Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Cesare Patrignani

Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Cesare Patrignani » 15 nov 2004 19:51:16

Hello everybody!
in Davide Shamà site
(http://www.sardimpex.com/sanseverino/SANSEVERINO1.htm), speaking of the
origin of the Italian family Sanseverino, I read:
"Ruggero (+ 2-11-1023), norman knight, probably son of Crispino, lord of di
Arnes (Normandia), of the family of Rollone....."
So, what do you all think of a common origin of the Sanseverino family and
the the Dukes of Normandy?
Thank you very much indeed of your opinion on the matter.
Best regards.
Cesare

Leo van de Pas

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 15 nov 2004 21:41:01

Dear Cesare,

As far as I understand both have no known fathers, with Rollo they don't
even know from which country he originated. I think claiming a link can only
be speculation.
Best wishes
Leo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cesare Patrignani" <cepatri@tin.it>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 5:51 AM
Subject: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)


Hello everybody!
in Davide Shamà site
(http://www.sardimpex.com/sanseverino/SANSEVERINO1.htm), speaking of the
origin of the Italian family Sanseverino, I read:
"Ruggero (+ 2-11-1023), norman knight, probably son of Crispino, lord of
di
Arnes (Normandia), of the family of Rollone....."
So, what do you all think of a common origin of the Sanseverino family and
the the Dukes of Normandy?
Thank you very much indeed of your opinion on the matter.
Best regards.
Cesare




Peter Stewart

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 16 nov 2004 03:57:43

Cesare Patrignani wrote:
Hello everybody!
in Davide Shamà site
(http://www.sardimpex.com/sanseverino/SANSEVERINO1.htm), speaking of the
origin of the Italian family Sanseverino, I read:
"Ruggero (+ 2-11-1023), norman knight, probably son of Crispino, lord of di
Arnes (Normandia), of the family of Rollone....."
So, what do you all think of a common origin of the Sanseverino family and
the the Dukes of Normandy?
Thank you very much indeed of your opinion on the matter.

This has no value at all - it conflates two distinct specualtions, that
are equally without proof anyway.

The first recorded ancestor of the lords of Sanseverino was Turgisius,
or Troisio, who captured & held Rota in 1061.

This man's parentage is unknown. He was one of the many Norman
adventurers appearing in Italy around this time, and was said to be a
brother of Angerius from whom the Filangeri family (royal chamberlains
in Sicily) descended.

In a continuation of Erasmo Ricca's mid-19-century history of the
nobility of the Two Sicilies, Raffaele Alfonso Ricciardi claimed without
evidence that Troisio was descended from "Crispino, signore di Arnes",
allegedly a relative of Rollo.

In the mid-20th century Augusto Sanfelice di Monteforte {in _Ricerche
storico-critico-genealogiche, dal 758 al 1194, su i Longobardi dei
principati di Benevento, Capua e Salerno, su i Franchi di Savoia,
Lombardia, Spoleto e Salerno e su i Normanni di Francia, Italia
meridionale e Sicilia_] suggested, from onomastics alone, that Troisio
might have been descended from "Roger the Norman" (Rotgerius Normannus),
witness to a charter of Rainald, count of Burgundy (whom he thought to
be the father of Robert Guiscard's first wife, Alberada, rounding off
the Sicilian connection). This charter was dated 2 November 1023, which
has evidently become the date of Roger's death in your fanciful source
[see _Recueil des chartes de l'abbaye de Cluny_, edited by Auguste
Bernard & Alexandre Bruel, 6 vols (Paris, 1876-1903) III pp. 807-808 no.
2782].

Peter Stewart

Douglas Richardson

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson » 16 nov 2004 18:46:36

Peter Stewart <p m stewart@msn.com> wrote in message news:<H0emd.37611$K7.9824@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
This has no value at all - it conflates two distinct specualtions, that
are equally without proof anyway.

Peter Stewart

Dear Peter ~

I see you've had time to lay down your Latin dictionary for a minute
and post a new message attacking someone on the newsgroup. How
typical of you.

You've been asked repeatedly to provide examples of "cognatus" meaning
"brother-in-law" in post Conquest English records. You still have not
done so .... nor can you.

