Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
taf

Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 23 sep 2007 03:04:54

Thanks to Nat Taylor, I have recently read through a new article on
the subject of Zaida, royal mistress and (as some would have it) queen
of Alfonso VI of Leon and Castile.

To review, Alonso had a complex marriage history. The early-12th
century Bishop Pelayo of Oviedo wrote that Alfonso married Agnes of
Aquitaine, Constance of Burgundy, Bertha of Tuscany, Isabel, and
Beatrice, and further had children by mistresses Jimena and Zaida, a
moorish princess who was baptized as Isabel. Several questions remain
about these women, their parentage and identities. Agnes can be
definitively placed as daughter of Guy-Geoffrey alias William VIII of
Aquitaine by his second wife, and Constance has always been clearly
identified as daughter of Robert I, Duke of Burgundy. Zaida is said by
the Bishop to be daughter of the deposed ruler of Seville, but muslim
sources make it clear that she was actually his daughter-in-law. At
various times, various theories have been proposed regarding the
others, while the fate of Agnes has also been subject to debate.

The problem with Agnes is that Orderic has her marrying Helias, Count
of Maine, 30 years after she is last recorded as Alfonso's wife (22
May 1077). This would require a divorce followed by a long seclusion,
or else an intermediate marriage that has escaped notice. As further
evidence for divorce, authors have cited an undated papal latter
thought to be from the late 1070s or earliest 1080s that condemns
Alfonso for continuing in an incestuous so-called marriage.
Presumably, it is argued, Alfonso divorced Agnes to satisfy the pope.
The alternative explanation is that Orderic was mistaken, and that
Helias married someone else. These authors would argue that the papal
letter refers not to his old marriage, but to his new one to
Constance, contracted prior to 8 May 1080. At least this latter part
does seem to be the case, as the letter decries the behavior of a
certain Clunaic monk who is known to have been instrumental in
arranging the marriage to Constance, and Constance was a near relative
of Agnes (and if it was the relationship of Constance to Agnes that
was the problem, it would suggest that Alfonso's marriage to Agnes was
never annulled). It hasn't helped that Agnes had a half-sister who
was also an Iberian queen, and the death date of the latter has been
erroneously given to the former by some authors.

Constance last appears 2 Sep. 1093, and is absent by 25 October of
that year.

With regard to Bertha, Szabolcs de Vajay wrote an article dedicate to
her identification, but I have been unable to get hold of a copy to
see what he concludes. I have seen nothing else, other than some vague
speculation. Bertha first appears 28 Apr. 1095 (as Alberta) and last
on 17 Nov. 1099 (Berta), being dead by 15 Jan. 1100.

By 14 May 1100, Alfonso is married to Isabel(/Elizabeth - the names
were not distinct at the time), and he continues to appear with a
queen of that name through 1107. She is called daughter of Luis, King
of France, by Lucas de Tuy, writing a century after bishop Pelayo, but
at the time she would have been born, no Louis had reigned in France
since the last of the Carolingians, nor was the name Isabel used for a
royal daughter until after she was married. While this identification
also appears on a tomb memorial, it was clearly carved in a later
hand, and both accounts giving her this parentage are generally
dismissed. Reilly hypothesized that she was daughter of WIlliam,
Count of Burgundy (but on nothing more than that it would be
consistent with the pattern of political alliances Alfonso operated
in). Most intriguing, because she was mother of a daughter with known
descent, some modern authors have identified her with mistress Zaida,
even though bishop Pelayo makes no indication that this is the case.

As to Beatrice, she likewise has been subject to unsupported
speculation, most notably by Reilly, who suggested she was niece of
Agnes. (One does wonder that if a pope went apoplectic over Alfonso
marrying a distant cousin of Agnes in Constance, it would not raise a
stink to marry her neice, but this does allow one to suggest that
Orderic's only mistake was in the name of Alfonso's wife marrying
Helias.)

Jimena has drawn much more attention, there being abounding theories
regarding her. Traditionally she has been called daughter of count
Nuno Rodriguez by a granddaughter of one of Vermudo II's bastards.
However, she was actually Jimena Munoz, daughter of a Munio (on the
other hand, Nuno Rodriguez was actually named Munio Rodriguez), and it
is clear that her identification with this family is of late origin.
Quintana Prieto suggested that she was daughter of an otherwise
obscure Munio Munoz, yet this doesn't seem to match with her
description as being of a most-noble family. Canal Sanchez-Pagin
looked at the 'most noble' Munios in the prior generation and found
three who could be so described. By process of elimination (one,
Munio Munoz, names all of his children in a charter, while another
seems not fo fit for chronological reasons), he concludes that she was
daughter of count Munio Gonzalez, who he also makes grandfather of
counts Pedro and Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara (this last appears not to be
the case - their father is clearly called Gonzalo Nunez, not Munoz).
There are also two works that I have been unable to access, one by
Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, which concludes that she was daughter of a
Count Munio Munoz (although I do not know the basis, or precisely
which man of this name is being suggested), and secondly, Salazar y
Acha published a paper in the same publication as the Vajay article on
Bertha, and I have yet to see it as well. However, recently a new
article by Canal clarified Vajay's conclusion. While not specifically
naming Jimena, he cites Salazar as indicating that count Rodrigo
Munoz, thought by Canal to be brother of Jimena, was son of Munio
Rodriguez and descendant of Vermudo II. Thus, it looks like Salazar
has returned to the traditional descent, although his reasoning
remains to be seen.

This brings us back to Zaida and the subject of the newly acquired
Salazar y Acha work. In the same article that he discussed Jimena, he
also concluded that Zaida and Queen Isabel were one and the same. His
arguments had to do with chronology, family politics, and one
particularly interesting document (although I have not seen the
original, his new article reviews his arguments from the old). Sancho
is absent from royal documents prior to the marriage to Isabel, and
then immediately appears. This coincidence of timing suggests to
Salazar that the two are related - that the marriage to Isabel
legitimated Sancho, allowing him to become the heir. That he did
become the heir is beyond dispute, and Salazar also questions whether
an unlinked queen Isabel would have permitted her own potential
children to be superseded (I have to wonder if Alfonso would have
cared what his wife thought of the matter). Finally, there is a
donation charter found in the Tumbo de Lorenzana, which is confirmed
by Alfonso, "eiusdemque Helisabeth regina sub maritali copula
legaliter aderente". This suggests that Isabel was once Alfonso's
mistress, which points directly to Zaida/Isabel. However, this is
somewhat odd, as by this time (1106) Alfonso and Isabel had been
married for 6 years, leading Reilly to conclude that there were two
queens Isabel in succession, and that only shortly before this 1106
confirmation did he marry Zaida.

In his new article, Salazar adds several novel points, and then drops
a bombshell for the very end. To refute Reilly's 'two Isabels'
theory, he cites a charter of Urraca, which names her step-mothers
Berta, Isabel, and Beatrix, meaning that both she and Bishop Pelayo
would have had to leave out one Isabel. He also points to the
chronology between marriages, taking las and first appearance as an
indication. We see three years between Agnes and Constance, and one
and a half between Constance and Bertha, but less than six months
between Bertha and Isabel. He concludes that this left insufficient
time for the arranging of a political union, but is perfectly
consistent with Alfonso simply marrying his mistress. Finally, he
draws attention to a previously overlooked charter in which a grant is
made by Alfonso, "cum uxore mea Elisabet et filio nostro Sancio". It
is clear that he is not using the 'royal we', as he does not call
Isabel "our wife" but "my wife". This would seem prima facie evidence
that Sancho, known to be son of Zaida, was son of queen Isabel,
meaning that she and Zaida were one and the same. (It would, however,
be useful to see how he refers to Urraca, Elvira and Teresa under
similar contexts).

If one accepts that Salazar had 1) refuted Reilly's suggestion, and 2)
shown that Sancho was son of Queen Isabel, it would indicate that the
Infantas Elvira, wife of Roger, King of Sicily, and Sancha, known
daughters of Queen Isabel, are daughters of the moor Zaida. This is of
particular interest with regard to Elvira, as she has numerous
documented descendants (while lines from Sancha are found across the
internet, none of them are factual).

taf

Refs:

Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. Jimena Munoz, Amiga de Alfonso VI.
Anuario de Estudios Medievales. 21:11-40 (1991).
Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. El conde Gómez González de
Candespina: su historia y su familia.Anuario de estudios medievales.
Nº 33:37-68 (2003)
Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, Luiz. A Ascendencia de D. Afonso Henriques.
Raizes & Memorias, vols. 2 through 8, various pages. (relevant part
not seen)
Quintana Prieto, Augusto. Jimena Muñiz, madre de Doña Teresa de
Portugal. Revista Portuguesa de Historia. 12:223-80 (1969).
Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. De nuevo sobre la mora Zaida. Hidalguía: la
revista de genealogía, nobleza y armas. Nº. 321:225-242 (2007).
Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. Contribución al estudio del reinado de
Alfonso VI de Castilla: algunas aclaraciones sobre su política
matrimonial. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y
Genealogía. Nº. 2:299-336 (1992-3) (not seen)
Vajay, Szabolcs de. Reflexiones en torno a Berta, tercera mujer de
Alfonso VI. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y
Genealogía. Nº. 2:337-344 (1992-3) (not seen)

taf

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 23 sep 2007 03:52:00

On Sep 22, 7:31 pm, "Merilyn Pedrick" <pedri...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
This is fascinating Todd. Can we now begin to speculate about Isabel/Zaida
s ancestors?

