On Friday, January 5, 1996 at 11:00:00 PM UTC-9, Nathaniel Lane Taylor wrote:Europäische Stammtafeln https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europ%C3%A4ische_Stammtafeln
In article <v02120d00ad1351a0d4ac@[136.152.71.59]>, Alan B. Wilson wrote:
A line of descent can be traced from Thierry
(Theodoric), Count of Autun in the eighth century, to (among
many others) Eleanor of Aquitaine:
Anthony Wagner in "Pedigree and Progress" (1975) has a
brief note on "The Jewish kings or princes of Narbonne" (pp.
76-77). He refers to the work of Zuckerman who proposes an identification of Makhir, a Jewish prince of the house of David,
with Thierry (Theoderic). Apparently Zuckerman's thesis has
received favorable comment from Professors Salo W. Baron and
David H. Kelley. Wagner concludes "Further evaluation and
possible fascinating extensions of these possibilities must
await analysis by authorities on the various aspects of these
matters."
I have been browsing in Arther Zuckerman's book, "A
Jewish princedom in feudal France: 768-900" (1972). I find it fascinating and erudite. But I am hardly one of the
"authorities on the various aspects of these matters" on whose
further research and commentary Wagner says we must await. Has
there been work in the past two decades which would tend to
confirm or cast doubt on the identity of Thierry and Makhir?
Alan,What is 'ES' in context?
To my knowledge the most committed adherent to this theory remains David H. Kelley, who has (I am told by a mutual acquaintance) done a considerable amount of onomastic research and theorizing on this question, and adheres to a modification of Zuckerman's original theory. However,
his work in this area remains, perhaps deliberately, unpublished. You should at least read Kelley and Robert Charles Anderson, "Holy Blood,
Holy Grail: Two Reviews," _The Genealogist_ 3 (1982), 249-263, where Kelley addresses this question briefly, presenting the theory as a much better idea than the crap dished up in the book _HBHG_ (much as I would like to add Jesus to my pedigree). An earlier piece by Kelley, "Who Descends from King David?," _Toledot: the Journal of Jewish Genealogy_ (Flushing, N.Y., Toledot Press) 1/3 (1977-8), 3-5, is not particularly informative.
Note that some of the connection between the Autun/Saint Guilhem family and later dynasties are over-optimistically presented in ES, although the descent through Wulgrin of Angouleme is accepted as well-supported and leads, of course, to the Plantaganets through Isabel.
Nat Taylor
In article <v02120d00ad1351a0d4ac@[136.152.71.59]>, Alan B. Wilson wrote:What is 'ES' in context?
A line of descent can be traced from Thierry
(Theodoric), Count of Autun in the eighth century, to (among
many others) Eleanor of Aquitaine:
Anthony Wagner in "Pedigree and Progress" (1975) has a
brief note on "The Jewish kings or princes of Narbonne" (pp.
76-77). He refers to the work of Zuckerman who proposes an
identification of Makhir, a Jewish prince of the house of David,
with Thierry (Theoderic). Apparently Zuckerman's thesis has
received favorable comment from Professors Salo W. Baron and
David H. Kelley. Wagner concludes "Further evaluation and
possible fascinating extensions of these possibilities must
await analysis by authorities on the various aspects of these
matters."
I have been browsing in Arther Zuckerman's book, "A
Jewish princedom in feudal France: 768-900" (1972). I find it
fascinating and erudite. But I am hardly one of the
"authorities on the various aspects of these matters" on whose
further research and commentary Wagner says we must await. Has
there been work in the past two decades which would tend to
confirm or cast doubt on the identity of Thierry and Makhir?
Alan,
To my knowledge the most committed adherent to this theory remains David
H. Kelley, who has (I am told by a mutual acquaintance) done a
considerable amount of onomastic research and theorizing on this question, and adheres to a modification of Zuckerman's original theory. However,
his work in this area remains, perhaps deliberately, unpublished. You
should at least read Kelley and Robert Charles Anderson, "Holy Blood,
Holy Grail: Two Reviews," _The Genealogist_ 3 (1982), 249-263, where
Kelley addresses this question briefly, presenting the theory as a much better idea than the crap dished up in the book _HBHG_ (much as I would
like to add Jesus to my pedigree). An earlier piece by Kelley, "Who
Descends from King David?," _Toledot: the Journal of Jewish Genealogy_ (Flushing, N.Y., Toledot Press) 1/3 (1977-8), 3-5, is not particularly informative.
