Blount-Ayala

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Peter Stewart

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 17 mar 2005 10:03:48

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:4239362E.2050001@interfold.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

If such a link is evident, maybe it should have come at least two
generations earlier - Adhemar says that Ramnulf I was nephew to a
William, brother of Gerhard, suggesting onomastic support for a
relationship to William of Gellone that had led to Ramnulf's becoming
count of Poitou in the first place.

Hmmm.

The use of the names Eudes and William remind one of the brothers, Counts
of Orleans and Blois respectively, of the generation of Louis the Pious.

I'm afraid you have left me behind - what other Eudes are you thinking of
here?

The brothers Eudes of Orleans and William the Constable of Blois were
somewhat younger than Louis the Pious, from memory - the emperor was born in
778, whereas Eudes married ca 828 (his daughter Ermentrudis, who married
Charles the Bald, was evidently born ca 830). Also, I think these brothers
came from the area of Worms, not from a family established earlier in
Auvergne or Poitou.

Perhaps I am missing something, as I haven't been reading SGM posts
regularly.

Peter Stewart

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 17 mar 2005 17:15:42

Peter Stewart wrote:
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message

The use of the names Eudes and William remind one of the brothers, Counts
of Orleans and Blois respectively, of the generation of Louis the Pious.

I'm afraid you have left me behind - what other Eudes are you thinking of
here?

Just proves I am not getting enough sleep. The name used was
Ebles, not Eudes, which invalidates the whole point: mea culpa.

The brothers Eudes of Orleans and William the Constable of Blois were
somewhat younger than Louis the Pious, from memory - the emperor was born in
778, whereas Eudes married ca 828 (his daughter Ermentrudis, who married
Charles the Bald, was evidently born ca 830). Also, I think these brothers
came from the area of Worms, not from a family established earlier in
Auvergne or Poitou.

I was just ballparking. Eudes was father-in-law of Louis's son,
and, by some speculation (Moriarty, which I had handy) possible
nephews of Hildegarde, his mother. As you point out,
geographically they appear to be northerners. (I guess at least
this shows that not all Williams lead to Gellone.)

I don't recall where more recent authors (Jackman, for instance)
place the brothers.

taf

Peter Stewart

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 17 mar 2005 22:54:00

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:4239AD2E.8020104@interfold.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message

The use of the names Eudes and William remind one of the brothers, Counts
of Orleans and Blois respectively, of the generation of Louis the Pious.

I'm afraid you have left me behind - what other Eudes are you thinking of
here?

Just proves I am not getting enough sleep. The name used was Ebles, not
Eudes, which invalidates the whole point: mea culpa.

The brothers Eudes of Orleans and William the Constable of Blois were
somewhat younger than Louis the Pious, from memory - the emperor was born
in 778, whereas Eudes married ca 828 (his daughter Ermentrudis, who
married Charles the Bald, was evidently born ca 830). Also, I think these
brothers came from the area of Worms, not from a family established
earlier in Auvergne or Poitou.

I was just ballparking. Eudes was father-in-law of Louis's son, and, by
some speculation (Moriarty, which I had handy) possible nephews of
Hildegarde, his mother. As you point out, geographically they appear to
be northerners. (I guess at least this shows that not all Williams lead
to Gellone.)

I don't recall where more recent authors (Jackman, for instance) place the
brothers.

I'm not sure about Jackman, but Edouard de Saint-Phalle [in 'Comtes de
Troyes et de Poitiers au IXe siècle: histoire d'un double échec',
_Onomastique et parenté dans l'Occident médiéval_ (Oxford, 2000), p. 169
suggests that Robert le Fort's mother was sister to Eudes of Orleans &
William of Blois.

The latter name could have come from the same ancestral source as that of
William of Gellone, I suppose - if it didn't come from the family background
in either case, this would tend to undermine the reliability of onomastics
in genealogical speculations. As I have said often before, I think this is
much overrated anyway. In rare instances we are told why noble Frankish
people received their names, and the reasons vary from devotion to a saint,
to honouring a god-parent as became more usual later on, to deliberately
reviving the name of a supposed ancestor that had fallen out of use in the
lineage. Several people are also known to have acquired second names, not
uncommon around the turn of the first millennium, and these could become
hereditary (e.g. Hugo "Magnus" in the Capetian dynasty) or otherwise
transferable with the original Christian name (e.g. William "Longsword" in
Anjou & England and then Montferrat) despite being apparently derived from
characteristics or circumstances in the life of the first bearer.

We can't even be sure that a second name isn't the only appellation
surviving for an individual - for example, Rozala-Susanna, the first wife of
King Robert II, is known only by one name or the other in most sources, and
only one from memory helpfully calls her "Rozala quae et Suzanna".

Peter Stewart

Gjest

Re: Magaret Radcliffe and Nicholas Rishton - Ancestors of Pe

Legg inn av Gjest » 17 mar 2005 23:41:01

Dear Newsgroup,
In RPA p 400, subject Humphrey, Richardson includes
a notation concerning the possible re-marriage of Margaret (de Holand) La
Warre, widow of John la Warre, 2nd Lord La Warre to John Tempest the younger of
Bracewell, York . La Warre died in June of 1331, Margaret, Lady La Warre in
August 1349. As her 1st marriage occurred shortly before 1326, She was probably
still in her twenties when her husband died. Interestingly, this John
Tempest`s son and heir, Richard Tempest served in 1397 as a deputy to John de
Holand, Duke of Exeter as lieutenant of Carlisle and Warden of the West March, Note
that provided Margaret Holand was this Richard Tempest`s mother, He was an
own cousin to the Duke.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 18 mar 2005 02:41:17

Peter Stewart wrote:
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:4239AD2E.8020104@interfold.com...

I don't recall where more recent authors (Jackman, for instance) place the
brothers.

I'm not sure about Jackman, but Edouard de Saint-Phalle [in 'Comtes de
Troyes et de Poitiers au IXe siècle: histoire d'un double échec',
_Onomastique et parenté dans l'Occident médiéval_ (Oxford, 2000), p. 169
suggests that Robert le Fort's mother was sister to Eudes of Orleans &
William of Blois.

This is a speculation of long standing. It appears even to have been
held in common by the two camps giving Robert radically different
paternal ancestry (the French Witichin vs. the German Rutpert
solutions). Basically, Robert's family both used the name Eudes and had
an interest in the County of Blois.

The latter name could have come from the same ancestral source as that of
William of Gellone, I suppose - if it didn't come from the family background
in either case, this would tend to undermine the reliability of onomastics
in genealogical speculations.

Moriarty's last reconstruction, while highly speculative, suggests that
the mother of Eudes and William was sister-in-law (wife's sister) to
William of Gellone. However, most onomasticists maintain that it was
only links by blood, and not by marriage, that supplied the pool of
names for a family (and there is no Eudes on either the proposed
paternal or maternal sides in this reconstruction).