Nothing to stop you, but I know of nothing more recent than the 19th
century that provides the slightest hint, other than the discredited
account of Bishop Pelayo, which most have followed. The place to
start is:

Levi-Provencal, Evariste. La mora Zaida, femme d'Alphonse VI de
Castille, et leur fils l'Infant don Sancho. Hesperius, 18: 1-8, 200-1
(1934).

I have not seen it, but it apparently reports the discovery of Zaida
in Muslim works.

taf

Nathaniel Taylor

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Nathaniel Taylor » 23 sep 2007 04:06:06

In article <mailman.2656.1190514749.7287.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>,
"Merilyn Pedrick" <pedricks@ozemail.com.au> wrote:

This is fascinating Todd. Can we now begin to speculate about Isabel/
Zaida's ancestors?

I have read of no source stating who her ancestors were, other than the
secondary & tertiary sources which bark up the wrong tree of her
father-in-law, the taifa king of Seville. The interest in Salazar
Acha's new article is that it showcases a *likely* infusion of Muslim
ancestry into the European noble gene pool--something which has proved
very elusive.

But even if the Zaida - Isabel identity were now to be generally
accepted, her role as a Muslim gateway remains purely abstract, since
there is no concrete information on her ancestry. Although Pelayo of
Oviedo is clear that she had been a Muslim and was converted to
Christianity, she was not necessarily of Muslim (let alone of
aristocratic Arab) ancestry.

As for modern descents -- in various old threads here the earliest
descent path to England currently identified is that via Jacquette de
Luxembourg & the Woodvilles. There may be other interesting paths of
diffusion of Zaida's (apparent) Sicilian descendants in 13th &
14th-century Continental Europe.

Nat Taylor
http://www.nltaylor.net

Leo van de Pas

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 23 sep 2007 04:08:54

A long time ago I was told that Zaida was the widow of Fath al-Mamun of
Cordoba, he died March 1091 and was a son of al-Mutamid, Emir of Seville,
but no parents for Zaida.

Al-Mutamid, Emir of Seville is reputedly a descendant of the Prophet
Mohammed, and _if_ Zaida had been his daughter Mohammed would a little bit
more likely be the ancestor of many Western people.

Many years ago I read (do not know anymore where) that during WWII pamphlets
were distributed in Muslim countries which displayed a lineage for King
George VI as a descendant of Mohammed and was intended to inspire the Muslim
world to come to the aid of "their cousin". Wish _that_ lineage was shown.
Probably it was the (wrong) one via Zaida.

With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Merilyn Pedrick" <pedricks@ozemail.com.au>
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)




This is fascinating Todd. Can we now begin to speculate about Isabel/Zaida
s ancestors?

Merilyn





-------Original Message-------



From: taf

Date: 09/23/07 11:35:24

To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com

Subject: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)



Thanks to Nat Taylor, I have recently read through a new article on

the subject of Zaida, royal mistress and (as some would have it) queen

of Alfonso VI of Leon and Castile.



To review, Alonso had a complex marriage history. The early-12th

century Bishop Pelayo of Oviedo wrote that Alfonso married Agnes of

Aquitaine, Constance of Burgundy, Bertha of Tuscany, Isabel, and

Beatrice, and further had children by mistresses Jimena and Zaida, a

moorish princess who was baptized as Isabel. Several questions remain

about these women, their parentage and identities. Agnes can be

definitively placed as daughter of Guy-Geoffrey alias William VIII of

Aquitaine by his second wife, and Constance has always been clearly

identified as daughter of Robert I, Duke of Burgundy. Zaida is said by

the Bishop to be daughter of the deposed ruler of Seville, but muslim

sources make it clear that she was actually his daughter-in-law. At

various times, various theories have been proposed regarding the

others, while the fate of Agnes has also been subject to debate.



The problem with Agnes is that Orderic has her marrying Helias, Count

of Maine, 30 years after she is last recorded as Alfonso's wife (22

May 1077). This would require a divorce followed by a long seclusion,

or else an intermediate marriage that has escaped notice. As further

evidence for divorce, authors have cited an undated papal latter

thought to be from the late 1070s or earliest 1080s that condemns

Alfonso for continuing in an incestuous so-called marriage.

Presumably, it is argued, Alfonso divorced Agnes to satisfy the pope.

The alternative explanation is that Orderic was mistaken, and that

Helias married someone else. These authors would argue that the papal

letter refers not to his old marriage, but to his new one to

Constance, contracted prior to 8 May 1080. At least this latter part

does seem to be the case, as the letter decries the behavior of a

certain Clunaic monk who is known to have been instrumental in

arranging the marriage to Constance, and Constance was a near relative

of Agnes (and if it was the relationship of Constance to Agnes that

was the problem, it would suggest that Alfonso's marriage to Agnes was

never annulled). It hasn't helped that Agnes had a half-sister who

was also an Iberian queen, and the death date of the latter has been

erroneously given to the former by some authors.



Constance last appears 2 Sep. 1093, and is absent by 25 October of

that year.



With regard to Bertha, Szabolcs de Vajay wrote an article dedicate to

her identification, but I have been unable to get hold of a copy to

see what he concludes. I have seen nothing else, other than some vague

speculation. Bertha first appears 28 Apr. 1095 (as Alberta) and last

on 17 Nov. 1099 (Berta), being dead by 15 Jan. 1100.



By 14 May 1100, Alfonso is married to Isabel(/Elizabeth - the names

were not distinct at the time), and he continues to appear with a

queen of that name through 1107. She is called daughter of Luis, King

of France, by Lucas de Tuy, writing a century after bishop Pelayo, but

at the time she would have been born, no Louis had reigned in France

since the last of the Carolingians, nor was the name Isabel used for a

royal daughter until after she was married. While this identification

also appears on a tomb memorial, it was clearly carved in a later

hand, and both accounts giving her this parentage are generally

dismissed. Reilly hypothesized that she was daughter of WIlliam,

Count of Burgundy (but on nothing more than that it would be

consistent with the pattern of political alliances Alfonso operated

in). Most intriguing, because she was mother of a daughter with known

descent, some modern authors have identified her with mistress Zaida,

even though bishop Pelayo makes no indication that this is the case.



As to Beatrice, she likewise has been subject to unsupported

speculation, most notably by Reilly, who suggested she was niece of

Agnes. (One does wonder that if a pope went apoplectic over Alfonso

marrying a distant cousin of Agnes in Constance, it would not raise a

stink to marry her neice, but this does allow one to suggest that

Orderic's only mistake was in the name of Alfonso's wife marrying

Helias.)



Jimena has drawn much more attention, there being abounding theories

regarding her. Traditionally she has been called daughter of count

Nuno Rodriguez by a granddaughter of one of Vermudo II's bastards.

However, she was actually Jimena Munoz, daughter of a Munio (on the

other hand, Nuno Rodriguez was actually named Munio Rodriguez), and it

is clear that her identification with this family is of late origin.

Quintana Prieto suggested that she was daughter of an otherwise

obscure Munio Munoz, yet this doesn't seem to match with her

description as being of a most-noble family. Canal Sanchez-Pagin

looked at the 'most noble' Munios in the prior generation and found

three who could be so described. By process of elimination (one,

Munio Munoz, names all of his children in a charter, while another

seems not fo fit for chronological reasons), he concludes that she was

daughter of count Munio Gonzalez, who he also makes grandfather of

counts Pedro and Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara (this last appears not to be

the case - their father is clearly called Gonzalo Nunez, not Munoz).

There are also two works that I have been unable to access, one by

Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, which concludes that she was daughter of a

Count Munio Munoz (although I do not know the basis, or precisely

which man of this name is being suggested), and secondly, Salazar y

Acha published a paper in the same publication as the Vajay article on

Bertha, and I have yet to see it as well. However, recently a new

article by Canal clarified Vajay's conclusion. While not specifically

naming Jimena, he cites Salazar as indicating that count Rodrigo

Munoz, thought by Canal to be brother of Jimena, was son of Munio

Rodriguez and descendant of Vermudo II. Thus, it looks like Salazar

has returned to the traditional descent, although his reasoning

remains to be seen.



