s) 05:34:11 UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au escreveu:
On 28-May-22 4:35 AM, taf wrote:
The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
The hypothesis is not entirely recent - it was adumbrated in vol. 9 of >>>> _Gallia Christiana_ (1751), p. 259, where Odo of Warcq was identified asThanks for this, Peter. What do you, yourself, think of that hypothesis? >> I think my opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
probably the son of Albert I of Vermandois, who certainly had a son of >>>> that name although not certainly this same individual. Historians in the
late-19th and early-20th century repeated the connection, and the case >>>> for descent from him to the counts of Chiny was expounded by Michel Bur >>>> in 1989. It is not universally accepted.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
For what it isn't worth, Bur made a plausible case that fell short of
fully convincing proof.
The onomastics are unhelpful, relying on the name Louis that did not
occur in the Vermandois lineage as somehow indicating a Carolingian
heritage for the Chiny family, so that the argument should occur to
zealous onomacists as little short of nonsense - and yet predictably
they have seized on this particularly unsupportable way of crediting it. >>
Peter Stewart
Is the onomastic argument something like, these noble families
called a son Louis to indicate a carolingian descent? Why not call him Charles after Charlemagne if that is the case, why Louis? Apart from Louis of
Chiny [d1025] there are other Louis in the 11th century, that is well after the
expiry of the Carolingian male line and their loss of kingship.
Louis of Mousson 1042-71
Louis the Bearded ancestor of the Landgraves of Thuringia 1039-1056
Neither of them seem to have had a carolingian descent.Looking for commonsense in the arguments of people who think they can
trace medieval genealogies by matching names to ancestry is like hoping
a rap artist is going to understand the difference between verse and doggerel - they just don't have it in them.
The name Louis was adopted by the Carolingians as a PR exercise, like
the name Edward by the Plantagenets, and of course the Vermandois line
was (a) not descended from any Louis in their agnatic clan and (b) did
not use the names Charles, Carloman, Pippin or Bernard belonging to
their own direct forbears.
On Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 1:36:28 AM UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:that recently there has been a hypothesis floated that the Counts of Chiny were a junior line of Vermandois, but they in turn went extinct in the 14th century.
On 31-May-22 1:33 AM, mike davis wrote:
On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 1:38:16 PM UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
On 28-May-22 8:06 PM, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A sábado, 28 de maio de 2022 à(s) 05:34:11 UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au escreveu:
On 28-May-22 4:35 AM, taf wrote:
The general consensus is that the proven male line of Charlemagne went extinct with the deaths of the children of Charles of Lorraine, uncle of Louis V, and with the end of the Vermandois male line, both in the 11th century. The caveat to this is
Looking for commonsense in the arguments of people who think they canThe hypothesis is not entirely recent - it was adumbrated in vol. 9 of >>>>>> _Gallia Christiana_ (1751), p. 259, where Odo of Warcq was identified as >>>>>> probably the son of Albert I of Vermandois, who certainly had a son of >>>>>> that name although not certainly this same individual. Historians in the >>>>>> late-19th and early-20th century repeated the connection, and the case >>>>>> for descent from him to the counts of Chiny was expounded by Michel Bur >>>>>> in 1989. It is not universally accepted.Thanks for this, Peter. What do you, yourself, think of that hypothesis? >>>> I think my opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
For what it isn't worth, Bur made a plausible case that fell short of
fully convincing proof.
The onomastics are unhelpful, relying on the name Louis that did not
occur in the Vermandois lineage as somehow indicating a Carolingian
heritage for the Chiny family, so that the argument should occur to
zealous onomacists as little short of nonsense - and yet predictably
they have seized on this particularly unsupportable way of crediting it. >>>>
Peter Stewart
Is the onomastic argument something like, these noble families
called a son Louis to indicate a carolingian descent? Why not call him
Charles after Charlemagne if that is the case, why Louis? Apart from Louis of
Chiny [d1025] there are other Louis in the 11th century, that is well after the
expiry of the Carolingian male line and their loss of kingship.