Several people are also known to have acquired second names,
. . . or otherwise
transferable with the original Christian name (e.g. William "Longsword" in
Anjou & England and then Montferrat) despite being apparently derived from
characteristics or circumstances in the life of the first bearer.

I think this has been discussed here before, but I forget the answer. A
William Longsword played a critical role at the siege of Lisbon, as well
as in Saramago's _History of the Siege of Lisbon_ (a fictional story
involving a proofreader of a history book with that title). Is his
family background known?

We can't even be sure that a second name isn't the only appellation
surviving for an individual - for example, Rozala-Susanna, the first wife of
King Robert II, is known only by one name or the other in most sources, and
only one from memory helpfully calls her "Rozala quae et Suzanna".

Similarly, IIRC, Mathilde-Felicia of Mayenne is only known by one name
at home with her parents and siblings, and the other as wife of the Duke
of Burgundy, never both, yet they seem to represent the same person
(Felicia is oddly absent from documents naming all of her siblings,
while no alternative fate is known for the Mathilde who appears there).
As I have suggested before, I suspect that one (Mathilde) was her
given name, and the other (Felicia = "happy") a pet name/nickname which
was used in subsequent generations as a given name (same with
Stephanie-Dulce [ = "sweet"], Countess of Provence).

taf

Peter Stewart

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 18 mar 2005 04:11:10

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:423a31bd@news.ColoState.EDU...
Peter Stewart wrote:
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:4239AD2E.8020104@interfold.com...

I don't recall where more recent authors (Jackman, for instance) place
the brothers.

I'm not sure about Jackman, but Edouard de Saint-Phalle [in 'Comtes de
Troyes et de Poitiers au IXe siècle: histoire d'un double échec',
_Onomastique et parenté dans l'Occident médiéval_ (Oxford, 2000), p. 169
suggests that Robert le Fort's mother was sister to Eudes of Orleans &
William of Blois.

This is a speculation of long standing. It appears even to have been held
in common by the two camps giving Robert radically different paternal
ancestry (the French Witichin vs. the German Rutpert solutions).
Basically, Robert's family both used the name Eudes and had an interest in
the County of Blois.

Yes, you're right of course, Saint-Phalle was just more confident about it
than the evidence deserves - Oda, the mother of Eudes & William, held
possessions of her own in Blois, and she could just as well have provided
the link between these families if the name Eudes had come from her
background.

The latter name could have come from the same ancestral source as that of
William of Gellone, I suppose - if it didn't come from the family
background in either case, this would tend to undermine the reliability
of onomastics in genealogical speculations.

Moriarty's last reconstruction, while highly speculative, suggests that
the mother of Eudes and William was sister-in-law (wife's sister) to
William of Gellone. However, most onomasticists maintain that it was only
links by blood, and not by marriage, that supplied the pool of names for a
family (and there is no Eudes on either the proposed paternal or maternal
sides in this reconstruction).

The conjecture I mentioned, that was repeated by Saint-Phalle, had been
discussed I think by René Merlet in 'Origine de Robert le Fort', _Mélanges
Julien Havet_ (Paris, 1895) and also by Léon Levillain at the end of his
'Essai sur le comte Eudes, fils de Harduin et de Guérinbourg, 845-871', _Le
moyen âge_ 47 (1937), with the additional suggestion that Guandalmodis, wife
of Eudes de Châteaudun, might have been a sister of Robert. He based this on
the assumption that names at this time were passed on within families, but
nevertheless allowed for transmission from one namesake to his nephew by
marriage. Go any further than that & all best are off.

<snip>

We can't even be sure that a second name isn't the only appellation
surviving for an individual - for example, Rozala-Susanna, the first wife
of King Robert II, is known only by one name or the other in most
sources, and only one from memory helpfully calls her "Rozala quae et
Suzanna".

Similarly, IIRC, Mathilde-Felicia of Mayenne is only known by one name at
home with her parents and siblings, and the other as wife of the Duke of
Burgundy, never both, yet they seem to represent the same person (Felicia
is oddly absent from documents naming all of her siblings, while no
alternative fate is known for the Mathilde who appears there). As I have
suggested before, I suspect that one (Mathilde) was her given name, and
the other (Felicia = "happy") a pet name/nickname which was used in
subsequent generations as a given name (same with Stephanie-Dulce [ =
"sweet"], Countess of Provence).

They are good examples. A second name that appeared twice for females in the
same family is that of Adelais and Ermengard of Anjou, both aka Blanca - I
wonder if a pigmentation deficiency occured in that bloodline, since neither
lady appears to have been particularly "white" in any moral sense.
Rozala-Susanna has the added complication that the widowed Countess Rozala
of Flanders suddenly appeared, unquestionably, as "Queen Suzanna" in a
charter given with her son that still exists in the original, written before
she could have been married to King Robert II. So not only a change of name
but also of title needs to be accounted for: no-one has published a
satisfactory explanation as yet.

Peter Stewart

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Lanier Genealogy

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 19 mar 2005 01:31:01

John Williams, Jr.?

Are you sure he is not John Williams II?

DSH

| | Thomas Lanier Williams was the son of of John Williams, Jr. and
Rhoda
| | Campbell Morgan; grandson of John Williams and Malinda White;
| | great-grandson of Joseph Williams and Rebecca Lanier. See p.
167-168
| | of Notable Kin, Volume II by Gary Boyd Roberts.
<mhollick@mac.com>

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Lanier Genealogy

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 19 mar 2005 01:31:02

"Direct descendant" is a very foolish oxymoron.

We've covered all this before, exhaustively -- it's in the Archives.

'Nuff Said

DSH

Gjest

Re: The best day of my life!

Legg inn av Gjest » 19 mar 2005 04:50:03

I can't believe anyone reading this group, could be so stupid
as to not recognize the old famous and very illegal pyramid club
scam. Stop advertising , before some smart cop picks you up.

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Quincy Jones' Line To Medieval Times

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 19 mar 2005 06:10:02

Followup to my last.

It would be particularly interesting and perhaps useful to know:

The father of Sara Frances Wells.

And:

The mother of Mary Belle Lanier.