Note that some of the connection between the Autun/Saint Guilhem family
and later dynasties are over-optimistically presented in ES, although the descent through Wulgrin of Angouleme is accepted as well-supported and
leads, of course, to the Plantaganets through Isabel.
Nat Taylor
On Sunday, June 12, 2022 at 7:51:40 PM UTC-7, adriancombe wrote:
On Friday, January 5, 1996 at 11:00:00 PM UTC-9, Nathaniel Lane Taylor wrote:
In article <v02120d00ad1351a0d4ac@[136.152.71.59]>, Alan B. Wilson wrote:
A line of descent can be traced from Thierry
(Theodoric), Count of Autun in the eighth century, to (among
many others) Eleanor of Aquitaine:
Anthony Wagner in "Pedigree and Progress" (1975) has a
brief note on "The Jewish kings or princes of Narbonne" (pp.
76-77). He refers to the work of Zuckerman who proposes an identification of Makhir, a Jewish prince of the house of David,
with Thierry (Theoderic). Apparently Zuckerman's thesis has
received favorable comment from Professors Salo W. Baron and
David H. Kelley. Wagner concludes "Further evaluation and
possible fascinating extensions of these possibilities must
await analysis by authorities on the various aspects of these matters."
I have been browsing in Arther Zuckerman's book, "A
Jewish princedom in feudal France: 768-900" (1972). I find it fascinating and erudite. But I am hardly one of the
"authorities on the various aspects of these matters" on whose
further research and commentary Wagner says we must await. Has
there been work in the past two decades which would tend to
confirm or cast doubt on the identity of Thierry and Makhir?
Europäische Stammtafeln https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europ%C3%A4ische_StammtafelnAlan,What is 'ES' in context?
To my knowledge the most committed adherent to this theory remains David H. Kelley, who has (I am told by a mutual acquaintance) done a considerable amount of onomastic research and theorizing on this question,
and adheres to a modification of Zuckerman's original theory. However, his work in this area remains, perhaps deliberately, unpublished. You should at least read Kelley and Robert Charles Anderson, "Holy Blood, Holy Grail: Two Reviews," _The Genealogist_ 3 (1982), 249-263, where Kelley addresses this question briefly, presenting the theory as a much better idea than the crap dished up in the book _HBHG_ (much as I would like to add Jesus to my pedigree). An earlier piece by Kelley, "Who Descends from King David?," _Toledot: the Journal of Jewish Genealogy_ (Flushing, N.Y., Toledot Press) 1/3 (1977-8), 3-5, is not particularly informative.
Note that some of the connection between the Autun/Saint Guilhem family and later dynasties are over-optimistically presented in ES, although the
descent through Wulgrin of Angouleme is accepted as well-supported and leads, of course, to the Plantaganets through Isabel.
Nat Taylor
Is Theuderic the same as Makhir?
My amateur answer is no.
Zuckerman says that Isaac, a jew sent by Charlemagne to the Caliph, is the same as William of Toulouse,
Despite this, this theory is still quite widespread on the net, and in printed
compendiums like David Hughes The British Chronicles 2007.
On Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at 7:04:53 AM UTC-7, mike davis wrote:with a false sense of reliability.
Is Theuderic the same as Makhir?
My amateur answer is no.
That is also the answer of the vast majority of professionals who have bothered to look. This is a case of classic fringe - too obscure, weird and couterfactual for many serious scholars to give it the time it woudl take to refute it, which leaves it
On Monday, June 13, 2022 at 3:58:03 AM UTC+1, pj.ev...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, June 12, 2022 at 7:51:40 PM UTC-7, adriancombe wrote:
On Friday, January 5, 1996 at 11:00:00 PM UTC-9, Nathaniel Lane Taylor wrote:Europäische Stammtafeln
In article <v02120d00ad1351a0d4ac@[136.152.71.59]>, Alan B. Wilson wrote: >>>>> A line of descent can be traced from ThierryWhat is 'ES' in context?