Louis of Mousson 1042-71
Louis the Bearded ancestor of the Landgraves of Thuringia 1039-1056
Neither of them seem to have had a carolingian descent.
trace medieval genealogies by matching names to ancestry is like hoping
a rap artist is going to understand the difference between verse and
doggerel - they just don't have it in them.
The name Louis was adopted by the Carolingians as a PR exercise, like
the name Edward by the Plantagenets, and of course the Vermandois line
was (a) not descended from any Louis in their agnatic clan and (b) did
not use the names Charles, Carloman, Pippin or Bernard belonging to
their own direct forbears.
yes that absence of certain names seems quite marked. I may be wrong
but a cursory look at the early capetian kings shows they stopped using
Hugh and Robert for their elder sons after Robert II. Some noble families
do seem wedded to just 1 or 2 names, the Guilhems of Montpellier and
Raymonds of Toulouse spring to mind, but you might have expected
a long line of King Hughs and Roberts, instead we have Henry and Philip
and then they too adopt Louis. And I believe that after the heiress Adelaide of
vermandois married one of the Hughs they didnt give any of their sons 'dynastic names' such as Hugh, Robert or Herbert.
The process of dropping Hugo and Robert from the Capetian name-stock was
not altogether straightforward. Henri I gave the exotic name Philip to
his eldest son, but the next two were named Robert and Hugo
respectively.
Henri's brother Robert of Burgundy named his eldest son
Hugo and the next two Henri and Robert respectively.
On Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 4:54:28 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:first preference.
The process of dropping Hugo and Robert from the Capetian name-stock was
not altogether straightforward. Henri I gave the exotic name Philip to
his eldest son, but the next two were named Robert and Hugo
respectively.
Indeed, while they didn't use it for their eldest son, the name Robert was used for a younger son by all but two kings down to Louis IX (which is as far as I went), and one of those only had a single son. It didn't really pass out of usage, just out of
Henri's brother Robert of Burgundy named his eldest son
Hugo and the next two Henri and Robert respectively.
And in this family, the dukes are named Hugh, Robert and another stem Capitian name, Eudes/Odo, all the way down to their penultimate member.
Looking for commonsense in the arguments of people who think they can
trace medieval genealogies by matching names to ancestry is like hoping
a rap artist is going to understand the difference between verse and
doggerel - they just don't have it in them.
On 01-Jun-22 12:12 PM, taf wrote:
And in this family, the dukes are named Hugh, Robert and another stem Capitian name, Eudes/Odo, all the way down to their penultimate member.It's notable that the second duke named Robert came in the second half
of the 13th century, two hundred years after the first.
On Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 8:23:58 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:duke.
On 01-Jun-22 12:12 PM, taf wrote:
It's notable that the second duke named Robert came in the second half
And in this family, the dukes are named Hugh, Robert and another stem Capitian name, Eudes/Odo, all the way down to their penultimate member.
of the 13th century, two hundred years after the first.
Yeah. After being used for two boys who became bishops, it passed out of use in the 12th century, and when used again for a duke it is better viewed as a reintrocution via the intermarriage with Capetian Dreux line rather than a callback to the first
Robert I of Burgundy named his third and fourth sons Robert and Simon respectively[snip]
The theory stated by Joseph Depoin, according to which baptismal names[snip]
were a "moral property" in Frankish families that they were obliged by
custom to respect and pass on in memory of distant ancestors,
On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 4:03:17 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
Robert I of Burgundy named his third and fourth sons Robert and Simon[snip]
respectively
But none named Dalmas.
The theory stated by Joseph Depoin, according to which baptismal names[snip]
were a "moral property" in Frankish families that they were obliged by
custom to respect and pass on in memory of distant ancestors,
Does strangling one's father-in-law absolve one of this obligation to pass on his memory via onomastics?
Where did you come across strangling as the cause of death? Hildebert of Lavardin wrote that Dalmas was killed by his son-in-law the duke of
Burgundy with his own hand, but I haven't seen another source for it
much less one specific about bare hands.
On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 4:03:17 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
Robert I of Burgundy named his third and fourth sons Robert and Simon[snip]
respectively
But none named Dalmas.