DSH

"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:...

| Very interesting.
|
| If this Lanier descent pans out, Quincy Jones is a cousin of mine.
|
| But where are the mothers?
|
| Any true mediaeval line is a separate issue.
|
| DSH
|
| ""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
| news:004a01c52c3d$44217e00$c3b4fea9@email...
|
| | John Lanier (also ancestor of Tennessee Williams)
| | father of
| | Sampson Lanier, married Elizabeth Washington
| | parents of
| | Thomas Lanier
| | father of
| | William Lanier
| | father of
| | Thomas Lanier
| | father of
| | Needham Burch Lanier
| | father of
| | James Balance Lanier
| | father of
| | Mary Belle Lanier
| | mother of
| | Sara Frances Wells
| | mother of
| | Quincy Jones (born 1933)
| |
| | No dates or marriage spouses mentioned. Can anyone make this a
better
| detailed line of descent?
| |
| | Lawrence Washington (also ancestor of George Washington)
| | father of
| | Sir John Washington
| | father of
| | John Washington
| | father of Richard Washington
| | father of
| | Elizabeth Washington who married Sampson Lanier (see above)
| |
| | And, of course, many more interesting lines of ancestry. Quincy
Jones,
| by the way, was added to my data base with the last update with a
| mentioning of Robert Davenport's book.
| | Best wishes
| | Leo van de Pas
| | Canberra, Australia

Gjest

re: DESCENDANT, direct or otherwise

Legg inn av Gjest » 20 mar 2005 11:30:02

I think this has gone out of control. I, like Leo, started life as a
non-Englihs speaker. What I discovered about the english language, is that unlike
others, it is an extraordinary precise language when the words are used in their
correct contexts. Spoken english, is, to say the least, appalling - but then
the majority of English speakers have never been taught to use words correctly.
Having made my sermon, I would have thought that , were I to qualify the
phrase 'direct descendant' , i would say ' direct paternal line, maternal line, or
qualify it even further by putting in the required subdivisions to make the
phrase fit what one is trying to say. OR does 'Direct' mean descendant of the
eldest son of the eldest son......?
regards
Pg

D. Spencer Hines

Re: DESCENDANT, direct or otherwise

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 20 mar 2005 13:41:03

No, it does not.

DSH

<PDeloriol@aol.com> wrote in message news:df.fb34586.2f6ea8ab@aol.com...
|
| I think this has gone out of control. I, like Leo, started life as a
| non-Englihs speaker. What I discovered about the english language, is
that unlike
| others, it is an extraordinary precise language when the words are
used in their
| correct contexts. Spoken english, is, to say the least, appalling -
but then
| the majority of English speakers have never been taught to use words
correctly.
| Having made my sermon, I would have thought that , were I to qualify
the
| phrase 'direct descendant' , i would say ' direct paternal line,
maternal line, or
| qualify it even further by putting in the required subdivisions to
make the
| phrase fit what one is trying to say. OR does 'Direct' mean descendant
of the
| eldest son of the eldest son......?
| regards
| Pg

Gjest

Re: Descendant, direct or Otherwise

Legg inn av Gjest » 20 mar 2005 15:00:02

Dear Peter,
Spoken English, at least American English is as You say
often abused more often than not being riddled with slang expressions. Are Such
unknown to speakers of French, Spanish, Dutch or Portugese ?
That said, my personal favorite `descendant descriptions are
pateralineal (son to father), materalineal (daughter to mother ), `of the
line of`, paternal or maternal, ancestral aunt or uncle ,descendant, relative
and the varying degrees of cousinship,plus the more usual. and oh yes, lest I
forget `said to be`.
Sincerely,

James W Cummings

Dixmont, Maine USA

Gjest

Re: DESCENDANT, direct or otherwise

Legg inn av Gjest » 20 mar 2005 17:30:02

In a message dated 3/20/2005 5:22:11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
PDeloriol@aol.com writes:

were I to qualify the
phrase 'direct descendant' , i would say ' direct paternal line, maternal
line, or
qualify it even further by putting in the required subdivisions to make the
phrase fit what one is trying to say. OR does 'Direct' mean descendant of
the
eldest son of the eldest son......?
regards
Pg




Hi Peter,

In my opinion the word direct is the unneeded portion of such a
statement. A simple statement of "paternal" descendant or "maternal" descendant
would suffice. No other modifier would be needed. Nor would a modifier be
required at all with the use of "descendant" or "ancestor". The words themselves
specify the directness of the connection.

I was trained to write for newspapers so perhaps I am being too
demanding in my opinion that the fewer words the better for indictating an idea. I
don't really think I am too demanding though, so I really shouldn't have
written that. It is an example of unneccessary wordiness. My journalism teacher
would have given me a bad grade on that.

I do think that it is better to get ones idea across with as few words
as possible. Fewer words are usually less subject to misunderstanding.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas

Gjest

Re: DESCENDANT, direct or otherwise

Legg inn av Gjest » 20 mar 2005 17:30:03

In a message dated 3/20/2005 5:22:11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
PDeloriol@aol.com writes:

OR does 'Direct' mean descendant of the
eldest son of the eldest son......?
regards
Pg




In my mind this phrase does not mean eldest son to eldest son, etc. I could
be assigned such an indication by agreement and usage but at this time I
don't think that is the meaning.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 21 mar 2005 01:59:32

Peter Stewart wrote:

Rozala-Susanna has the added complication that the widowed Countess Rozala
of Flanders suddenly appeared, unquestionably, as "Queen Suzanna" in a
charter given with her son that still exists in the original, written before
she could have been married to King Robert II. So not only a change of name
but also of title needs to be accounted for: no-one has published a
satisfactory explanation as yet.

So what were the possibilities - where were there Queens at this
time. France, England, Germany, Italy, Burgundy . . . where
else? (Scotland, Ireland and Iberia don't seem reasonable
possibilities, and Scandinavia seems unlikely.)

taf

Peter Stewart

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 21 mar 2005 03:14:52

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:423E1C74.9030104@interfold.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:

Rozala-Susanna has the added complication that the widowed Countess
Rozala of Flanders suddenly appeared, unquestionably, as "Queen Suzanna"
in a charter given with her son that still exists in the original,
written before she could have been married to King Robert II. So not only
a change of name but also of title needs to be accounted for: no-one has
published a satisfactory explanation as yet.

So what were the possibilities - where were there Queens at this time.
France, England, Germany, Italy, Burgundy . . . where else? (Scotland,
Ireland and Iberia don't seem reasonable possibilities, and Scandinavia
seems unlikely.)

The point is that she was not married to any king at the time of this
charter, which was clearly given within a matter of weeks after her fist
husband's death and probably at the time of his burial, when the
neighbouring counts (who witnessed it) were gathered to honour him. It was
not an anniversary remembrance - the business was to do the immediate will
of the deceased, and the text opens with a meditation on mortality (Arnulf
had died unexpectedly).

Ferdinand Lot suggested that his widow called herself "regina" to emphasise
that she was daughter to a king, as for instacne later on some dukes'
daughters were given the by-name "Ducissa" although not ducheesses in their
own right or through marriage. I don't think this argument is sustainable:
there are no precedents or other examples, and moreover Rozala had always
been a king's daughter yet there is no evidence that she had ever called
herself "regina" until April 988. She could hardly have been marketing
herself as a royal bride for young King Robert II in the circumstances -
this would have been preposterous, although an offer might well have been
made in the immediate aftermath of her husband's demise. The nature of local
and wider Frankish politics impacting on this is too complex to cover
adequately here.