Waving a dictionary in the air doesn't make someone an expert. You're
a fraud and everyone on the newsgroup knows it now. Time to pack it
it, Peter.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 16 nov 2004 19:20:12

Douglas Richardson wrote:
Peter Stewart <p m stewart@msn.com> wrote in message news:<H0emd.37611$K7.9824@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

This has no value at all - it conflates two distinct specualtions, that
are equally without proof anyway.

I see you've had time to lay down your Latin dictionary for a minute
and post a new message attacking someone on the newsgroup. How
typical of you.

Lest this mislead anyone interested in the supposed Sanseverino
pedigree, there was nothing in Peter's message that was an attack on
anyone. He provided a disfavorable analysis of an unfounded pedigree.
There is nothing to the Sanseverino speculation, and Peter was simply
pointing that out.

Do you, Douglas, have anything to add on the Sanseverino pedigree?

taf

Peter Stewart

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 16 nov 2004 22:12:48

Douglas Richardson wrote:
Peter Stewart <p m stewart@msn.com> wrote in message news:<H0emd.37611$K7.9824@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

This has no value at all - it conflates two distinct specualtions, that
are equally without proof anyway.

Peter Stewart


Dear Peter ~

I see you've had time to lay down your Latin dictionary for a minute
and post a new message attacking someone on the newsgroup. How
typical of you.

You've been asked repeatedly to provide examples of "cognatus" meaning
"brother-in-law" in post Conquest English records. You still have not
done so .... nor can you.

I see - so Douglas Richardson CAN post proof that there is NO such "post
Conquest English" [sic] record available for posting. Then why doesn't he?

Maybe because it would be an immense amount of trouble for nothing, just
as it isn't worth my time to seek out another example of "cognatus"
referring to an in-law when the point I was making is already
substantiated without this.

Richardson wishes to propose that what was a plain and acceptable
meaning for St Jerome in the Vulgate and for the Venerable Bede in his
great history (considered adequate as exemplicification by the leading
lexicographers of today) nevertheless didn't and couldn't have carried
the same sense for anyone in 12th-century Chester. People who understand
something about the medieval world, and methods of education, know this
to be utterly preposterous. Yet Richardson posts NOTHING to substantiate
his peculiar theory that flatly counters received wisdom, while harping
demands that I should waste my time adding unnecessary evidence to a
small point in favour of the same.

Waving a dictionary in the air doesn't make someone an expert. You're
a fraud and everyone on the newsgroup knows it now. Time to pack it
it, Peter.

Dictionaries have a specific and valuable purpose, pinning down shades
of meaning and giving explicit or otherwise incontrovertible
illustrations of each: precisely the use that I made of the British
Academy's fine work.

And of course I didn't attack anyone about the Sanseverino matter.

Peter Stewart

Stewart Baldwin

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Stewart Baldwin » 17 nov 2004 07:27:05

On 16 Nov 2004 09:46:36 -0800, douglasrichardson@royalancestry.net
(Douglas Richardson) wrote:

Peter Stewart <p m stewart@msn.com> wrote in message news:<H0emd.37611$K7.9824@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

This has no value at all - it conflates two distinct specualtions, that
are equally without proof anyway.

Peter Stewart

Dear Peter ~

I see you've had time to lay down your Latin dictionary for a minute
and post a new message attacking someone on the newsgroup. How
typical of you.

Actually, the question asked by the original poster was:

"So, what do you all think of a common origin of the Sanseverino
family and the the Dukes of Normandy?"

The poster was clearly asking a question, and Peter replied with his
opinion (with which I agree) about the reliability of the information.
Peter's comment was quite obviously directed at the erroneous
information itself, and it goes way beyond ridiculous to suggest that
he was "attacking someone".

You've been asked repeatedly to provide examples of "cognatus" meaning
"brother-in-law" in post Conquest English records. You still have not
done so .... nor can you.

How is this relevant to the comments given in this thread? To answer
my own question, the fact that you have had a disagreement with Peter
on a completely unrelated matter in a different thread (where, by the
way, you are also wrong) has no relevance to the matters in this
thread.

Waving a dictionary in the air doesn't make someone an expert. You're
a fraud and everyone on the newsgroup knows it now. Time to pack it
it, Peter.