This brings us back to Zaida and the subject of the newly acquired

Salazar y Acha work. In the same article that he discussed Jimena, he

also concluded that Zaida and Queen Isabel were one and the same. His

arguments had to do with chronology, family politics, and one

particularly interesting document (although I have not seen the

original, his new article reviews his arguments from the old). Sancho

is absent from royal documents prior to the marriage to Isabel, and

then immediately appears. This coincidence of timing suggests to

Salazar that the two are related - that the marriage to Isabel

legitimated Sancho, allowing him to become the heir. That he did

become the heir is beyond dispute, and Salazar also questions whether

an unlinked queen Isabel would have permitted her own potential

children to be superseded (I have to wonder if Alfonso would have

cared what his wife thought of the matter). Finally, there is a

donation charter found in the Tumbo de Lorenzana, which is confirmed

by Alfonso, "eiusdemque Helisabeth regina sub maritali copula

legaliter aderente". This suggests that Isabel was once Alfonso's

mistress, which points directly to Zaida/Isabel. However, this is

somewhat odd, as by this time (1106) Alfonso and Isabel had been

married for 6 years, leading Reilly to conclude that there were two

queens Isabel in succession, and that only shortly before this 1106

confirmation did he marry Zaida.



In his new article, Salazar adds several novel points, and then drops

a bombshell for the very end. To refute Reilly's 'two Isabels'

theory, he cites a charter of Urraca, which names her step-mothers

Berta, Isabel, and Beatrix, meaning that both she and Bishop Pelayo

would have had to leave out one Isabel. He also points to the

chronology between marriages, taking las and first appearance as an

indication. We see three years between Agnes and Constance, and one

and a half between Constance and Bertha, but less than six months

between Bertha and Isabel. He concludes that this left insufficient

time for the arranging of a political union, but is perfectly

consistent with Alfonso simply marrying his mistress. Finally, he

draws attention to a previously overlooked charter in which a grant is

made by Alfonso, "cum uxore mea Elisabet et filio nostro Sancio". It

is clear that he is not using the 'royal we', as he does not call

Isabel "our wife" but "my wife". This would seem prima facie evidence

that Sancho, known to be son of Zaida, was son of queen Isabel,

meaning that she and Zaida were one and the same. (It would, however,

be useful to see how he refers to Urraca, Elvira and Teresa under

similar contexts).



If one accepts that Salazar had 1) refuted Reilly's suggestion, and 2)

shown that Sancho was son of Queen Isabel, it would indicate that the

Infantas Elvira, wife of Roger, King of Sicily, and Sancha, known

daughters of Queen Isabel, are daughters of the moor Zaida. This is of

particular interest with regard to Elvira, as she has numerous

documented descendants (while lines from Sancha are found across the

internet, none of them are factual).



taf



Refs:



Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. Jimena Munoz, Amiga de Alfonso VI.

Anuario de Estudios Medievales. 21:11-40 (1991).

Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. El conde Gómez González de

Candespina: su historia y su familia.Anuario de estudios medievales.

Nº 33:37-68 (2003)

Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, Luiz. A Ascendencia de D. Afonso Henriques.

Raizes & Memorias, vols. 2 through 8, various pages. (relevant part

not seen)

Quintana Prieto, Augusto. Jimena Muñiz, madre de Doña Teresa de

Portugal. Revista Portuguesa de Historia. 12:223-80 (1969).

Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. De nuevo sobre la mora Zaida. Hidalguía: la

revista de genealogía, nobleza y armas. Nº. 321:225-242 (2007).

Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. Contribución al estudio del reinado de

Alfonso VI de Castilla: algunas aclaraciones sobre su política

matrimonial. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y

Genealogía. Nº. 2:299-336 (1992-3) (not seen)

Vajay, Szabolcs de. Reflexiones en torno a Berta, tercera mujer de

Alfonso VI. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y

Genealogía. Nº. 2:337-344 (1992-3) (not seen)





-------------------------------

To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message



-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Leo van de Pas

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 23 sep 2007 04:22:38

See below

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathaniel Taylor" <nathanieltaylor@earthlink.net>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)


In article <mailman.2656.1190514749.7287.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>,
"Merilyn Pedrick" <pedricks@ozemail.com.au> wrote:

snip
But even if the Zaida - Isabel identity were now to be generally
accepted, her role as a Muslim gateway remains purely abstract, since
there is no concrete information on her ancestry. Although Pelayo of
Oviedo is clear that she had been a Muslim and was converted to
Christianity, she was not necessarily of Muslim (let alone of
aristocratic Arab) ancestry.
snip
Nat Taylor
http://www.nltaylor.net

Dear Nat,


Pelayo tells she had been a Muslim, converted to Christianity. To me this
implies the was born a Muslim, had Muslim parents and her first husband was
very much a Muslim. Being a Muslim means belonging to a religion, not a
race. But lets allow Muslim being a race, surely she belonged to the upper
class of Muslim Spanish families, and therefor most likely be of Muslim
origins race/and religion? Then surely we can say that Zaida's descendants
had Muslim ancestors? Even if we do not know any names?

Another such situation I find fascinating is "a" mistress of Fadrique
Alfonso of Castile (bastard of Alfonso XI) she is known as Paloma. a Jewish
girl daughter of Gedaliah ben Shlomo. She is an ancestor of Ferdinand "the
Catholic" and many more interesting people all the way to the present.
In her case we have a name for her father, surely we can say there is a
Jewish origin for all her descendants?

With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia

Merilyn Pedrick

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Merilyn Pedrick » 23 sep 2007 04:33:02

This is fascinating Todd. Can we now begin to speculate about Isabel/Zaida
s ancestors?

Merilyn





-------Original Message-------



From: taf

Date: 09/23/07 11:35:24

To: gen-medieval@rootsweb.com

Subject: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)



Thanks to Nat Taylor, I have recently read through a new article on

the subject of Zaida, royal mistress and (as some would have it) queen

of Alfonso VI of Leon and Castile.



To review, Alonso had a complex marriage history. The early-12th

century Bishop Pelayo of Oviedo wrote that Alfonso married Agnes of

Aquitaine, Constance of Burgundy, Bertha of Tuscany, Isabel, and

Beatrice, and further had children by mistresses Jimena and Zaida, a

moorish princess who was baptized as Isabel. Several questions remain

about these women, their parentage and identities. Agnes can be

definitively placed as daughter of Guy-Geoffrey alias William VIII of

Aquitaine by his second wife, and Constance has always been clearly

identified as daughter of Robert I, Duke of Burgundy. Zaida is said by

the Bishop to be daughter of the deposed ruler of Seville, but muslim

sources make it clear that she was actually his daughter-in-law. At

various times, various theories have been proposed regarding the

others, while the fate of Agnes has also been subject to debate.



The problem with Agnes is that Orderic has her marrying Helias, Count

of Maine, 30 years after she is last recorded as Alfonso's wife (22

May 1077). This would require a divorce followed by a long seclusion,

or else an intermediate marriage that has escaped notice. As further

evidence for divorce, authors have cited an undated papal latter

thought to be from the late 1070s or earliest 1080s that condemns

Alfonso for continuing in an incestuous so-called marriage.

Presumably, it is argued, Alfonso divorced Agnes to satisfy the pope.

The alternative explanation is that Orderic was mistaken, and that

Helias married someone else. These authors would argue that the papal

letter refers not to his old marriage, but to his new one to

Constance, contracted prior to 8 May 1080. At least this latter part

does seem to be the case, as the letter decries the behavior of a

certain Clunaic monk who is known to have been instrumental in

arranging the marriage to Constance, and Constance was a near relative

of Agnes (and if it was the relationship of Constance to Agnes that

was the problem, it would suggest that Alfonso's marriage to Agnes was

never annulled). It hasn't helped that Agnes had a half-sister who

was also an Iberian queen, and the death date of the latter has been

erroneously given to the former by some authors.



Constance last appears 2 Sep. 1093, and is absent by 25 October of

that year.



With regard to Bertha, Szabolcs de Vajay wrote an article dedicate to

her identification, but I have been unable to get hold of a copy to

see what he concludes. I have seen nothing else, other than some vague

speculation. Bertha first appears 28 Apr. 1095 (as Alberta) and last

on 17 Nov. 1099 (Berta), being dead by 15 Jan. 1100.



By 14 May 1100, Alfonso is married to Isabel(/Elizabeth - the names

were not distinct at the time), and he continues to appear with a

queen of that name through 1107. She is called daughter of Luis, King

of France, by Lucas de Tuy, writing a century after bishop Pelayo, but

at the time she would have been born, no Louis had reigned in France

since the last of the Carolingians, nor was the name Isabel used for a

royal daughter until after she was married. While this identification

also appears on a tomb memorial, it was clearly carved in a later

hand, and both accounts giving her this parentage are generally

dismissed. Reilly hypothesized that she was daughter of WIlliam,

Count of Burgundy (but on nothing more than that it would be

consistent with the pattern of political alliances Alfonso operated

in). Most intriguing, because she was mother of a daughter with known

descent, some modern authors have identified her with mistress Zaida,

even though bishop Pelayo makes no indication that this is the case.