Leaving aside the essential & overlooked question of her apparent change of
name, which I intend to discuss in an article soon, I think the title should
be viewed alongside two other examples of women who called themselves, or
were called by others, "regina" around this time when ruling "regna" (that
is, territorial principalities of the first rank below outright sovreignty)
on behalf of a son or husband - in other words, for lack of a better word
"regina" on a few occasions was taken to mean "regent", the female ruler,
and not "queen", the (royal) ruler's wife. Other examples are Hemma, the
widowed duchess of Boleslav the Pious in Bohemia (and who was NOT the same
person as Emma the widow of King Lothaire IV), and Rozala's own
granddaughter Matilda of Flanders, who was called "regina" when her husband
William was still just a duke, before 1066, apparently during his temporary
absence from his "regnum" of Normandy.

Peter Stewart

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 21 mar 2005 03:46:46

Peter Stewart wrote:
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:423E1C74.9030104@interfold.com...

Peter Stewart wrote:
Rozala-Susanna has the added complication that the widowed Countess
Rozala of Flanders suddenly appeared, unquestionably, as "Queen Suzanna"
in a charter given with her son that still exists in the original,
written before she could have been married to King Robert II. So not only
a change of name but also of title needs to be accounted for: no-one has
published a satisfactory explanation as yet.

So what were the possibilities - where were there Queens at this time.
France, England, Germany, Italy, Burgundy . . . where else? (Scotland,
Ireland and Iberia don't seem reasonable possibilities, and Scandinavia
seems unlikely.)


The point is that she was not married to any king at the time of this
charter, which was clearly given within a matter of weeks after her fist
husband's death and probably at the time of his burial, when the
neighbouring counts (who witnessed it) were gathered to honour him. It was
not an anniversary remembrance - the business was to do the immediate will
of the deceased, and the text opens with a meditation on mortality (Arnulf
had died unexpectedly).

Yes, I got that. I was more thinking about a possible pre-Arnulf
marriage. As wife of Arnulf, going by the title of a former
husband might have been out of place, but as widow of both, I
could envision her using the more elevated title. What are the
politics behind the Flanders marriage? Politically and
geographically it seems a bit distant (or should this match
instead be viewed in the Burgundian context of her nephew - I
will have to check the chronology). Could there have been a
brief marriage/widowhood that brought her north and made her a
good match for Arnulf?

Ferdinand Lot suggested that his widow called herself "regina" to emphasise
that she was daughter to a king,

I was familiar with this suggestion, but it does seem unlikely.

Leaving aside the essential & overlooked question of her apparent change of
name, which I intend to discuss in an article soon, I think the title should
be viewed alongside two other examples of women who called themselves, or
were called by others, "regina" around this time when ruling "regna" (that
is, territorial principalities of the first rank below outright sovreignty)
on behalf of a son or husband - in other words, for lack of a better word
"regina" on a few occasions was taken to mean "regent", the female ruler,
and not "queen", the (royal) ruler's wife. Other examples are Hemma, the
widowed duchess of Boleslav the Pious in Bohemia (and who was NOT the same
person as Emma the widow of King Lothaire IV), and Rozala's own
granddaughter Matilda of Flanders, who was called "regina" when her husband
William was still just a duke, before 1066, apparently during his temporary
absence from his "regnum" of Normandy.

Does "Matilda regina", wife of Guigues, perhaps fit in here? I
know that some 'curious' attempts to explain her title have been
put forward (e.g. as heiress of Eadgar AEtheling) There seems a
consensus these days that she was daughter of Roger of Sicily and
widow of Conrad "King of Germany", yet the same article which
proposed this likewise suggested an alternative fate for the
King's widow having nothing to do with Albon/Viennois.

taf

Peter Stewart

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 21 mar 2005 04:13:56

Todd Farmerie wrote:

I was more thinking about a possible pre-Arnulf marriage.
As wife of Arnulf, going by the title of a former husband
might have been out of place, but as widow of both, I
could envision her using the more elevated title. What
are the politics behind the Flanders marriage? Politically
and geographically it seems a bit distant (or should this
match instead be viewed in the Burgundian context of her
nephew - I will have to check the chronology). Could there
have been a brief marriage/widowhood that brought her
north and made her a good match for Arnulf?

She was already "north" - brought up at the imperial court after her
father's banishment from italy and imprisonment. She appears to have
been older than Arnulf and perhaps in her mid-twenties when they
married, but she would perhaps have found difficulties in getting a
suitable husband, especially if she had been aiming for a king in the
first place. A count of Flanders was better than she might have hoped
by the late 960s. I don't know of any evidence or circumstantial
reasoning to link her with a previous husband. The Flemish sources only
call her Rozala daughter of King Berrengar, and they would have had
every motive to tell if she had been a queen.

<snip>

Does "Matilda regina", wife of Guigues, perhaps fit in here? I
know that some 'curious' attempts to explain her title have
been put forward (e.g. as heiress of Eadgar AEtheling) There
seems a consensus these days that she was daughter of
Roger of Sicily and widow of Conrad "King of Germany", yet
the same article which proposed this likewise suggested an
alternative fate for the King's widow having nothing to do with
Albon/Viennois.

Quite possibly she does fit a loose pattern - but she is somewhat later
and more precedents might have been expected if this abnormal usage of
"regina" had continued to her time, the early 12th century - the
example with Matilda of Flanders was a one-off, but definite, and Hemma
of Bohemia was even less likely to have been a king's wife than the
Sicilian lady. (The conjecture linking Duchess hemma to the namesake
Frankish queen was half-baked, at best.)

Peter Stewart

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Charlemagne to Neuhards ??

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 21 mar 2005 04:27:57

Peter Stewart wrote:

and Hemma
of Bohemia was even less likely to have been a king's wife than the
Sicilian lady. (The conjecture linking Duchess hemma to the namesake
Frankish queen was half-baked, at best.)

I recall an alternative identification, based primarily on
numismatics, making her English, and suggesting whe was the
daughter of Eadweard 'the Elder' married "a prince near the
Jupiter Mountains".

taf

Gjest

Re: October 2004 TAG (Stephen Hopkins)

Legg inn av Gjest » 23 mar 2005 22:50:03

Dear Newsgroup,
I won`t claim that I am totally disinterested to
know the names of the parents identified in this theory concerning Mr Stephen
Hopkins paternity. Bravo, Mr Cristainsen should You happen to be reading this. I
hope you prove to be right. I seem to recall there was some speculation in
the article by Caleb Johnson identifying Hopkins` 1st wife Mary and the finding
of the baptisms of their children Elizabeth, Constance and Giles at Hursley,
Hampshire that Stephen may have been related to a William Hopkins whose wife
was named Constance and who was the son of a John Hopkins back in TAG 73 (1998)
Sincerely,

James W Cummings

Dixmont, Maine USA

Gjest

Re: Origins of Theodoros I Laskaris

Legg inn av Gjest » 26 mar 2005 05:31:01

Dear Newsgroup,
While it is intriquing and quite possible that the
Laskaris family owed the throne to descent from the Komnenos and Dukas
families, might They also have assumed the names as a portion of their imperial
titulary even as former Emperors added Caesar and Augustus to their names. Also
,Georgios could indicate either a Georgian (Giorgi) or even a Russian (Yuri)
connection.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Peter Stewart

Re: Origins of Theodoros I Laskaris

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 26 mar 2005 07:27:21

<Jwc1870@aol.com> wrote in message news:110.46639463.2f763d7c@aol.com...
Dear Newsgroup,
While it is intriquing and quite possible that the
Laskaris family owed the throne to descent from the Komnenos and Dukas
families, might They also have assumed the names as a portion of their
imperial
titulary even as former Emperors added Caesar and Augustus to their names.