The theory stated by Joseph Depoin, according to which baptismal names[snip]
were a "moral property" in Frankish families that they were obliged by
custom to respect and pass on in memory of distant ancestors,
Does strangling one's father-in-law absolve one of this obligation to pass on his memory via onomastics?
On 02-Jun-22 9:50 AM, taf wrote:Dear Peter, could you, please, expand on how Constance of Provence was appaling?
On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 4:03:17 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
Robert I of Burgundy named his third and fourth sons Robert and Simon[snip]
respectively
But none named Dalmas.Adopting a name from the mother's family probably happened more often
when this was of higher status than the father's, as was not the case
with Burgundy and Semur.
The theory stated by Joseph Depoin, according to which baptismal names[snip]
were a "moral property" in Frankish families that they were obliged by
custom to respect and pass on in memory of distant ancestors,
Does strangling one's father-in-law absolve one of this obligation to pass on his memory via onomastics?Depoin was focused on agnatic ancestry, but anyway some leeway with tradition (and indulgence for a murder or two) must be given to a son of Robert's appalling mother Constance.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
On Thursday, June 2, 2022 at 5:24:08 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
Where did you come across strangling as the cause of death? Hildebert of Lavardin wrote that Dalmas was killed by his son-in-law the duke of Burgundy with his own hand, but I haven't seen another source for itDon't remember where this came from. Not a primary source.
much less one specific about bare hands.
A quinta-feira, 2 de junho de 2022 à(s) 02:01:21 UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au escreveu:
On 02-Jun-22 9:50 AM, taf wrote:Dear Peter, could you, please, expand on how Constance of Provence was appaling?
On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 4:03:17 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:Adopting a name from the mother's family probably happened more often
Robert I of Burgundy named his third and fourth sons Robert and Simon[snip]
respectively
But none named Dalmas.
when this was of higher status than the father's, as was not the case
with Burgundy and Semur.
Depoin was focused on agnatic ancestry, but anyway some leeway withThe theory stated by Joseph Depoin, according to which baptismal names >>>> were a "moral property" in Frankish families that they were obliged by >>>> custom to respect and pass on in memory of distant ancestors,[snip]
Does strangling one's father-in-law absolve one of this obligation to pass on his memory via onomastics?
tradition (and indulgence for a murder or two) must be given to a son of
Robert's appalling mother Constance.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
On Thursday, June 2, 2022 at 6:01:32 PM UTC-7, taf wrote:
On Thursday, June 2, 2022 at 5:24:08 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote: >>
Where did you come across strangling as the cause of death? Hildebert of >>> Lavardin wrote that Dalmas was killed by his son-in-law the duke ofDon't remember where this came from. Not a primary source.
Burgundy with his own hand, but I haven't seen another source for it
much less one specific about bare hands.
Retraced my steps - I was looking into two different things at the same time, and got them crossed in my head.
On 03-Jun-22 11:17 AM, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:Thanks for the reply, Peter. I checked Constance's Wikipedia page where the succession war she instigated is mentioned but I wanted more clarification.
A quinta-feira, 2 de junho de 2022 à(s) 02:01:21 UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au escreveu:Queen Constance was not someone to be caught with down a dark alley, or
On 02-Jun-22 9:50 AM, taf wrote:Dear Peter, could you, please, expand on how Constance of Provence was appaling?
On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 4:03:17 PM UTC-7, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:Adopting a name from the mother's family probably happened more often
Robert I of Burgundy named his third and fourth sons Robert and Simon >>>> respectively[snip]
But none named Dalmas.
when this was of higher status than the father's, as was not the case
with Burgundy and Semur.
Depoin was focused on agnatic ancestry, but anyway some leeway withThe theory stated by Joseph Depoin, according to which baptismal names >>>> were a "moral property" in Frankish families that they were obliged by >>>> custom to respect and pass on in memory of distant ancestors,[snip]
Does strangling one's father-in-law absolve one of this obligation to pass on his memory via onomastics?
tradition (and indulgence for a murder or two) must be given to a son of >> Robert's appalling mother Constance.