As to Beatrice, she likewise has been subject to unsupported

speculation, most notably by Reilly, who suggested she was niece of

Agnes. (One does wonder that if a pope went apoplectic over Alfonso

marrying a distant cousin of Agnes in Constance, it would not raise a

stink to marry her neice, but this does allow one to suggest that

Orderic's only mistake was in the name of Alfonso's wife marrying

Helias.)



Jimena has drawn much more attention, there being abounding theories

regarding her. Traditionally she has been called daughter of count

Nuno Rodriguez by a granddaughter of one of Vermudo II's bastards.

However, she was actually Jimena Munoz, daughter of a Munio (on the

other hand, Nuno Rodriguez was actually named Munio Rodriguez), and it

is clear that her identification with this family is of late origin.

Quintana Prieto suggested that she was daughter of an otherwise

obscure Munio Munoz, yet this doesn't seem to match with her

description as being of a most-noble family. Canal Sanchez-Pagin

looked at the 'most noble' Munios in the prior generation and found

three who could be so described. By process of elimination (one,

Munio Munoz, names all of his children in a charter, while another

seems not fo fit for chronological reasons), he concludes that she was

daughter of count Munio Gonzalez, who he also makes grandfather of

counts Pedro and Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara (this last appears not to be

the case - their father is clearly called Gonzalo Nunez, not Munoz).

There are also two works that I have been unable to access, one by

Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, which concludes that she was daughter of a

Count Munio Munoz (although I do not know the basis, or precisely

which man of this name is being suggested), and secondly, Salazar y

Acha published a paper in the same publication as the Vajay article on

Bertha, and I have yet to see it as well. However, recently a new

article by Canal clarified Vajay's conclusion. While not specifically

naming Jimena, he cites Salazar as indicating that count Rodrigo

Munoz, thought by Canal to be brother of Jimena, was son of Munio

Rodriguez and descendant of Vermudo II. Thus, it looks like Salazar

has returned to the traditional descent, although his reasoning

remains to be seen.



This brings us back to Zaida and the subject of the newly acquired

Salazar y Acha work. In the same article that he discussed Jimena, he

also concluded that Zaida and Queen Isabel were one and the same. His

arguments had to do with chronology, family politics, and one

particularly interesting document (although I have not seen the

original, his new article reviews his arguments from the old). Sancho

is absent from royal documents prior to the marriage to Isabel, and

then immediately appears. This coincidence of timing suggests to

Salazar that the two are related - that the marriage to Isabel

legitimated Sancho, allowing him to become the heir. That he did

become the heir is beyond dispute, and Salazar also questions whether

an unlinked queen Isabel would have permitted her own potential

children to be superseded (I have to wonder if Alfonso would have

cared what his wife thought of the matter). Finally, there is a

donation charter found in the Tumbo de Lorenzana, which is confirmed

by Alfonso, "eiusdemque Helisabeth regina sub maritali copula

legaliter aderente". This suggests that Isabel was once Alfonso's

mistress, which points directly to Zaida/Isabel. However, this is

somewhat odd, as by this time (1106) Alfonso and Isabel had been

married for 6 years, leading Reilly to conclude that there were two

queens Isabel in succession, and that only shortly before this 1106

confirmation did he marry Zaida.



In his new article, Salazar adds several novel points, and then drops

a bombshell for the very end. To refute Reilly's 'two Isabels'

theory, he cites a charter of Urraca, which names her step-mothers

Berta, Isabel, and Beatrix, meaning that both she and Bishop Pelayo

would have had to leave out one Isabel. He also points to the

chronology between marriages, taking las and first appearance as an

indication. We see three years between Agnes and Constance, and one

and a half between Constance and Bertha, but less than six months

between Bertha and Isabel. He concludes that this left insufficient

time for the arranging of a political union, but is perfectly

consistent with Alfonso simply marrying his mistress. Finally, he

draws attention to a previously overlooked charter in which a grant is

made by Alfonso, "cum uxore mea Elisabet et filio nostro Sancio". It

is clear that he is not using the 'royal we', as he does not call

Isabel "our wife" but "my wife". This would seem prima facie evidence

that Sancho, known to be son of Zaida, was son of queen Isabel,

meaning that she and Zaida were one and the same. (It would, however,

be useful to see how he refers to Urraca, Elvira and Teresa under

similar contexts).



If one accepts that Salazar had 1) refuted Reilly's suggestion, and 2)

shown that Sancho was son of Queen Isabel, it would indicate that the

Infantas Elvira, wife of Roger, King of Sicily, and Sancha, known

daughters of Queen Isabel, are daughters of the moor Zaida. This is of

particular interest with regard to Elvira, as she has numerous

documented descendants (while lines from Sancha are found across the

internet, none of them are factual).



taf



Refs:



Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. Jimena Munoz, Amiga de Alfonso VI.

Anuario de Estudios Medievales. 21:11-40 (1991).

Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. El conde Gómez González de

Candespina: su historia y su familia.Anuario de estudios medievales.

Nº 33:37-68 (2003)

Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, Luiz. A Ascendencia de D. Afonso Henriques.

Raizes & Memorias, vols. 2 through 8, various pages. (relevant part

not seen)

Quintana Prieto, Augusto. Jimena Muñiz, madre de Doña Teresa de

Portugal. Revista Portuguesa de Historia. 12:223-80 (1969).

Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. De nuevo sobre la mora Zaida. Hidalguía: la

revista de genealogía, nobleza y armas. Nº. 321:225-242 (2007).

Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. Contribución al estudio del reinado de

Alfonso VI de Castilla: algunas aclaraciones sobre su política

matrimonial. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y

Genealogía. Nº. 2:299-336 (1992-3) (not seen)

Vajay, Szabolcs de. Reflexiones en torno a Berta, tercera mujer de

Alfonso VI. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y

Genealogía. Nº. 2:337-344 (1992-3) (not seen)





-------------------------------

To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Nathaniel Taylor

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Nathaniel Taylor » 23 sep 2007 04:41:46

In article <mailman.2661.1190517775.7287.gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>,
"Leo van de Pas" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote:

[Nat Taylor wrote:]

there is no concrete information on her ancestry. Although Pelayo of
Oviedo is clear that she had been a Muslim and was converted to
Christianity, she was not necessarily of Muslim (let alone of
aristocratic Arab) ancestry.

Pelayo tells she had been a Muslim, converted to Christianity. To me this
implies the was born a Muslim, had Muslim parents and her first husband was
very much a Muslim. Being a Muslim means belonging to a religion, not a
race. But lets allow Muslim being a race, surely she belonged to the upper
class of Muslim Spanish families, and therefor most likely be of Muslim
origins race/and religion? Then surely we can say that Zaida's descendants
had Muslim ancestors? Even if we do not know any names?

You are right in the sense that Zaida was likely born a Muslim. But
Al-Andalus appears to have had liberal marriage mixtures of non-Arab
(and even non-Muslim) brides in the Caliphal and taifa royal families,
partly due to the political alliances of politically and ethnically
complex Iberia. Zaida could have come from any number of ethnic
backgrounds.

Another such situation I find fascinating is "a" mistress of Fadrique
Alfonso of Castile (bastard of Alfonso XI) she is known as Paloma. a Jewish
girl daughter of Gedaliah ben Shlomo. She is an ancestor of Ferdinand "the
Catholic" and many more interesting people all the way to the present.
In her case we have a name for her father, surely we can say there is a
Jewish origin for all her descendants?

On "La Paloma"--see the archives. She would be another of these
abstract gateways. The sources do not, I think, name her father. The
name you give here was posted by Stan Mommaerts in an unsourced Davidic
line, which I suspect is one of those wishful-thinking fabrications
(Fadrications?).

Nat Taylor
http://www.nltaylor.net

taf

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 23 sep 2007 05:00:43

On Sep 22, 8:22 pm, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au> wrote:

Pelayo tells she had been a Muslim, converted to Christianity. To me this
implies the was born a Muslim, had Muslim parents and her first husband was
very much a Muslim. Being a Muslim means belonging to a religion, not a
race. But lets allow Muslim being a race,

I am not sure what you mean by this? Arab? Berber? or are you just
grouping Muslims of different origins into a single 'racial' group.

surely she belonged to the upper
class of Muslim Spanish families, and therefor most likely be of Muslim
origins race/and religion?

I don't know if a study has been done on this, but it would not
surprise me if a reasonable proportion of the locals (including the
court administration) were of Iberian origin. Zaida could well have
come from this level of society, so I don't think that we can assume
that her family was of extra-Iberian stock. That being said, given
over 400 years of occupation it would be odd if there wasn't some
admixture.

Then surely we can say that Zaida's descendants
had Muslim ancestors? Even if we do not know any names?