The evidence mentioned by Ruth Macrides calling Theodoros Laskaris
'Komnenos' includes a seal from before 1204, so that the name was not
assumed by him with imperial rank in 1205. The surname came to be used as a
title ('Megas Komnenos') only in Trebizond, and by agnatic descendants of
Alexios I who founded the dynasty there, while Theodoros was emperor in
Nicaea.

Peter Stewart

Gjest

Re: OT Queen Camilla

Legg inn av Gjest » 26 mar 2005 23:41:01

Dear Newsgroup,
Edward VIII was known as Prince David before
becoming King, George VI was Prince Albert. (see Williamson`s Kings and Queens of
Britain) Charles could choose to become Arthur I, Philip I (?II),or most
likely George VII in his maternal grandfather`s memory rather than Charles III.
The first two Charleses incidently weren`t disliked that much more than the
early Georges. I suppose He could even decide to become George Charles I, rather
like the recent popes have done.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: OT Queen Camilla

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 27 mar 2005 03:31:54

Jwc1870@aol.com wrote:
I suppose He could even decide to become George Charles I, rather
like the recent popes have done.

And more to the point, the current King of Spain.

taf

D. Spencer Hines

Re: OT Queen Camilla

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 27 mar 2005 03:41:02

The British Royal Anglicans imitating Roman Catholics?

Amusing...

DSH

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:42460d0a@news.ColoState.EDU...
| Jwc1870@aol.com wrote:

| > I suppose He could even decide to become George Charles I, rather
| > like the recent popes have done.
|
| And more to the point, the current King of Spain.
|
| taf

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Re:OT Queen Camilla

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 27 mar 2005 04:40:10

Yep.

Good Thinking.

Many folks would be happy with a George VII.

DSH

<Jwc1870@aol.com> wrote in message news:144.425bae49.2f7778bf@aol.com...

| Dear Todd, Spencer, Betty and Others,
| As Todd
pointed out
| , Juan Carlos I also uses two names as his official name and it is a
more apt
| comparsion than the Pope because 1) both could well be monarchs and
2 ) Juan
| Carlos I adopted his name three years prior to John Paul I`s 1978
election
| to the Papal throne. Spencer is of the opinion that the notion of
Charles
| choosing to imitate the Roman Catholics and taking a name like George
Charles I
| amusing which it doubtless is. Another poster thought it highly
unlikely that
| Charles might choose Arthur I or Philip I (? II), which it is. Charles
III or
| George VII being far like3lier, but unlike that poster, I would not be
suprised
| if He chose George VII, firstly because He probably remembers his
grandfather,
| if but dimly and secondly because of the bravery He and the late
Queen
| Consort Elizabeth displayed by refusing to leave London when the
Germans bombed the
| city during World War II.
| Sincerely,
| James W Cummings
| Dixmont, Maine Unum

Gjest

Re:OT Queen Camilla

Legg inn av Gjest » 27 mar 2005 05:15:04

Dear Todd, Spencer, Betty and Others,
As Todd pointed out
, Juan Carlos I also uses two names as his official name and it is a more apt
comparsion than the Pope because 1) both could well be monarchs and 2 ) Juan
Carlos I adopted his name three years prior to John Paul I`s 1978 election
to the Papal throne. Spencer is of the opinion that the notion of Charles
choosing to imitate the Roman Catholics and taking a name like George Charles I
amusing which it doubtless is. Another poster thought it highly unlikely that
Charles might choose Arthur I or Philip I (? II), which it is. Charles III or
George VII being far like3lier, but unlike that poster, I would not be suprised
if He chose George VII, firstly because He probably remembers his grandfather,
if but dimly and secondly because of the bravery He and the late Queen
Consort Elizabeth displayed by refusing to leave London when the Germans bombed the
city during World War II.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine Unum

Gjest

Re: OT Queen Camilla

Legg inn av Gjest » 27 mar 2005 05:50:02

In a message dated 3/26/2005 8:38:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
poguemidden@hotmail.com writes:

The British Royal Anglicans imitating Roman Catholics?

Amusing...

DSH




And old Hank 8 is spinning in his grave.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas

joy mceldowney

Re: OT Queen Camilla

Legg inn av joy mceldowney » 28 mar 2005 06:50:03

<The British Royal Anglicans imitating Roman Catholics.....Amusing>

Mr DSH!
What a load of old Horsefeathers! Ever heard of Anglican-Catholics? No? Well, well. I'm one of 'em! If you don't have them in Hawaii doesn't mean they don't exist. Low Anglican Church people don't like us very much...too Papist they say.The Anglican Church has NEVER encouraged divorce nor did they like divorced people marrying in the church.
We gained strength at the Oxford Movement of 1833 that emphasized the Catholic rather than the Protestant heritage of Anglicanism. The Movement was led by writer, poet and priest John Henry Newman who later crossed the floor and became a Roman Catholic Cardinal. Anglican-Catholicism (or Anglo-Catholicism) is a continuation of the old Christian tradition in the episcopate, priesthood and sacraments. The Mass hasn't changed much since the reign of Elizabeth the First. My Prayer Book had on the front page, the Fines that she imposed on people who didn't go to church every week, except those who lived ten miles away; they were allowed two weeks off!
There is very little difference between the RC and AC Mass and I assure you, we aren't amusing, we're dead boring! We are not keen on banjo music in church, nor do we like dancing to the contemporary 'hymns'...clapping our hands, throwing our arms around like semaphore operators...we leave all that fun for the Proddies. We prefer music by Elgar, Vaughan Williams, Faure, Mozart, Palestrina, Allegri, Bach, Handel, Tallis, Byrd, to name but a few, all of them, filling the House of God with beautiful music that reaches into the soul.
If you've never listened to Sacred music Mr DSH, try Allegri's 'Miserere' sung by the world's best...The Choir of King's College, Cambridge, Roy Goodman treble solo. Definitely RC/AC. Look at it this way...it could even make of you a nice, kindly man who will no longer abuse people on this List. It will take some doing, but it's worth a try! But please don't be rude to me...I have stored in me, nearly 78 years of rudeness that's itching to be released! It was damned close this time; I don't like my religion being mocked.
Aloha
Joy
Tasmania
Member ACM=Australians for Constitutional Monarchy. .
----- Original Message -----
From: GRHaleJr@aol.com
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: OT Queen Camilla



In a message dated 3/26/2005 8:38:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
poguemidden@hotmail.com writes:

The British Royal Anglicans imitating Roman Catholics?