(Theodoric), Count of Autun in the eighth century, to (amongAlan,
many others) Eleanor of Aquitaine:
Anthony Wagner in "Pedigree and Progress" (1975) has a
brief note on "The Jewish kings or princes of Narbonne" (pp.
76-77). He refers to the work of Zuckerman who proposes an
identification of Makhir, a Jewish prince of the house of David,
with Thierry (Theoderic). Apparently Zuckerman's thesis has
received favorable comment from Professors Salo W. Baron and
David H. Kelley. Wagner concludes "Further evaluation and
possible fascinating extensions of these possibilities must
await analysis by authorities on the various aspects of these
matters."
I have been browsing in Arther Zuckerman's book, "A
Jewish princedom in feudal France: 768-900" (1972). I find it
fascinating and erudite. But I am hardly one of the
"authorities on the various aspects of these matters" on whose
further research and commentary Wagner says we must await. Has
there been work in the past two decades which would tend to
confirm or cast doubt on the identity of Thierry and Makhir?
To my knowledge the most committed adherent to this theory remains David >>>> H. Kelley, who has (I am told by a mutual acquaintance) done a
considerable amount of onomastic research and theorizing on this question, >>>> and adheres to a modification of Zuckerman's original theory. However, >>>> his work in this area remains, perhaps deliberately, unpublished. You
should at least read Kelley and Robert Charles Anderson, "Holy Blood,
Holy Grail: Two Reviews," _The Genealogist_ 3 (1982), 249-263, where
Kelley addresses this question briefly, presenting the theory as a much >>>> better idea than the crap dished up in the book _HBHG_ (much as I would >>>> like to add Jesus to my pedigree). An earlier piece by Kelley, "Who
Descends from King David?," _Toledot: the Journal of Jewish Genealogy_ >>>> (Flushing, N.Y., Toledot Press) 1/3 (1977-8), 3-5, is not particularly >>>> informative.
Note that some of the connection between the Autun/Saint Guilhem family >>>> and later dynasties are over-optimistically presented in ES, although the >>>> descent through Wulgrin of Angouleme is accepted as well-supported and >>>> leads, of course, to the Plantaganets through Isabel.
Nat Taylor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europ%C3%A4ische_Stammtafeln
This is a very old post, but it seems nobody really answered the question
Is Theuderic the same as Makhir?
My amateur answer is no. Mainly because Theuderic was a real person, and we dont know if this Makhir
even existed. Is it a jewish name? There was an argument that a charter of Magnarius Count of Narbonne has a
squiggle which means its actually Makhir. Seems ridiculous. I believe that Zuckerman claims that Theuderic,
William of Toulouse, and his son Bernard of Septimania were all Nasi of the Jews at Narbonne. A much later
romance calls William court de nez, but that means crooked nose due to an injury when he fought a giant [!] and
his son Bernard was called Naso in a rather strange text called the Epitaph Arsenii describing the struggles at the
court of Louis the Pious, where all the participants have nicknames.
On 16-Jun-22 10:12 AM, taf wrote:with a false sense of reliability.
On Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at 7:04:53 AM UTC-7, mike davis wrote:
Is Theuderic the same as Makhir?
My amateur answer is no.
That is also the answer of the vast majority of professionals who have bothered to look. This is a case of classic fringe - too obscure, weird and couterfactual for many serious scholars to give it the time it woudl take to refute it, which leaves it
Bernard Bachrach took the trouble apply commonsense on this matter in _American Historical Review_ 78 (1973) p 1441:
Zuckerman wrote in _A Jewish Princedom in Feudal France_ (192) p 263:
"Bernard was the most illustrious, but to some of his contemporaries the
most notorious, son of William of Toulouse and Gellone. In court circles
he was called 'Naso', not so much as a complimentary recollection of
Ovid but rather, as Dümmler assumes, in consequence of a prominent nose. Calmette accepts this explanation because the medieval epics refer consistently to his father as "William of the curved (or, clipped)
nose." It could of course not occur to either scholar that the
distinctive appellation of both father and son originated with the
Hebrew title 'Nasi' "Prince (of the Jews)." Bernard's relentless enemy Paschase Radbert stigmatizes Bernard as "that villain Naso summoned (to office) from the Spains," presumably a reference to Bernard's
association with the Spanish March".