Peter Stewart
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
even a well-lit street - she was a violent termagant who once poked out
a priest's eye with a stick when undertaking crowd control at a heresy trial. She fomented war between her sons over the succession after
Robert II's death.
Peter Stewart
When Robert separated from his second wife Bertha, are there any primary documents that mention this separation ?
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/ French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
Also..
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:04:01 PM UTC-4, Denis Beauregard wrote:
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne.There are none to my knowledge that claim a fully agnatic descent. Do you know of one?
--Joe C
Op vrijdag 27 mei 2022 om 18:04:01 UTC+2 schreef Denis Beauregard:
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I am working to research the most recent male ancestors of Charlemagne. Untill now I have one that reaches the 18th century in The Netherlands (Sohier family) but that line needs more research.
Op zondag 5 juni 2022 om 18:22:25 UTC+2 schreef André Sijnesael:
Op vrijdag 27 mei 2022 om 18:04:01 UTC+2 schreef Denis Beauregard:
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Peter Stewart already said this is a fraud.Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I am working to research the most recent male ancestors of Charlemagne. Untill now I have one that reaches the 18th century in The Netherlands (Sohier family) but that line needs more research.I found: (not checked completely until now, don't know yet if number 1 had sons).
1 Jacques Antoine Adrien Sohier 1851-1928
2. Hippolyte Sohier 1815-1911
3. Jacques-Francois Sohier ?-1849
4, François-Adrien Sohier ?-?
5. Jean-Antoine Sohier 1715-?
6. Jean Sohier 1688-?
7. Nicolas III Sohier 1638-1728
8. Jacques Sohier 1606-?
9. Hugues Sohier 1560-?
10. NIcolas II Sohier 1530-?
11. Nicolas I Sohier ?-?
12. Simon Sohier 1465-?
13. Jean III Sohier, seigneur de la Buissière ?-?
14, Jean II Sohier ?-?
15. Pierre IV Sohier ?-?
16. Pierre III Sohier ?-?
17. Pierre II Sohier ?-?
18. Matthieu Sohier ?-?
19. Gillebert Sohier ?-?
20, Jean I Sohier ?-?
21. Pierre I Sohier ?-?
22. Hellin Sohier ?-?
23. Hugues II Sohier ?-?
24, Renaud Sohier ?-?
25, Watier Sohier ?-?
26. Hugues I Sohier ?-?
27. Hugues d'Oisy Sohier ?-?
28. Sohier de Vermandois 1024-?
29. Eudes de Vermandois ?-ca 1050
30. Othon de Vermandois ca980-1046
31. Herbert III de Vermandois ca955-1015
32. Albert I "le Pieux" de Vermandois ca931-987
33. Herbert II de Vermandois ca880-943
34. Herbert I de Vermandois ca840-902
35. Pepin II de Vermandois 818-878
36. Bernard d'Italie ca 797-818
37. Pepin I d'Italie ca777-810
38. CHARLEMAGNE 768-814.
Op zondag 5 juni 2022 om 18:22:25 UTC+2 schreef André Sijnesael:
Op vrijdag 27 mei 2022 om 18:04:01 UTC+2 schreef Denis Beauregard:
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I am working to research the most recent male ancestors of Charlemagne. Untill now I have one that reaches the 18th century in The Netherlands (Sohier family) but that line needs more research.I found: (not checked completely until now, don't know yet if number 1 had sons).
1 Jacques Antoine Adrien Sohier 1851-1928
2. Hippolyte Sohier 1815-1911
3. Jacques-Francois Sohier ?-1849
4, François-Adrien Sohier ?-?
5. Jean-Antoine Sohier 1715-?
6. Jean Sohier 1688-?
7. Nicolas III Sohier 1638-1728
8. Jacques Sohier 1606-?
9. Hugues Sohier 1560-?
10. NIcolas II Sohier 1530-?
11. Nicolas I Sohier ?-?
12. Simon Sohier 1465-?
13. Jean III Sohier, seigneur de la Buissière ?-?
14, Jean II Sohier ?-?