Amusing...

DSH




And old Hank 8 is spinning in his grave.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas

______________________________

Gjest

Re: Sam Sloan is in line to become King of Monaco

Legg inn av Gjest » 31 mar 2005 00:11:02

Dear Newsgroup,
There is no doubt in my mind but what Albert II
will succeed his father as Prince of Monaco, as He`s about forty-six or
forty-seven (b 1958 according to Louda and MacLagan`s Monaco tables in their Heraldry
of the Royal Families of Europe) and so could marry as there was noise He was
about to a couple of years ago and possibly still produce an heir, but failing
that, the Grimaldis may petition the French goverment to allow his eldest
nephew Andrea to succeed him.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine
USA

Sally Laine

Re: Sam Sloan is in line to become King of Monaco

Legg inn av Sally Laine » 31 mar 2005 02:11:01

My understanding is that Prince Rainier sorted all this out a number of
years ago. Prince Albert then if no children, Princess Caroline and her
child Prince Andrea.

Sally

----- Original Message -----
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Sam Sloan is in line to become King of Monaco


Dear Newsgroup,
There is no doubt in my mind but what Albert II
will succeed his father as Prince of Monaco, as He`s about forty-six or
forty-seven (b 1958 according to Louda and MacLagan`s Monaco tables in
their Heraldry
of the Royal Families of Europe) and so could marry as there was noise He
was
about to a couple of years ago and possibly still produce an heir, but
failing
that, the Grimaldis may petition the French goverment to allow his eldest
nephew Andrea to succeed him.
Sincerely,
James W
Cummings
Dixmont,
Maine
USA

Gjest

Re: Jean Hotman was de Marle seigneur de Vaugien

Legg inn av Gjest » 31 mar 2005 18:51:02

Mr Dulong, and others
I have been looking for a copy of the book titled something like "The
English Connection of Jean Hotman". This Jean was the son of Francois Hotman. I'm
wondering if in your research on Catherine Baillon you might have consulted
this book and could give a review of whether you thought it was useful or no.
Thank you
Will Johnson

John P. DuLong

Re: Jean Hotman was de Marle seigneur de Vaugien

Legg inn av John P. DuLong » 02 apr 2005 15:13:36

WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Mr Dulong, and others
I have been looking for a copy of the book titled something like "The
English Connection of Jean Hotman". This Jean was the son of Francois Hotman. I'm
wondering if in your research on Catherine Baillon you might have consulted
this book and could give a review of whether you thought it was useful or no.
Thank you
Will Johnson


The book is by G. H. M. Posthumus [sic] Meyjes, _Jean Hotman's English
Connection_ (Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nedelandse Akademie van
Wetenschappen, 1990).

According to OCLC FirstSearch it is at 20 libraries. I will be ordering
it through interlibrary loan and will let you all know if there is
anything worthwhile in it concerning the Hotman genealogy.

Thanks Mr. Johnson for the tip about this book.

JP

Gjest

Re: Leonard of Saugus, Pontypool and Picardie

Legg inn av Gjest » 02 apr 2005 21:01:02

Those interested in the Leonards might read my article , including footnotes,
entitled "Glimpses into the English and Continental Ancestry of Certain
Braintree and Saugus Ironworkers of About 1650: Vinton, Leonard, Pray, Pinion,
Tyler and Russell" which was published in the May 2000 The Essex Genealogist

In this article I show the almost certainty that the Leonards were of
ancestral French origin as shown in the Westminster Denization Rolls of 1544 which
show "Lenard James born in Picardy, in the Kings Forge at Newbridge 1july
1544" (Deniz Roll 36 Hen 8 ) John Lyonarde French born, a "finer" was in England
30 years on 1 July 1544


There are English records of John Lenard, son of Martin, at Frant, Sussex ,
christening 29 Jan 1447, of Jordam and Jordain Leonard at Burwash Sussex in
1594 --centers of ironworks as was Pontypool, not far from on built by
ironmasters if Suffok
(per VCH Suffolk)

Henry VII decided to make England self sufficient in heavy arms and
commenced building blast furnaces in England and importan French ironworkers to work
them
Robert Bowman



In a message dated 4/2/2005 10:11:06 AM Pacific Standard Time,
mhollick@mac.com writes:
There's a couple of things. John Leonard of Springfield is not
connected to the Leonard family of Pontypool. The two Leonards who are
connected are Henry and James who appear in Taunton. Their brother
John remained in England.

Secondly those Leonards have never been proven to be connected with the
Lords Dacre who spelled their name Lennard. See: "Ancestral Lines" by
Carl Boyer, 3rd (3rd ed., Santa Clarita, CA: 1998), pp. 371-5.



JKent10581@aol.com wrote:
Below is an ancestry which I received without documentation that
runs from
John of Gaunt (#1) to John Leonard (#9) the gateway ancestor in
Mass. Are
there any errors that need to be corrected?

Margaret Fiennes, * b: 1540 in Pontypool, Monmouth, Wales, England
d: March 10,
1610/11 in Chevening, Kent, England

.......................................................................

+Sampson Leonard, *

............................................................................

8 Thomas Leonard, * b: May 23, 1577 in Chevening, Kent, England d:
November
6, 1638 in Taunton, Bristol, England

.............................................................................
.
..... +Lydia White, *

.............................................................................
.
.......... 9 John Leonard, * b: 1615 in Pontypool, Mommoth, Wales,
United
Kingdom d: March 20, 1675/76 in Springfield, Mass.

.............................................................................
.
................ +Sarah Heath, *

Gjest

Re: Louvain- Ponthieu link ?

Legg inn av Gjest » 05 apr 2005 01:51:01

Dear Newsgroup,
I have discovered a reference on Stirnet`s Brabant
02 database to the marriage of Gertrud, daughter of Henry III, Count of
Louvain and Gertrud of Flanders to Lambert, whom it calls Count of Montaigu and
Clermont; whom elsewhere in certain on-line pedigrees in given as Sire of
Clermont -Ailley and son of Kuno, Sire de Montaigu by Ida, daughter of Eustace II,
Count of Bologne by Ida of Lorraine. This same series of pedigree charts gives
Lambert`s wife as Petronille, a daughter of Thierry II, Duke of Lorraine by
Gertrude of Flanders. There was a daughter Gertrud of Montaigu who is said to
have married Raoul II de Nesle and Everhard III de Mortaigne.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Hans Vogels

Re: Louvain- Ponthieu link ?

Legg inn av Hans Vogels » 05 apr 2005 07:38:00

James,

Alan V. Murray in his "The Crusader Kindom of Jerusalem. A Dynastic
History 1099-1125" (Prosopographica et Genealogica, Oxford 2000),
189-190, states clearly that Cono of Montaigu has mistakenly been
referred to as a brother in law to duke Godfrey of Bouillon.