So Bernard evidently had a prominent nose because his father was said to
have had a curved or clipped one - this illogical effusion from
crazytown was refuted by David Ganz in 'The "epitaphium Arsenii" and opposition to Louis the Pious', _Charlemagne's Heir: New Perspectives on
the Reign of Louis the Pious_ (1990)p. 542:
"Despite recent attempts to show that the name Naso, applied to Bernard
of Septimania, proves that he was a king of the Jews, it is clear that
the name refers to Ovid, who was known to have loved a queen and to have
been deservedly exiled. The oldest extant witness of Ovid's 'Tristia'
was copied at Corbie at the same time as our sole manuscript of the 'Epitaphium'."
On 16-Jun-22 1:04 PM, Peter Stewart wrote:
Zuckerman wrote in _A Jewish Princedom in Feudal France_ (192) p 263:
"Bernard was the most illustrious, but to some of his contemporaries
the most notorious, son of William of Toulouse and Gellone. In court
circles he was called 'Naso', not so much as a complimentary
recollection of Ovid but rather, as Dümmler assumes, in consequence of
a prominent nose. Calmette accepts this explanation because the
medieval epics refer consistently to his father as "William of the
curved (or, clipped) nose." It could of course not occur to either
scholar that the distinctive appellation of both father and son
originated with the Hebrew title 'Nasi' "Prince (of the Jews)."
Bernard's relentless enemy Paschase Radbert stigmatizes Bernard as
"that villain Naso summoned (to office) from the Spains," presumably a
reference to Bernard's association with the Spanish March".
So Bernard evidently had a prominent nose because his father was said
to have had a curved or clipped one - this illogical effusion from
crazytown was refuted by David Ganz in 'The "epitaphium Arsenii" and
opposition to Louis the Pious', _Charlemagne's Heir: New Perspectives
on the Reign of Louis the Pious_ (1990)p. 542:
"Despite recent attempts to show that the name Naso, applied to
Bernard of Septimania, proves that he was a king of the Jews, it is
clear that the name refers to Ovid, who was known to have loved a
queen and to have been deservedly exiled. The oldest extant witness of
Ovid's 'Tristia' was copied at Corbie at the same time as our sole
manuscript of the 'Epitaphium'."
Apologies for my stupidity - in reducing a long note about the satirical alias Naso for Bernard to a short one for the post above, I carelessly
and illogically misrepresented Zuckerman on this point.
He did not cite the opinions of Dümmler and Calmette as sequential
supports for his own theory but rather to reject them both in favour of
his absurd notion that the title Nasi became the pseudonym Naso.
My long note was about the obvious allusion to Ovid (full name Publius Ovidius Naso), whose poem 'Tristia' bemoaning his exile (perhaps for advocating non-marital lovemaking) was doubtless in mind when Bernard
was accused of adultery with Empress Judith. In this context Louis I's contemporary biographer Thegan tells us that Bernard was the emperor's godson, and elsewhere reports that Louis had a long nose (using the
phrase "naso longo") - so that in disregarding the link to Ovid and the
later literary claim that Bernard's father had a shortened nose, a
better guess for the origin of Naso would be the alleged usurpation by Bernard of the emperor's place in Judith's love-life.
On 17-Jun-22 9:08 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
On 16-Jun-22 1:04 PM, Peter Stewart wrote:
Zuckerman wrote in _A Jewish Princedom in Feudal France_ (192) p 263:
"Bernard was the most illustrious, but to some of his contemporaries
the most notorious, son of William of Toulouse and Gellone. In court
circles he was called 'Naso', not so much as a complimentary
recollection of Ovid but rather, as Dümmler assumes, in consequence of >> a prominent nose. Calmette accepts this explanation because the
medieval epics refer consistently to his father as "William of the
curved (or, clipped) nose." It could of course not occur to either
scholar that the distinctive appellation of both father and son
originated with the Hebrew title 'Nasi' "Prince (of the Jews)."