Another such situation I find fascinating is "a" mistress of Fadrique
Alfonso of Castile (bastard of Alfonso XI) she is known as Paloma. a Jewish
girl daughter of Gedaliah ben Shlomo.

While widely reported, I don't believe there is contemporary evidence
for anything more than that she was named Paloma (no parents names, no
religion). I know that a writer from a century or so later said she
was Jewish, but he appears not to be unbiased, and may have been
reporting as fact some political rumormongering.


In her case we have a name for her father, surely we can say there is a
Jewish origin for all her descendants?

If there is any factual basis for this name.

taf

taf

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 23 sep 2007 05:08:37

On Sep 22, 9:00 pm, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:


While widely reported, I don't believe there is contemporary evidence
for anything more than that she was named Paloma (no parents

I should have said "called" Paloma.

taf

taf

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 23 sep 2007 05:17:38

On Sep 22, 7:04 pm, taf <farme...@interfold.com> wrote:

As to Beatrice, she likewise has been subject to unsupported
speculation, most notably by Reilly, who suggested she was niece of
Agnes.

I see I confused theories. Reilly suggested she was Burgundian. It was
someone else who suggested she was of Aquitaine.

taf

Leo van de Pas

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 23 sep 2007 07:29:31

Dear Todd,

I have applied (I hope) all your corrections. But now you have made me
curious about the children as well.
Yes I have that Lara son for Sancha. In my own computer he is already
disconnected and his file is ready to be used again.

Alfonso VI 'the Brave', King of Castile 1072-1109, King of Leon 1065-1109
born about 1039
died 30 June 1109 in Toledo
married (1) 1069, divorced 1077 Agnes de Poitou, was she really born about
1059? died 1080, daughter of Guillaume VI-VIII de Poitou, Duke of Aquitaine,
and Mathilde de La Marche
married (2) before 9 May 1080 Constance de Bourgogne, widow of Hugues II,
comte de Chalon-sur-Saone, born about 1046, died after 2 September 1093, but
before 25 October 1093, daughter of Robert I, Duke of Burgundy, and Helie de
Semur-en-Brionnais
married (3) about 28 April 1095 Bertha, died before 15 January 1100
married (4) Zaida "of Seville" (Isabel/Elizabeth), widow of Fath al-Mamun,
she died in 1103 and is buried in San Isidore de Leon
married (5) Beatrice (she came from France) DID SHE ALSO DIE IN 1110? Is she
the one who married Helias de Maine?
A most important mistress (a) Jimena Nunez

Children :
(by Jimena Nunez)
1. Teresa of Castile and Leon, born 1070, died 1 November 1130, she married
in 1093 Henri, Count of Portugal and they founded the Portuguese Royal
family, she also had an affaire with Fernando Peres de Trava
(by Jimena Nunez)
2.Elvira of Castile, married (1) Raimond V, Count of Toulouse, (2) Fernando
Fernandez
by her first husband she had one son
1.Alfonse Jourdain, Count of Toulouse, Duke of Narbonne, born 1102,
murdered 16 April 1148 Casesarea
he married Faydiva d'Uzes, their son is Raymond V, Count of Toulouse
who had at least two sons
Alfonse Jourdain had by an unnamed mistress a daughter (also unnamed)
who married Dodo dit Bernardo III de Comminges, Count of
Comminges and from this line we can find the de Foix family, Amadeo
VIII, Duke of Savoie (and anti-Pope Felix V) Maria the Rich of
Burgundy, Joao II, King of Portugal and so on.
(by 2nd wife Constance de Bourgogne)
3. Uracca, Queen of Castile and Leon 1109-1126
born 1082, died 4 March 1126 Saldana,
married (1) ca.1095 Raymond Count of Burgundy (2) Alfonso VI King of
Aragon (3) Pedro Gonzalez de Lara
For her I have only one child by her first husband: Alfonso VII King of
Castile and Leon
(the last three by Zaida/Isabel/Elisabeth)
4.Sancho born 1093 (?) died May 1108 Ucles (in battle)
5.Elvira of Castile, died 1135 married 1120 Roger II, King of Sicily, they
had two sons, Guglielmo I, King of Sicily, (his son Guglielmo II
married an English princess) and Roger Duke of Apulia and he has two
bastard sons in my system at the moment , one being Tancred,
King of Sicily, Count of Lecce, and he has numerous descendants till the
present
6.Sancha of Castile, was she married to Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara, Count of
Lara.

Any corrections? Yes, please!!

With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia

----- Original Message -----
From: "taf" <farmerie@interfold.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 12:04 PM
Subject: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)


Thanks to Nat Taylor, I have recently read through a new article on
the subject of Zaida, royal mistress and (as some would have it) queen
of Alfonso VI of Leon and Castile.

To review, Alonso had a complex marriage history. The early-12th
century Bishop Pelayo of Oviedo wrote that Alfonso married Agnes of
Aquitaine, Constance of Burgundy, Bertha of Tuscany, Isabel, and
Beatrice, and further had children by mistresses Jimena and Zaida, a
moorish princess who was baptized as Isabel. Several questions remain
about these women, their parentage and identities. Agnes can be
definitively placed as daughter of Guy-Geoffrey alias William VIII of
Aquitaine by his second wife, and Constance has always been clearly
identified as daughter of Robert I, Duke of Burgundy. Zaida is said by
the Bishop to be daughter of the deposed ruler of Seville, but muslim
sources make it clear that she was actually his daughter-in-law. At
various times, various theories have been proposed regarding the
others, while the fate of Agnes has also been subject to debate.

The problem with Agnes is that Orderic has her marrying Helias, Count
of Maine, 30 years after she is last recorded as Alfonso's wife (22
May 1077). This would require a divorce followed by a long seclusion,
or else an intermediate marriage that has escaped notice. As further
evidence for divorce, authors have cited an undated papal latter
thought to be from the late 1070s or earliest 1080s that condemns
Alfonso for continuing in an incestuous so-called marriage.
Presumably, it is argued, Alfonso divorced Agnes to satisfy the pope.
The alternative explanation is that Orderic was mistaken, and that
Helias married someone else. These authors would argue that the papal
letter refers not to his old marriage, but to his new one to
Constance, contracted prior to 8 May 1080. At least this latter part
does seem to be the case, as the letter decries the behavior of a
certain Clunaic monk who is known to have been instrumental in
arranging the marriage to Constance, and Constance was a near relative
of Agnes (and if it was the relationship of Constance to Agnes that
was the problem, it would suggest that Alfonso's marriage to Agnes was
never annulled). It hasn't helped that Agnes had a half-sister who
was also an Iberian queen, and the death date of the latter has been
erroneously given to the former by some authors.

Constance last appears 2 Sep. 1093, and is absent by 25 October of
that year.

With regard to Bertha, Szabolcs de Vajay wrote an article dedicate to
her identification, but I have been unable to get hold of a copy to
see what he concludes. I have seen nothing else, other than some vague
speculation. Bertha first appears 28 Apr. 1095 (as Alberta) and last
on 17 Nov. 1099 (Berta), being dead by 15 Jan. 1100.

By 14 May 1100, Alfonso is married to Isabel(/Elizabeth - the names
were not distinct at the time), and he continues to appear with a
queen of that name through 1107. She is called daughter of Luis, King
of France, by Lucas de Tuy, writing a century after bishop Pelayo, but
at the time she would have been born, no Louis had reigned in France
since the last of the Carolingians, nor was the name Isabel used for a
royal daughter until after she was married. While this identification
also appears on a tomb memorial, it was clearly carved in a later
hand, and both accounts giving her this parentage are generally
dismissed. Reilly hypothesized that she was daughter of WIlliam,
Count of Burgundy (but on nothing more than that it would be
consistent with the pattern of political alliances Alfonso operated
in). Most intriguing, because she was mother of a daughter with known
descent, some modern authors have identified her with mistress Zaida,
even though bishop Pelayo makes no indication that this is the case.

As to Beatrice, she likewise has been subject to unsupported
speculation, most notably by Reilly, who suggested she was niece of
Agnes. (One does wonder that if a pope went apoplectic over Alfonso
marrying a distant cousin of Agnes in Constance, it would not raise a
stink to marry her neice, but this does allow one to suggest that
Orderic's only mistake was in the name of Alfonso's wife marrying
Helias.)