"This information derives from Orderic Vitalis, who states that Cono
was married to a sister of Godfrey of Bouillon, but this claim is not
confirmed by any other sources with knowledge local to Lotharingia or
Boulogne, and Orderic's information may simply be a result of
confusion over the name Ida. Eustace II of Boulogne and Ida of
Bouillon are not known to have any daughters, while the chronicle of
the abbey of Saint Hubert states that Cono's only known wife, also
called Ida, was a daughter of Lambert 'the Old', a nobleman of the
territory of Liege, who was burried at the abbey of Saint Hubert".

Elsewere I found this Ida named as Ida of Fouron (Voeren).

With regards,
Hans Vogels


Jwc1870@aol.com wrote in message news:<6d.428930a8.2f832a7d@aol.com>...
Dear Newsgroup,
I have discovered a reference on Stirnet`s Brabant
02 database to the marriage of Gertrud, daughter of Henry III, Count of
Louvain and Gertrud of Flanders to Lambert, whom it calls Count of Montaigu and
Clermont; whom elsewhere in certain on-line pedigrees in given as Sire of
Clermont -Ailley and son of Kuno, Sire de Montaigu by Ida, daughter of Eustace II,
Count of Bologne by Ida of Lorraine. This same series of pedigree charts gives
Lambert`s wife as Petronille, a daughter of Thierry II, Duke of Lorraine by
Gertrude of Flanders. There was a daughter Gertrud of Montaigu who is said to
have married Raoul II de Nesle and Everhard III de Mortaigne.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

Gjest

Re: Louvain- Ponthieu link ?

Legg inn av Gjest » 05 apr 2005 20:09:38

Hans Vogels wrote:
James,

Alan V. Murray in his "The Crusader Kindom of Jerusalem. A Dynastic
History 1099-1125" (Prosopographica et Genealogica, Oxford 2000),
189-190, states clearly that Cono of Montaigu has mistakenly been
referred to as a brother in law to duke Godfrey of Bouillon.

"This information derives from Orderic Vitalis, who states that Cono
was married to a sister of Godfrey of Bouillon, but this claim is not
confirmed by any other sources with knowledge local to Lotharingia or
Boulogne, and Orderic's information may simply be a result of
confusion over the name Ida. Eustace II of Boulogne and Ida of
Bouillon are not known to have any daughters, while the chronicle of
the abbey of Saint Hubert states that Cono's only known wife, also
called Ida, was a daughter of Lambert 'the Old', a nobleman of the
territory of Liege, who was burried at the abbey of Saint Hubert".

Elsewere I found this Ida named as Ida of Fouron (Voeren).

With regards,
Hans Vogels


Jwc1870@aol.com wrote in message
news:<6d.428930a8.2f832a7d@aol.com>...
Dear Newsgroup,
I have discovered a reference on
Stirnet`s Brabant
02 database to the marriage of Gertrud, daughter of Henry III,
Count of
Louvain and Gertrud of Flanders to Lambert, whom it calls Count of
Montaigu and
Clermont; whom elsewhere in certain on-line pedigrees in given as
Sire of
Clermont -Ailley and son of Kuno, Sire de Montaigu by Ida, daughter
of Eustace II,
Count of Bologne by Ida of Lorraine. This same series of pedigree
charts gives
Lambert`s wife as Petronille, a daughter of Thierry II, Duke of
Lorraine by
Gertrude of Flanders. There was a daughter Gertrud of Montaigu who
is said to
have married Raoul II de Nesle and Everhard III de Mortaigne.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine
USA


Here is a report of the descendants of Lambert de Fouron, father of Ide
who was married to Conon de Montaigu. The numbers after each name are
the sources used for each people. The sources are at the end of the
post!

Hope this helps,

Frederic
PS: Sorry all the notes are in French...


Modified Register for Lambert le Vieux de FOURON


First Generation

1. Lambert le Vieux de FOURON 1,2 died after 25 Dec 1078.

Seigneur de Fouron. Il signe avec son fils Lambert une charte de
l'évêque Théoduin en faveur de
l'abbaye de Saint-Laurent, le 25 décembre 1078. Il fut inhumé dans
l'abbaye de Saint-Hubert.


Lambert had the following children:

2 M i. Lambert le Jeune de FOURON 3 died after 25 Dec 1078.

Cité avec son père dans une charte de l'évêque Théoduin.


+ 3 F ii. Ide de FOURON died before 1100.


Second Generation

3. Ide de FOURON 4,5 (Lambert le Vieux) died before 1100.

Citée en 1096. Elle fut inhumée à l'abbaye de Stavelot.


Ide married Conon de MONTAIGU 6,7 son of Gozelon de MONTAIGU and
Ermentrude de GRANDPRE. Conon died on 30 Apr 1106 in Dalhem.

Comte de Montaigu, avoué de Dinant et seigneur de Rochefort. Chatelain
de Dalhem. Il apparait
pour la première fois en 1055 avec son père et son frère Rodolphe.
En 1064, il hérita du comté de
Montaigu, de la seigneurie de Rochefort et de l'avouerie de Dinant.
En 1066, il assista à la consécration de la collégiale de Huy, que
l'évêque Théoduin venait de
reconstruire à grands frais. Pour partir en Terre Sainte, il céda aux
religieux de Saint-Hubert, pour le
prix de dix onces d'or et pour en jouir après sa mort, son alleu de
Felc, près de Nassogne, ainsi que
tout ce qu'il possédait à Mont, à Heyd et à Cielle. Il abandonna
également au chapitre de Notre-
Dame à Dinant. Il partit pour la Croisade avec son ami Godefroid de
Bouillon, où il se fit remarquer
par ses actions d'éclat devant le siège d'Antioche. Il fit également
des prodiges de valeur lors de la
prise de Jérusalem. Lors de son retour avec Pierre l'Ermite, plusieurs
gentilshommes et roturiers,
ainsi que quelques bourgeois de Huy. En route, leur navire, fut
assailli par une tempête furieuse, qui
menaçait à chaque instant de les engloutir dans les flots. Ils
promirent de faire ériger une église si ils
s'en sortaient. Pour l'an 1100 il était rentré dans ses terres.
L'église fut construite dans un faubourg
de Huy, Pierre l'Ermite y ajouta un monastère de religieux augustins,
qui reçut le nom de
Neufmoustiers. Il fut inhumé à Dinant.


Conon and Ide had the following children:

4 M i. Gozelon de MONTAIGU 8 died in 1097 in Antioche.

Mentionné avec son père dans des actes de 1086 et 1091. Il accompagna
son
père en Croisade et mourut au siège d'Antioche.


+ 5 M ii. Lambert de MONTAIGU died in 1147.

6 M iii. Henri de MONTAIGU 9 died in 1128.

Archidiacre de Liège et prévôt du chapitre de Fosses de 1111 à
1128. Il est
parfois qualifier de "Junior" pour le distinguer de son oncle qui fut
aussi
archidiacre.


7 M iv. Thibaut de MONTAIGU 10 died after 1086.


Il n'est connu que par un acte de 1086.