Bernard's relentless enemy Paschase Radbert stigmatizes Bernard as
"that villain Naso summoned (to office) from the Spains," presumably a
reference to Bernard's association with the Spanish March".
So Bernard evidently had a prominent nose because his father was said
to have had a curved or clipped one - this illogical effusion from
crazytown was refuted by David Ganz in 'The "epitaphium Arsenii" and
opposition to Louis the Pious', _Charlemagne's Heir: New Perspectives
on the Reign of Louis the Pious_ (1990)p. 542:
"Despite recent attempts to show that the name Naso, applied to
Bernard of Septimania, proves that he was a king of the Jews, it is
clear that the name refers to Ovid, who was known to have loved a
queen and to have been deservedly exiled. The oldest extant witness of
Ovid's 'Tristia' was copied at Corbie at the same time as our sole
manuscript of the 'Epitaphium'."
Apologies for my stupidity - in reducing a long note about the satirical alias Naso for Bernard to a short one for the post above, I carelessly
and illogically misrepresented Zuckerman on this point.
He did not cite the opinions of Dümmler and Calmette as sequential supports for his own theory but rather to reject them both in favour of his absurd notion that the title Nasi became the pseudonym Naso.
My long note was about the obvious allusion to Ovid (full name Publius Ovidius Naso), whose poem 'Tristia' bemoaning his exile (perhaps for advocating non-marital lovemaking) was doubtless in mind when BernardOn the matter of Bernard's having been a godson of Louis I - obviously
was accused of adultery with Empress Judith. In this context Louis I's contemporary biographer Thegan tells us that Bernard was the emperor's godson, and elsewhere reports that Louis had a long nose (using the
phrase "naso longo") - so that in disregarding the link to Ovid and the later literary claim that Bernard's father had a shortened nose, a
better guess for the origin of Naso would be the alleged usurpation by Bernard of the emperor's place in Judith's love-life.
not remotely credible in the heir to a Jewish dynasty - it should be
noted that Zuckerman indulged in deliberate obfuscation if not blatant deceit. On p. 122 of _Jewish Princedom in Feudal France_ he wrote:
"A contemporary describes Bernard as 'of royal stock' (de stirpe regali)
and adoptive son of the emperor."
The authority cited for this (in note 19) is Thegan, and the relevant
text is actually quoted although truncated as well as mistranslated -
this plainly states that Judith's accusers described Bernard as of royal lineage and the emperor's godson, all lies (in the MGH edition here (p
222):
https://www.dmgh.de/mgh_ss_rer_germ_64/index.htm#page/222/mode/1up, "dixerunt Iudith reginam violatam esse a quodam duce Bernhardo, qui erat
de stirpe regali et domni imperatoris ex sacro fonte baptismatis filius, mentientes omnia"). Zuckerman quoted this indirectly, from Calmette
rather than from a full edition, but left off the last two words.
One manuscript gives "filiolus" (godson) instead of "filius" (son), but whether or not the godson part was false the words "ex sacro fonte baptismatis" (from the holy font of baptism) leave no doubt that this
was not about adoption, and of course it would never have been claimed
by any sane courtier about a Jewish prince in the first place.
Peter Stewart
On Friday, June 17, 2022 at 7:12:06 AM UTC+1, pss...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
On 17-Jun-22 9:08 AM, Peter Stewart wrote:
On 16-Jun-22 1:04 PM, Peter Stewart wrote:On the matter of Bernard's having been a godson of Louis I - obviously
Zuckerman wrote in _A Jewish Princedom in Feudal France_ (192) p 263:
"Bernard was the most illustrious, but to some of his contemporaries
the most notorious, son of William of Toulouse and Gellone. In court
circles he was called 'Naso', not so much as a complimentary
recollection of Ovid but rather, as Dümmler assumes, in consequence of >>>> a prominent nose. Calmette accepts this explanation because the
medieval epics refer consistently to his father as "William of the
curved (or, clipped) nose." It could of course not occur to either
scholar that the distinctive appellation of both father and son
originated with the Hebrew title 'Nasi' "Prince (of the Jews)."