Jimena has drawn much more attention, there being abounding theories
regarding her. Traditionally she has been called daughter of count
Nuno Rodriguez by a granddaughter of one of Vermudo II's bastards.
However, she was actually Jimena Munoz, daughter of a Munio (on the
other hand, Nuno Rodriguez was actually named Munio Rodriguez), and it
is clear that her identification with this family is of late origin.
Quintana Prieto suggested that she was daughter of an otherwise
obscure Munio Munoz, yet this doesn't seem to match with her
description as being of a most-noble family. Canal Sanchez-Pagin
looked at the 'most noble' Munios in the prior generation and found
three who could be so described. By process of elimination (one,
Munio Munoz, names all of his children in a charter, while another
seems not fo fit for chronological reasons), he concludes that she was
daughter of count Munio Gonzalez, who he also makes grandfather of
counts Pedro and Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara (this last appears not to be
the case - their father is clearly called Gonzalo Nunez, not Munoz).
There are also two works that I have been unable to access, one by
Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, which concludes that she was daughter of a
Count Munio Munoz (although I do not know the basis, or precisely
which man of this name is being suggested), and secondly, Salazar y
Acha published a paper in the same publication as the Vajay article on
Bertha, and I have yet to see it as well. However, recently a new
article by Canal clarified Vajay's conclusion. While not specifically
naming Jimena, he cites Salazar as indicating that count Rodrigo
Munoz, thought by Canal to be brother of Jimena, was son of Munio
Rodriguez and descendant of Vermudo II. Thus, it looks like Salazar
has returned to the traditional descent, although his reasoning
remains to be seen.

This brings us back to Zaida and the subject of the newly acquired
Salazar y Acha work. In the same article that he discussed Jimena, he
also concluded that Zaida and Queen Isabel were one and the same. His
arguments had to do with chronology, family politics, and one
particularly interesting document (although I have not seen the
original, his new article reviews his arguments from the old). Sancho
is absent from royal documents prior to the marriage to Isabel, and
then immediately appears. This coincidence of timing suggests to
Salazar that the two are related - that the marriage to Isabel
legitimated Sancho, allowing him to become the heir. That he did
become the heir is beyond dispute, and Salazar also questions whether
an unlinked queen Isabel would have permitted her own potential
children to be superseded (I have to wonder if Alfonso would have
cared what his wife thought of the matter). Finally, there is a
donation charter found in the Tumbo de Lorenzana, which is confirmed
by Alfonso, "eiusdemque Helisabeth regina sub maritali copula
legaliter aderente". This suggests that Isabel was once Alfonso's
mistress, which points directly to Zaida/Isabel. However, this is
somewhat odd, as by this time (1106) Alfonso and Isabel had been
married for 6 years, leading Reilly to conclude that there were two
queens Isabel in succession, and that only shortly before this 1106
confirmation did he marry Zaida.

In his new article, Salazar adds several novel points, and then drops
a bombshell for the very end. To refute Reilly's 'two Isabels'
theory, he cites a charter of Urraca, which names her step-mothers
Berta, Isabel, and Beatrix, meaning that both she and Bishop Pelayo
would have had to leave out one Isabel. He also points to the
chronology between marriages, taking las and first appearance as an
indication. We see three years between Agnes and Constance, and one
and a half between Constance and Bertha, but less than six months
between Bertha and Isabel. He concludes that this left insufficient
time for the arranging of a political union, but is perfectly
consistent with Alfonso simply marrying his mistress. Finally, he
draws attention to a previously overlooked charter in which a grant is
made by Alfonso, "cum uxore mea Elisabet et filio nostro Sancio". It
is clear that he is not using the 'royal we', as he does not call
Isabel "our wife" but "my wife". This would seem prima facie evidence
that Sancho, known to be son of Zaida, was son of queen Isabel,
meaning that she and Zaida were one and the same. (It would, however,
be useful to see how he refers to Urraca, Elvira and Teresa under
similar contexts).

If one accepts that Salazar had 1) refuted Reilly's suggestion, and 2)
shown that Sancho was son of Queen Isabel, it would indicate that the
Infantas Elvira, wife of Roger, King of Sicily, and Sancha, known
daughters of Queen Isabel, are daughters of the moor Zaida. This is of
particular interest with regard to Elvira, as she has numerous
documented descendants (while lines from Sancha are found across the
internet, none of them are factual).

taf

Refs:

Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. Jimena Munoz, Amiga de Alfonso VI.
Anuario de Estudios Medievales. 21:11-40 (1991).
Canal Sanchez-Pagin, Jose Maria. El conde Gómez González de
Candespina: su historia y su familia.Anuario de estudios medievales.
Nº 33:37-68 (2003)
Mello Vaz de Sao Payo, Luiz. A Ascendencia de D. Afonso Henriques.
Raizes & Memorias, vols. 2 through 8, various pages. (relevant part
not seen)
Quintana Prieto, Augusto. Jimena Muñiz, madre de Doña Teresa de
Portugal. Revista Portuguesa de Historia. 12:223-80 (1969).
Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. De nuevo sobre la mora Zaida. Hidalguía: la
revista de genealogía, nobleza y armas. Nº. 321:225-242 (2007).
Salazar y Acha, Jaime de. Contribución al estudio del reinado de
Alfonso VI de Castilla: algunas aclaraciones sobre su política
matrimonial. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y
Genealogía. Nº. 2:299-336 (1992-3) (not seen)
Vajay, Szabolcs de. Reflexiones en torno a Berta, tercera mujer de
Alfonso VI. Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y
Genealogía. Nº. 2:337-344 (1992-3) (not seen)


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

taf

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 23 sep 2007 08:15:09

On Sep 22, 11:29 pm, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au>
wrote:
Dear Todd,

I have applied (I hope) all your corrections. But now you have made me
curious about the children as well.
Yes I have that Lara son for Sancha. In my own computer he is already
disconnected and his file is ready to be used again.

The daughters usually asigned him were actually daughters of Rodrigo
Fernandez de Toron~o.

Alfonso VI 'the Brave', King of Castile 1072-1109, King of Leon 1065-1109

married (1) 1069, divorced 1077 Agnes de Poitou, was she really born about
1059? died 1080, daughter of Guillaume VI-VIII de Poitou, Duke of Aquitaine,
and Mathilde de La Marche

Agnes either either died as wife and queen before the marriage to
Constance, or else she was divorced and married Helias of Maine 30
years later. There is no reason to hypothesize a divorce if you are
then going to kill her off immedietely.

married (2) before 9 May 1080 Constance de Bourgogne, widow of Hugues II,
comte de Chalon-sur-Saone, born about 1046, died after 2 September 1093, but
before 25 October 1093, daughter of Robert I, Duke of Burgundy, and Helie de
Semur-en-Brionnais
married (3) about 28 April 1095 Bertha, died before 15 January 1100
married (4) Zaida "of Seville" (Isabel/Elizabeth), widow of Fath al-Mamun,
she died in 1103 and is buried in San Isidore de Leon

She was still living in 1107. As to her burial, it is not clear that
any of the reputed tombs are authentic.

married (5) Beatrice (she came from France) DID SHE ALSO DIE IN 1110? Is she
the one who married Helias de Maine?

Only known as wife of Alfonso, and since he died first, we don't have
the slightest idea about her fate. It has been speculated that Orderic
may have confused the dtails and that it was Alfonso's widow Beatrice
who married Helias, but there are other alternatives.

A most important mistress (a) Jimena Nunez

Jimena Mun~oz. (As has been explained, these were distinct names at
the time, but confused by later historians.)

Children :
(by Jimena Nunez)
1. Teresa of Castile and Leon, born 1070, died 1 November 1130, she married
in 1093 Henri, Count of Portugal and they founded the Portuguese Royal
family, she also had an affaire with Fernando Peres de Trava
(by Jimena Nunez)
2.Elvira of Castile, married (1) Raimond V, Count of Toulouse, (2) Fernando
Fernandez

Actually Alfonso's eldest - older than Teresa

by her first husband she had one son
1.Alfonse Jourdain, Count of Toulouse, Duke of Narbonne, born 1102,
murdered 16 April 1148 Casesarea

by second husband:

Diego Fernandez
Garcia Fernandez
Teresa Fernandez, m. count Osorio Martinez - ancestors of the Osorio
family and of the oft-mentioned Sancha de Ayala




(by 2nd wife Constance de Bourgogne)
3. Uracca, Queen of Castile and Leon 1109-1126
born 1082, died 4 March 1126 Saldana,
married (1) ca.1095 Raymond Count of Burgundy (2) Alfonso VI King of
Aragon (3) Pedro Gonzalez de Lara

never married Pedro

For her I have only one child by her first husband: Alfonso VII King of
Castile and Leon
(the last three by Zaida/Isabel/Elisabeth)

Alfonso had an older sister Sancha, who never married

By Pedro she had at least one child, but I don't recall if there were
others.
Fernan Perez de Lara

4.Sancho born 1093 (?) died May 1108 Ucles (in battle)

This birth date is based on a combination of when Zaida's husband
died, and the belief that he was acceptable as heir because he was not
born out of adultery (just fornication), i.e. - he was conceived when
Alfonso was between Constance and Bertha, plus his later chronology.