So, what was the point of this posting? Do you believe that there was
a common origin of the Sanseverino family and the the Dukes of
Normandy? After all, that was the question. If you do believe thus,
then why not post the details (and evidence)? (On the other hand, if
you agree with Peter's statement that the claim has no value, would
not members of the group be justified in thinking that your only
reason for posting was to "attack someone"?) Do you have anything to
offer which is relevant to this thread?

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Given the rest of the message, should those two words be believed?

Stewart Baldwin

P.S. It seems to me that the well-informed members of this newsgroup
(at least the ones without an axe to grind) know quite well that Peter
has clearly shown himself to be an expert in medieval genealogy, based
on his many excellent postings, and the high quality and thoroughness
of the documentation which he routinely provides.

Peter Stewart

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 17 nov 2004 08:57:42

Stewart Baldwin wrote:

<chomp>

P.S. It seems to me that the well-informed members of this newsgroup
(at least the ones without an axe to grind) know quite well that Peter
has clearly shown himself to be an expert in medieval genealogy, based
on his many excellent postings, and the high quality and thoroughness
of the documentation which he routinely provides.

Thank you kindly, Stewart - to be as fair as I can to Douglas
Richardson, I have ground an axe in his face on many occasions & it's
not to be wondered at that he should try to return this favour. I don't
have a right to complain about the occurrence of abuse from him, but
only about its nature.

I suppose he couldn't wait to find a better pretext, but his original
request for an example of "cognatus" meaning "brother-in-law" was
perfectly reasonable.

Obviously he isn't familiar enough with sources to realise that
self-explanatory instances of such a usage, like that from Bede which I
quoted, are extremely rare, and that his repeated demand for later
examples is absurd because of the inevitable maintenance of the various
senses of Latin words, especially as used in St Jerome's Bible.

100 examples wouldn't help, since these couldn't prove one way or the
other what the specific use in question actually meant - and anyway we
know that Richardson wouldn't acknowledge any evidence to the detriment
of his own false proposition, as with his ignoring my posted examples of
"avunculus" for a paternal uncle.

He calls me a fraud for relying on the expertise of the British
Academy's committee of lexicographers for the range of meaning attached
to a word in medieval Latin. I fail to see how any dishonesty can be
read into this.

And I don't know what gallery Richardson thinks he is playing to - as
far as I'm aware, SGM doesn't have more than one participant silly
enough to applaud this latest nonsense, and that one is himself. While
one hand writes, the other claps....

Peter Stewart

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 17 nov 2004 09:40:07

In message of 17 Nov, Stewart Baldwin <sbaldw@mindspring.com> wrote:

On 16 Nov 2004 09:46:36 -0800, douglasrichardson@royalancestry.net
(Douglas Richardson) wrote:

<snip a non-relevant exchange with Peter Stewart>

You're a fraud and everyone on the newsgroup knows it now. Time to
pack it it, Peter.

P.S. It seems to me that the well-informed members of this newsgroup
(at least the ones without an axe to grind) know quite well that Peter
has clearly shown himself to be an expert in medieval genealogy, based
on his many excellent postings, and the high quality and thoroughness
of the documentation which he routinely provides.

I shall come out and say that I thoroughly agree with Stewart on this.
What little I know of academics and scholarship, and a tour round four
universities over a period of eight years might just be relevant, says
to me that Peter is one of the best.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Pierre Aronax

Re: Sanseverino and Rollo (of Normandy)

Legg inn av Pierre Aronax » 20 nov 2004 16:43:26

douglasrichardson@royalancestry.net (Douglas Richardson) wrote in message news:<2619efc9.0411160946.49f9c782@posting.google.com>...
Peter Stewart <p m stewart@msn.com> wrote in message news:<H0emd.37611$K7.9824@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

This has no value at all - it conflates two distinct specualtions, that
are equally without proof anyway.

Peter Stewart

Dear Peter ~

I see you've had time to lay down your Latin dictionary for a minute
and post a new message attacking someone on the newsgroup. How
typical of you.

You've been asked repeatedly to provide examples of "cognatus" meaning
"brother-in-law" in post Conquest English records. You still have not
done so .... nor can you.

Speaking of reading Latin and of unanswered questions, I am still
interested by this one to which Douglas Richardson did not reply:

http://groups.google.fr/groups?hl=fr&lr ... 7.noos.net

Pierre

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»