15. Pierre IV Sohier ?-?
16. Pierre III Sohier ?-?
17. Pierre II Sohier ?-?
18. Matthieu Sohier ?-?
19. Gillebert Sohier ?-?
20, Jean I Sohier ?-?
21. Pierre I Sohier ?-?
22. Hellin Sohier ?-?
23. Hugues II Sohier ?-?
24, Renaud Sohier ?-?
25, Watier Sohier ?-?
26. Hugues I Sohier ?-?
27. Hugues d'Oisy Sohier ?-?
28. Sohier de Vermandois 1024-?
29. Eudes de Vermandois ?-ca 1050
30. Othon de Vermandois ca980-1046
31. Herbert III de Vermandois ca955-1015
32. Albert I "le Pieux" de Vermandois ca931-987
33. Herbert II de Vermandois ca880-943
34. Herbert I de Vermandois ca840-902
35. Pepin II de Vermandois 818-878
36. Bernard d'Italie ca 797-818
37. Pepin I d'Italie ca777-810
38. CHARLEMAGNE 768-814.
Op zondag 5 juni 2022 om 18:22:25 UTC+2 schreef André Sijnesael:
Op vrijdag 27 mei 2022 om 18:04:01 UTC+2 schreef Denis Beauregard:
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I am working to research the most recent male ancestors of Charlemagne. Untill now I have one that reaches the 18th century in The Netherlands (Sohier family) but that line needs more research.
I found: (not checked completely until now, don't know yet if number 1 had sons).
1 Jacques Antoine Adrien Sohier 1851-1928
2. Hippolyte Sohier 1815-1911
3. Jacques-Francois Sohier ?-1849
4, François-Adrien Sohier ?-?
5. Jean-Antoine Sohier 1715-?
6. Jean Sohier 1688-?
7. Nicolas III Sohier 1638-1728
8. Jacques Sohier 1606-?
9. Hugues Sohier 1560-?
10. NIcolas II Sohier 1530-?
11. Nicolas I Sohier ?-?
12. Simon Sohier 1465-?
13. Jean III Sohier, seigneur de la Buissière ?-?
14, Jean II Sohier ?-?
15. Pierre IV Sohier ?-?
16. Pierre III Sohier ?-?
17. Pierre II Sohier ?-?
18. Matthieu Sohier ?-?
19. Gillebert Sohier ?-?
20, Jean I Sohier ?-?
21. Pierre I Sohier ?-?
22. Hellin Sohier ?-?
23. Hugues II Sohier ?-?
24, Renaud Sohier ?-?
25, Watier Sohier ?-?
26. Hugues I Sohier ?-?
27. Hugues d'Oisy Sohier ?-?
28. Sohier de Vermandois 1024-?
29. Eudes de Vermandois ?-ca 1050
30. Othon de Vermandois ca980-1046
31. Herbert III de Vermandois ca955-1015
32. Albert I "le Pieux" de Vermandois ca931-987
33. Herbert II de Vermandois ca880-943
34. Herbert I de Vermandois ca840-902
35. Pepin II de Vermandois 818-878
36. Bernard d'Italie ca 797-818
37. Pepin I d'Italie ca777-810
38. CHARLEMAGNE 768-814.
On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:02:15 AM UTC-7, André Sijnesael wrote:
Op zondag 5 juni 2022 om 18:22:25 UTC+2 schreef André Sijnesael:
Op vrijdag 27 mei 2022 om 18:04:01 UTC+2 schreef Denis Beauregard:I found: (not checked completely until now, don't know yet if number 1 had sons).
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I am working to research the most recent male ancestors of Charlemagne. Untill now I have one that reaches the 18th century in The Netherlands (Sohier family) but that line needs more research.
1 Jacques Antoine Adrien Sohier 1851-1928
2. Hippolyte Sohier 1815-1911
3. Jacques-Francois Sohier ?-1849
4, François-Adrien Sohier ?-?