6.Sancha of Castile, was she married to Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara, Count of
Lara.

count, and "of Lara", but not Count of Lara. At this time in the Leon-
Castile-Toledo kingdom, with a few exceptions, count was a rank
disassociated from any particular place. Sancha was his second wife.

children:
Pedro Rodriguez de Lara, priest
Elvira Rodriguez de Lara, m. as second wife, Ermengol VI, Count of
Urgel

taf

Leo van de Pas

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 23 sep 2007 10:27:11

Apologies for taking so long to react-----I had to go out. Someone told me
that I have also too much on the mother of Agnes de Poitou, apparently her
origins are not certain, the only thing certain is her name Mathilde with a
possible version Mateoda.

If Queen Uracca did not marry Pedro Gonzalez de Lara----- did they have a
relationship?

Elvira de Castile and her second husband Fernando Fernandez, all their
children are new to me. The big question for me is : their daughter Teresa
Fernandez _how_ is she an ancestor of Sancha de Ayala? This is an
interesting but also important link as many of her descendants are known.

I have not digested all as yet. All this corrections will become visible
with the next update.

So many thanks for this.
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia


----- Original Message -----
From: "taf" <farmerie@interfold.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)


On Sep 22, 11:29 pm, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au
wrote:
Dear Todd,

I have applied (I hope) all your corrections. But now you have made me
curious about the children as well.
Yes I have that Lara son for Sancha. In my own computer he is already
disconnected and his file is ready to be used again.

The daughters usually asigned him were actually daughters of Rodrigo
Fernandez de Toron~o.

Alfonso VI 'the Brave', King of Castile 1072-1109, King of Leon 1065-1109

married (1) 1069, divorced 1077 Agnes de Poitou, was she really born
about
1059? died 1080, daughter of Guillaume VI-VIII de Poitou, Duke of
Aquitaine,
and Mathilde de La Marche

Agnes either either died as wife and queen before the marriage to
Constance, or else she was divorced and married Helias of Maine 30
years later. There is no reason to hypothesize a divorce if you are
then going to kill her off immedietely.

married (2) before 9 May 1080 Constance de Bourgogne, widow of Hugues II,
comte de Chalon-sur-Saone, born about 1046, died after 2 September 1093,
but
before 25 October 1093, daughter of Robert I, Duke of Burgundy, and Helie
de
Semur-en-Brionnais
married (3) about 28 April 1095 Bertha, died before 15 January 1100
married (4) Zaida "of Seville" (Isabel/Elizabeth), widow of Fath
al-Mamun,
she died in 1103 and is buried in San Isidore de Leon

She was still living in 1107. As to her burial, it is not clear that
any of the reputed tombs are authentic.

married (5) Beatrice (she came from France) DID SHE ALSO DIE IN 1110? Is
she
the one who married Helias de Maine?

Only known as wife of Alfonso, and since he died first, we don't have
the slightest idea about her fate. It has been speculated that Orderic
may have confused the dtails and that it was Alfonso's widow Beatrice
who married Helias, but there are other alternatives.

A most important mistress (a) Jimena Nunez

Jimena Mun~oz. (As has been explained, these were distinct names at
the time, but confused by later historians.)

Children :
(by Jimena Nunez)
1. Teresa of Castile and Leon, born 1070, died 1 November 1130, she
married
in 1093 Henri, Count of Portugal and they founded the Portuguese Royal
family, she also had an affaire with Fernando Peres de Trava
(by Jimena Nunez)
2.Elvira of Castile, married (1) Raimond V, Count of Toulouse, (2)
Fernando
Fernandez

Actually Alfonso's eldest - older than Teresa

by her first husband she had one son
1.Alfonse Jourdain, Count of Toulouse, Duke of Narbonne, born 1102,
murdered 16 April 1148 Casesarea

by second husband:

Diego Fernandez
Garcia Fernandez
Teresa Fernandez, m. count Osorio Martinez - ancestors of the Osorio
family and of the oft-mentioned Sancha de Ayala




(by 2nd wife Constance de Bourgogne)
3. Uracca, Queen of Castile and Leon 1109-1126
born 1082, died 4 March 1126 Saldana,
married (1) ca.1095 Raymond Count of Burgundy (2) Alfonso VI King of
Aragon (3) Pedro Gonzalez de Lara

never married Pedro

For her I have only one child by her first husband: Alfonso VII King
of
Castile and Leon
(the last three by Zaida/Isabel/Elisabeth)

Alfonso had an older sister Sancha, who never married

By Pedro she had at least one child, but I don't recall if there were
others.
Fernan Perez de Lara

4.Sancho born 1093 (?) died May 1108 Ucles (in battle)

This birth date is based on a combination of when Zaida's husband
died, and the belief that he was acceptable as heir because he was not
born out of adultery (just fornication), i.e. - he was conceived when
Alfonso was between Constance and Bertha, plus his later chronology.

6.Sancha of Castile, was she married to Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara, Count
of
Lara.

count, and "of Lara", but not Count of Lara. At this time in the Leon-
Castile-Toledo kingdom, with a few exceptions, count was a rank
disassociated from any particular place. Sancha was his second wife.

children:
Pedro Rodriguez de Lara, priest
Elvira Rodriguez de Lara, m. as second wife, Ermengol VI, Count of
Urgel

taf


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

taf

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 23 sep 2007 17:00:44

On Sep 23, 2:27 am, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au> wrote:
Apologies for taking so long to react-----I had to go out. Someone told me
that I have also too much on the mother of Agnes de Poitou, apparently her
origins are not certain, the only thing certain is her name Mathilde with a
possible version Mateoda.

Yes, I had intended to mention that. However, it would be more
accurate to say she was Mateoda, a possible version of Mathilde, as I
only know of the less common name in primary documents (including a
reference to Agnes, which explicitly names her mother).

If Queen Uracca did not marry Pedro Gonzalez de Lara----- did they have a
relationship?

Urraca 'allied' herself with the two most powerful men in the kingdom
as counterweight to her husband. First came count Gomez Gonzalez (who
apparently had previously married Jimena's sister) although I have
seen some authors doubt whether this crossed the line into a full-
flung fling. As to Pedro, they had two acknowledged children, so you
pretty much have to conclude from that that they did have a
relationship. By the way, I found the names:

Fernan Perez 'Hurtado' de Lara
Elvira Perez de Lara, m.1 Garcia Perez de Traba, 2) Bertrand de
Risnel, lord of Carrion

Elvira de Castile and her second husband Fernando Fernandez, all their
children are new to me. The big question for me is : their daughter Teresa
Fernandez _how_ is she an ancestor of Sancha de Ayala? This is an
interesting but also important link as many of her descendants are known.

The precise connection is a little speculative, but I don't think
anyone doubts that there was a descent.
Teresa Fernandez had:

Gonzalo Osorio, (attested as a royal descendant through his mother)
Osorio Gonzalez, mayordomo mayor of Ferdinand II
Rodrigo Osorio
Rodrigo Rodriguez Osorio
Alvar Rodriguez Osorio
Elvira Alvarez Osorio = Garcia Gomez Carrillo
Juana Garcia Carrillo = Diego Gutierrez de Ceballos
Elvira Alvarez de Ceballos = Fernan Perez de Ayala
Ines Alfonso de Ayala = Diego Gomez (de Toledo)
Sancha de Ayala
Juana Garcia Carrillo

The question regards the connection between Gonzalo Osorio and Rodrigo
Rodriguez Osorio, and specifically that the latter's father Rodrigo
(known from his patronymic) is identical to the attested son of Osorio
Gonzalez. Traditional sources giving a different line, but this
construction of Canal seems likely. There is a newer work by Salazar
y Acha on the family which I have not seen.

taf

WJhonson

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av WJhonson » 24 sep 2007 23:46:39

On Agnes wife of Helias (Elias) de la Fleche, Count of Maine I have the following.

Firstly that William, Duke of Aquitaine and Poitou by his wife Agnes, had not one, but two sons named William, alongwith an Agnes and a Beatrice.

The elder William, in his turn also Duke of Aquitaine and Poitou died in 1058 and had at least one child Clemence who m Conrad, Count of Luxembourg

The younger William, in his turn, since his brother d.s.p.m., Duke of Aquitaine and Count of Poitou died in 1086, his wife Hildegard of Burgundy was yet living in 1120.

The Agnes who married Helias I have as a daughter to the younger William, while the Agnes who married Alphonso seems likely to fit better chronologically, and I currently have, as a daughter of the elder William.

Alternatively if the younger William really did have two wifes, first Mathilde and secondly by 1068 Hildegarde, there's no reason why he couldn't have two daughters, both named Agnes, by the two different wives.

Will Johnson

taf

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av taf » 25 sep 2007 02:07:31

On Sep 24, 3:46 pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
On Agnes wife of Helias (Elias) de la Fleche, Count of Maine I have the following.

Firstly that William, Duke of Aquitaine and Poitou by his wife Agnes, had not one, but two sons named William, alongwith an Agnes and a Beatrice.