Bernard's relentless enemy Paschase Radbert stigmatizes Bernard as
"that villain Naso summoned (to office) from the Spains," presumably a >>>> reference to Bernard's association with the Spanish March".
So Bernard evidently had a prominent nose because his father was said
to have had a curved or clipped one - this illogical effusion from
crazytown was refuted by David Ganz in 'The "epitaphium Arsenii" and
opposition to Louis the Pious', _Charlemagne's Heir: New Perspectives
on the Reign of Louis the Pious_ (1990)p. 542:
"Despite recent attempts to show that the name Naso, applied to
Bernard of Septimania, proves that he was a king of the Jews, it is
clear that the name refers to Ovid, who was known to have loved a
queen and to have been deservedly exiled. The oldest extant witness of >>>> Ovid's 'Tristia' was copied at Corbie at the same time as our sole
manuscript of the 'Epitaphium'."
Apologies for my stupidity - in reducing a long note about the satirical >>> alias Naso for Bernard to a short one for the post above, I carelessly
and illogically misrepresented Zuckerman on this point.
He did not cite the opinions of Dümmler and Calmette as sequential
supports for his own theory but rather to reject them both in favour of
his absurd notion that the title Nasi became the pseudonym Naso.
My long note was about the obvious allusion to Ovid (full name Publius
Ovidius Naso), whose poem 'Tristia' bemoaning his exile (perhaps for
advocating non-marital lovemaking) was doubtless in mind when Bernard
was accused of adultery with Empress Judith. In this context Louis I's
contemporary biographer Thegan tells us that Bernard was the emperor's
godson, and elsewhere reports that Louis had a long nose (using the
phrase "naso longo") - so that in disregarding the link to Ovid and the
later literary claim that Bernard's father had a shortened nose, a
better guess for the origin of Naso would be the alleged usurpation by
Bernard of the emperor's place in Judith's love-life.
not remotely credible in the heir to a Jewish dynasty - it should be
noted that Zuckerman indulged in deliberate obfuscation if not blatant
deceit. On p. 122 of _Jewish Princedom in Feudal France_ he wrote:
"A contemporary describes Bernard as 'of royal stock' (de stirpe regali)
and adoptive son of the emperor."
The authority cited for this (in note 19) is Thegan, and the relevant
text is actually quoted although truncated as well as mistranslated -
this plainly states that Judith's accusers described Bernard as of royal
lineage and the emperor's godson, all lies (in the MGH edition here (p
222):
https://www.dmgh.de/mgh_ss_rer_germ_64/index.htm#page/222/mode/1up,
"dixerunt Iudith reginam violatam esse a quodam duce Bernhardo, qui erat
de stirpe regali et domni imperatoris ex sacro fonte baptismatis filius,
mentientes omnia"). Zuckerman quoted this indirectly, from Calmette
rather than from a full edition, but left off the last two words.
One manuscript gives "filiolus" (godson) instead of "filius" (son), but
whether or not the godson part was false the words "ex sacro fonte
baptismatis" (from the holy font of baptism) leave no doubt that this
was not about adoption, and of course it would never have been claimed
by any sane courtier about a Jewish prince in the first place.
Peter Stewart
I've been misled by these underhand tactics quite often. Many of these pretend histories like the Holy Blood, which although probably not the first is the most famous, often footnote a statement which begins with a
truth and then slides into fantasy, with a reputable source like Wallace Hadrills
Chronicle of Fredegar, which is clearly a deliberate ploy. The casual reader
will then believe that both the truth and the fantasy are supported by the quoted
source. Then this statement is referenced by later authors and so on, its a bit
like UFO writers.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 293 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 233:51:23 |
| Calls: | 6,624 |
| Files: | 12,172 |
| Messages: | 5,319,635 |