5. Jean-Antoine Sohier 1715-?
6. Jean Sohier 1688-?
7. Nicolas III Sohier 1638-1728
8. Jacques Sohier 1606-?
9. Hugues Sohier 1560-?
10. NIcolas II Sohier 1530-?
11. Nicolas I Sohier ?-?
12. Simon Sohier 1465-?
13. Jean III Sohier, seigneur de la Buissière ?-?
14, Jean II Sohier ?-?
15. Pierre IV Sohier ?-?
16. Pierre III Sohier ?-?
17. Pierre II Sohier ?-?
18. Matthieu Sohier ?-?
19. Gillebert Sohier ?-?
20, Jean I Sohier ?-?
21. Pierre I Sohier ?-?
22. Hellin Sohier ?-?
23. Hugues II Sohier ?-?
24, Renaud Sohier ?-?
25, Watier Sohier ?-?
26. Hugues I Sohier ?-?
27. Hugues d'Oisy Sohier ?-?
28. Sohier de Vermandois 1024-?
29. Eudes de Vermandois ?-ca 1050
30. Othon de Vermandois ca980-1046
31. Herbert III de Vermandois ca955-1015
32. Albert I "le Pieux" de Vermandois ca931-987
33. Herbert II de Vermandois ca880-943
34. Herbert I de Vermandois ca840-902
35. Pepin II de Vermandois 818-878
36. Bernard d'Italie ca 797-818
37. Pepin I d'Italie ca777-810
38. CHARLEMAGNE 768-814.
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eudes_I,_Lord_of_Ham
which does not give this Eudes any children at all, and also says he was yet living as late as 1089
On 06-Jun-22 3:59 AM, Will Johnson wrote:
On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:02:15 AM UTC-7, André Sijnesael wrote:
Op zondag 5 juni 2022 om 18:22:25 UTC+2 schreef André Sijnesael:
Op vrijdag 27 mei 2022 om 18:04:01 UTC+2 schreef Denis Beauregard:I found: (not checked completely until now, don't know yet if number
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord -
http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 -
http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I am working to research the most recent male ancestors of
Charlemagne. Untill now I have one that reaches the 18th century in
The Netherlands (Sohier family) but that line needs more research.
1 had sons).
1 Jacques Antoine Adrien Sohier 1851-1928
2. Hippolyte Sohier 1815-1911
3. Jacques-Francois Sohier ?-1849
4, François-Adrien Sohier ?-?
5. Jean-Antoine Sohier 1715-?
6. Jean Sohier 1688-?
7. Nicolas III Sohier 1638-1728
8. Jacques Sohier 1606-?
9. Hugues Sohier 1560-?
10. NIcolas II Sohier 1530-?
11. Nicolas I Sohier ?-?
12. Simon Sohier 1465-?
13. Jean III Sohier, seigneur de la Buissière ?-?
14, Jean II Sohier ?-?
15. Pierre IV Sohier ?-?
16. Pierre III Sohier ?-?
17. Pierre II Sohier ?-?
18. Matthieu Sohier ?-?
19. Gillebert Sohier ?-?
20, Jean I Sohier ?-?
21. Pierre I Sohier ?-?
22. Hellin Sohier ?-?
23. Hugues II Sohier ?-?
24, Renaud Sohier ?-?
25, Watier Sohier ?-?
26. Hugues I Sohier ?-?
27. Hugues d'Oisy Sohier ?-?
28. Sohier de Vermandois 1024-?
29. Eudes de Vermandois ?-ca 1050
30. Othon de Vermandois ca980-1046
31. Herbert III de Vermandois ca955-1015
32. Albert I "le Pieux" de Vermandois ca931-987
33. Herbert II de Vermandois ca880-943
34. Herbert I de Vermandois ca840-902
35. Pepin II de Vermandois 818-878
36. Bernard d'Italie ca 797-818
37. Pepin I d'Italie ca777-810
38. CHARLEMAGNE 768-814.
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eudes_I,_Lord_of_Ham
which does not give this Eudes any children at all, and also says he
was yet living as late as 1089
When I open your link the Wikipedia page shows two sons of Eudes I - his successor Gérard and Lancelin, who is further alleged on the page for
his elder brother to be the father of Gérard's successor Eudes II.