The elder William, in his turn also Duke of Aquitaine and Poitou died in 1058 and had at least one child Clemence who m Conrad, Count of Luxembourg

The younger William, in his turn, since his brother d.s.p.m., Duke of Aquitaine and Count of Poitou died in 1086, his wife Hildegard of Burgundy was yet living in 1120.

The Agnes who married Helias I have as a daughter to the younger William, while the Agnes who married Alphonso seems likely to fit better chronologically, and I currently have, as a daughter of the elder William.

Alternatively if the younger William really did have two wifes, first Mathilde and secondly by 1068 Hildegarde, there's no reason why he couldn't have two daughters, both named Agnes, by the two different wives.


Actually, he had three wives. Agnes wife of Alfonso is unambiguously
documented as child of William VIII by his second wife. Likewise,
Agnes, Queen of Aragon, was daughter of William VIII by his third
wife, Hildegarde.

The problem with the wife of Helias is that she is explicitly called
widow of Alfonso, and yet there are reasons to reject this. If you
choose to throw it out, then there are all kinds of possible
solutions, although making her the deceased queen of Aragon is not one
of them.

taf

Roger LeBlanc

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Roger LeBlanc » 16 okt 2007 02:16:30

Not having received a response to my previous question on the subject,
I'm going to try again.

Who is this Helias/Elias/Helie count of Maine referred to in the
following discussion? He is surely not the Helie of Maine who died in
1110. Kimberley LoPrete, who has recently spilled a good deal of ink on
the subject of Maine appears not to know of any second marriage for him.
Neither does Stewart Baldwin's page in the Henry Project show a second
marriage. So who is he then?

taf wrote:

On Sep 24, 3:46 pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:


On Agnes wife of Helias (Elias) de la Fleche, Count of Maine I have the following.

Firstly that William, Duke of Aquitaine and Poitou by his wife Agnes, had not one, but two sons named William, alongwith an Agnes and a Beatrice.

The elder William, in his turn also Duke of Aquitaine and Poitou died in 1058 and had at least one child Clemence who m Conrad, Count of Luxembourg

The younger William, in his turn, since his brother d.s.p.m., Duke of Aquitaine and Count of Poitou died in 1086, his wife Hildegard of Burgundy was yet living in 1120.

The Agnes who married Helias I have as a daughter to the younger William, while the Agnes who married Alphonso seems likely to fit better chronologically, and I currently have, as a daughter of the elder William.

Alternatively if the younger William really did have two wifes, first Mathilde and secondly by 1068 Hildegarde, there's no reason why he couldn't have two daughters, both named Agnes, by the two different wives.




Actually, he had three wives. Agnes wife of Alfonso is unambiguously
documented as child of William VIII by his second wife. Likewise,
Agnes, Queen of Aragon, was daughter of William VIII by his third
wife, Hildegarde.

The problem with the wife of Helias is that she is explicitly called
widow of Alfonso, and yet there are reasons to reject this. If you
choose to throw it out, then there are all kinds of possible
solutions, although making her the deceased queen of Aragon is not one
of them.

taf



Gjest

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 okt 2007 03:28:36

On Oct 15, 6:16 pm, Roger LeBlanc <lebla...@mts.net> wrote:
Not having received a response to my previous question on the subject,
I'm going to try again.

Who is this Helias/Elias/Helie count of Maine referred to in the
following discussion? He is surely not the Helie of Maine who died in
1110. Kimberley LoPrete, who has recently spilled a good deal of ink on
the subject of Maine appears not to know of any second marriage for him.
Neither does Stewart Baldwin's page in the Henry Project show a second
marriage. So who is he then?



From a post by Peter Stewart:

: He wrote (see book X, chapter 18 in _The Ecclesiastical History of
: Orderic Vitalis_, edited by Marjorie Chibnall, 6 vols (Oxford,
1969-81)
: V p. 306): "Defuncta coniuge sua celibem uitam actitare renuit, sed
: Agnetem filiam Guillelmi Pictauorum ducis relictam Hildefonsi
senioris
: Galiciae regis uxorem duxit. Celebres nuptias cum ingenti tripudio
: perpetrauit, sed sequenti anno multis lugentibus obiit" (trans:
After
: his wife died he [Helias of Maine] declined to lead a celibate life
and
: instead married Duke William of the Poitevins' daughter Agnes, the
widow
: of old King Alfonso of Galicia. The nuptials were performed with
: extraordinary celebrations, but the following year to general
mourning
: he died).

There can be no doubt to whom this refers - the Helias who died 1110.
There is room to doubt whether Orderic was accurate. The more I mull
over this the more I think this is a reference to Alfonso's widow,
Beatrice. Whether she was actually daughter of (a) Duke William is
another story. (Perhaps Orderic simply knew two facts - that Alfonso
married Agnes daughter of William, and that Helias married the widow
of Alfonso, and he put two and two together. or perhaps he was just
misinformed.) If it is Beatrice, then she has a pattern of marriage to
old codgers who then immediately croak on her.

taf

Gjest

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Gjest » 16 okt 2007 04:05:48

On Oct 15, 7:44 pm, WJhonson <wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
Tod could you explain more why there is a problem in accepting Orderic's statement in a straightforward why? The editor of the link I posted, stated that Agnes was not actually the widow of Alphonse, that they had been divorced in 1080.


There is no actual evidence that Agnes was repudiated. There is a
papal letter provisionally dated to 1080 accusing Alfonso of incest,
and this has been taken to be preliminary to the divorce of Agnes, but
there are three reasons to suspect this wasn't the case. First, it
seems unlikely that the pope would wait a decade to complain. Second,
more royal documents are now available, and they show a marriage to
Constance by 1080, which does not leave reasonable time for Alfonso to
drop Agnes and then negotiate to marry Constance, given that the
sequence of the letter places it in 1080. Third, the letter also
condemns the Cluny monk who is known to have been instrumental in
arranging the marriage of Alfonso to Constance. It sure looks like it
was decrying Alfonso's marriage to Constance, not his to Agnes. Also,
Constance was a kinswoman of Agnes, making it likely that the 'incest'
was due to marrying a wife related to his previous wife, while the
ancestry of Alfonso leaves little opportunity for any relationship
between him and Agnes. Likewise, it seems highly unlikely (as Peter
pointed out in the 2004 discussion) that Helias would have been had
his nuptuals "performed with extraordinary celebrations" if his wife
was over 60 years old, had no lands of her own, and had been hanging
out in limbo for almost three decades. Given that Orderic is not
entirely reliable on such details, it does not seem unlikely that he
is mistaken here as well.

taf

Don Stone

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Don Stone » 17 okt 2007 07:44:54

(From David H. Kelley:)

With respect to other claimed Muslim descents, specifically that of the
Laras, the _Cancion de los Infantes de Lara_ is, indeed, heroic poetry,
and certainly untrustworthy on many details. However, the claimed
ancestor, Mudarra, must rest on genuine tradition. 'Mudarra' is not a
name but a nickname, a derogatory Arabic term (lit. mule) for a
half-breed. It could only come from an Arabic-speaking enemy of the
Laras, and the individual would appear under a completely different name
in any accurate genealogical account.

Gjest

Re: Zaida (& Isabel, Jimena and the others)

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 okt 2007 08:32:32

On Oct 16, 11:44 pm, Don Stone <d...@donstonetech.com> wrote:
(From David H. Kelley:)

With respect to other claimed Muslim descents, specifically that of the
Laras, the _Cancion de los Infantes de Lara_ is, indeed, heroic poetry,
and certainly untrustworthy on many details.

Just to be clear, the Cancion does not give a descent, just some
events that occurred to a supposed Lara ancestor.

However, the claimed
ancestor, Mudarra, must rest on genuine tradition.

I don't see why he must. Even if one accepts that there is some
historical basis (and I am not willing to grant this), exactly which
aspect of the story has authentic origins? One could argue that
Melusine, the demon progenatrix of the house of Anjou, must rest on
genuine tradition but that doesn't mean there is a serpent-demon
somewhere in their ancestry.

'Mudarra' is not a
name but a nickname, a derogatory Arabic term (lit. mule) for a
half-breed.

This is one interpretation, but not the only one. Garcia Gomez and
Menendez Pidal discussed the term in detail in "Sobre la etimologia
del nombre del bastardo 'Mudarra'", _Al Andalus_ 16:87-98 (1951).

It could only come from an Arabic-speaking enemy of the
Laras, and the individual would appear under a completely different name
in any accurate genealogical account.

Were there an accurate genealogical account. As it is, we can't be
certain before the generation of Alfonso VI. The only nobleman in the
story that can be identified as historical is the 'evil uncle'.


An alternative explanation is that the writer of the Cancion pulled a
'Banquo', naming these characters as ancestors of the Lara simply to
flatter potential patrons of his own period, rather than reflecting
genealogical fact. Mudarra would then have been, not a derogatory
Arab nickname of a real person, but a name intentionally chosen for a
fictional character who, for the sake of the plot, the author had
already decided should be a bastard half-breed.

taf

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»