This is all hooey, as well as entirely misplaced in the context of Carolingian ancestry.
On 06-Jun-22 9:25 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
On 06-Jun-22 3:59 AM, Will Johnson wrote:
On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:02:15 AM UTC-7, André Sijnesael wrote:
Op zondag 5 juni 2022 om 18:22:25 UTC+2 schreef André Sijnesael:
Op vrijdag 27 mei 2022 om 18:04:01 UTC+2 schreef Denis Beauregard:I found: (not checked completely until now, don't know yet if number
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed >>>>>> to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will >>>>>> have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord -
http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 -
http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
I am working to research the most recent male ancestors of
Charlemagne. Untill now I have one that reaches the 18th century in
The Netherlands (Sohier family) but that line needs more research.
1 had sons).
1 Jacques Antoine Adrien Sohier 1851-1928
2. Hippolyte Sohier 1815-1911
3. Jacques-Francois Sohier ?-1849
4, François-Adrien Sohier ?-?
5. Jean-Antoine Sohier 1715-?
6. Jean Sohier 1688-?
7. Nicolas III Sohier 1638-1728
8. Jacques Sohier 1606-?
9. Hugues Sohier 1560-?
10. NIcolas II Sohier 1530-?
11. Nicolas I Sohier ?-?
12. Simon Sohier 1465-?
13. Jean III Sohier, seigneur de la Buissière ?-?
14, Jean II Sohier ?-?
15. Pierre IV Sohier ?-?
16. Pierre III Sohier ?-?
17. Pierre II Sohier ?-?
18. Matthieu Sohier ?-?
19. Gillebert Sohier ?-?
20, Jean I Sohier ?-?
21. Pierre I Sohier ?-?
22. Hellin Sohier ?-?
23. Hugues II Sohier ?-?
24, Renaud Sohier ?-?
25, Watier Sohier ?-?
26. Hugues I Sohier ?-?
27. Hugues d'Oisy Sohier ?-?
28. Sohier de Vermandois 1024-?
29. Eudes de Vermandois ?-ca 1050
30. Othon de Vermandois ca980-1046
31. Herbert III de Vermandois ca955-1015
32. Albert I "le Pieux" de Vermandois ca931-987
33. Herbert II de Vermandois ca880-943
34. Herbert I de Vermandois ca840-902
35. Pepin II de Vermandois 818-878
36. Bernard d'Italie ca 797-818
37. Pepin I d'Italie ca777-810
38. CHARLEMAGNE 768-814.
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eudes_I,_Lord_of_Ham
which does not give this Eudes any children at all, and also says he
was yet living as late as 1089
When I open your link the Wikipedia page shows two sons of Eudes I -
his successor Gérard and Lancelin, who is further alleged on the page
for his elder brother to be the father of Gérard's successor Eudes II.
This is all hooey, as well as entirely misplaced in the context of
Carolingian ancestry.
To be clearer, I meant to type the last sentence as follows:
This is all hooey, as well as entirely misplaced, in the context of Carolingian ancestry.
The Wikipedia page is not wrong in giving Eudes of Ham sons named Gérard
and Lancelin, but only in placing their family as a branch of the
Vermandois lineage.
Hi all:
Genealogics has only 8 generations of male descendants for
Charlemagne from the main entries.
https://genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00000001&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=10
I see there is a limit of 8 in the settings of the software. But
if I check the most recent lineages, I get at most 4 more
generations. When selecting "male descendants", the "4" is changed
to "8" so it is not the limit of the software but the limit of
what is found on this site.
So, is there something after year 1200 ? 1600 ? Would I find more
on other medieval databases and would this be reliable ?
Some noble families pretend to descend from Charlemagne. So if
2 of them from distinct lineages have the same Y DNA, then we will
have the Y DNA of Charlemagne. But is this possible ?
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/ French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 286 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 84:53:00 |
Calls: | 6,495 |
Calls today: | 6 |
Files: | 12,097 |
Messages: | 5,276,962 |