+ 8 F v. Gertrude de MONTAIGU .


Third Generation

5. Lambert de MONTAIGU 11,12 (Ide de FOURON, Lambert le Vieux) died
in 1147.

Comte de Clermont dès 1102. Comte de Montaigu, avoué de Dinant de
1106 à 1147. Seigneur de
Rochefort. Il est cité pour la première fois en 1086, avec son père
et ses frères dans un document
de l'évêque de Liège Henri de Verdun. En 1102, en tant que comte de
Clermont, il intervient dans la
donation d'une dame Elimode à l'abbaye de Flône. En 1119, il
s'engagea aux cotés du duc de
Brabant, contre le comte de Namur. Lambert de Montaigu engagé entre la
Meuse et les rochers
escarpés qui dominent le château, se jette sur lui avec toutes ses
forces. Arrivé en face de son
adversaire, le comte de Namur lui crie: "Est-ce bien toi qui oses
marcher contre moi, après m'avoir
promis fidélité par un serment sacré?" - "Je renonce dès ce jour à
tous les bénéfices que je tenais
de toi" réponds Lambert courroucé. - "Et moi, réplique à son tour
Godefroid, je perce de cette lance
la bouche menteuse d'un perfide". En disant ces mots, il le blesse à
la gorge d'un coup de lance et le
renverse. Les troupes de Lambert prennent alors la fuite, il tombe
entre les mains du comte de
Namur, qui le fait charger de fers et conduire à Namur. Il reparu dans
un synode en 1124. Lambert
fut l'un des binfaiteurs de l'abbaye de Flône. En 1136, il permit aux
religieux de prendre, dans ses
forêts de Cleront, les bois nécessaires à leur couvent. Il est cité
jusqu'au 27 février 1140.


Lambert married N. de LOUVAIN 13 daughter of Henri III le Jeune de
LOUVAIN and Gertrude de FLANDRE. N. de LOUVAIN was born after 1090.

They had the following children:

9 M i. Godefroid de MONTAIGU 14 died in 1161.

Comte de Montaigu, de Clermont et de Duras. Seigneur de Rochefort.
Avoué et
chatelain de la ville de Dinant. Sous-avoué de Saint-Trond de 1147 à
1161, lui
venant de son beau-père. En 1154, il confirme à l'abbaye de Flône la
possession
de Vivegnies. Il dévasta Brustem, possession du comte de Looz, située
tout près
de Saint-Trond. Il fit la guerre au comte de Laroche, et dévasta les
terres
soumises à l'abbaye de Stavelot, dont le comte de Laroche était
avoué. Le comte
Godefroid se signala par quelques libéralités. C'est ainsi qu'en
1154, il céda à
l'abbaye d'Averbode sa part dans l'alleu de Bolderberg. Il figure aussi
sur la liste
des bienfaiteurs de l'abbaye de Saint-Hubert pour avoir donné à cette
maison son
alleu de Bande avec toutes ses dépendances. Il vivait encore en 1161,
où il
assista comme témoin à une charte de Henri II de Limbourg.


Godefroid married Julienne de DURAS 15 daughter of Otton II de DURAS
and Berthe de BOUCHAIN. Julienne died in 1164.

Comtesse de Jodoigne et de Duras. C'est peut-être elle qui se remaria
avec
Enguerrand d'Orbais. Non seulement ils ratifièrent la donation de son
père de
l'alleu d'Aleym, mais ils renoncèrent en plus à leurs droits
d'avoués.
Voulant mettre les intentions de la comtesse Erlende, son ancêtre, à
exécution,
elle céda les revenus de la fondation à l'abbaye d'Heylissem, à
charge d'ériger un
autel sur le territoire de la paroisse de Jodoigne et d'y nommer un
prêtre pour
décharger la messe quotidienne. Elle suivit en ceci le conseil
d'Enguerrand, son
second mari, gagné, parait-il, à prix d'argent, et elle reçut
l'assentiment de tous
ses enfants.


10 M ii. Conon de MONTAIGU 16 died after 1140.

Mentionné dans une charte de 1140.


11 F iii. Gertrude de MONTAIGU 17,18,19,20 died after 4 May 1189.

Nièce du Comte de Flandre d'après Butkens. Citée de 1143 à 1189.
Elle est citée
en 1146 dans un acte de Ives de Soissons, son beau-frère. On la
retrouve le 10
septembre 1185 dans un acte de sa bru Elisabeth de Cysoing. Elle
apparait pour
la dernière fois le 4 mai 1189.


Gertrude married (1) Everard Radulf III de MORTAGNE 21,22,23,24 son of
Everard Radulf II de MORTAGNE and Richilde de HAINAUT about 1161.
Everard died on 14 Mar 1190.

Chatelain héréditaire de la ville de Tournai. Seigneur de Mortagne.
Chevalier. Cité
de 1157 à 1189. Il partit en Croisade en 1177.
Philippe d'Alsace profite d'une discorde entre Jean de Cysoing et
Evrard III,
châtelain de Tournai, pour obtenir de ce dernier l'hommage du château
de
Mortagne. Inquiet, le comte Baudouin de Hainaut en appelle à son
gendre
Philippe Auguste. Celui-ci voit là une excellente occasion
d'intervenir dans les
affaires de Flandre. Il prend Tournai et lui concède une charte
communale
(Tournai devient ainsi française). Cela réduit le pouvoir du
châtelain Evrard,
parent de Gilbert de Bourghelles, qui fut dès lors hostile à Philippe
Auguste.


Gertrude married (2) Raoul II de NESLE 25,26,27 son of Raoul Ier de
NESLE and Rainurde N. before 1143. Raoul died after 1160.

Seigneur de Nesle. Chatelain de Bruges. Chevalier. Cité de 1134 à
1153.


8. Gertrude de MONTAIGU 28 (Ide de FOURON, Lambert le Vieux).

Elle fut inhumée dans le cloître de l'abbaye de Saint-Trond.


Gertrude married Giselbert II de DURAS 29 son of Otton de LOOZ and Oda
de DURAS. Giselbert died about 1137.

Comte de Duras et de Jodoigne. Il est cité dans une charte de 1132,
confirmant la fondation de
l'Abbaye d'Heylissem.


Giselbert and Gertrude had the following children:

12 M i. Otton II de DURAS 30 died in 1146.

Comte de Duras. Sous-avoué de l'abbaye de Saint-Trond. Il avait
légué à ce
monastère son alleu d'Aleym en Hollande, ne laissant à ses héritiers
que le droit
d'avouerie. Il fut enterré dans le cloître de Saint-Trond, à coté
de sa mère
Gertrude.


Otton married Berthe de BOUCHAIN .




Appendix A - Sources


1. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin
(Bruxelles), n°290, 1994, pp.120, 127.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine
de Bruges et de Tournai par T. Stasser.
2. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales de
la Société Archéologique de Namur (Namur, XX, 1893), p.110.
3. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales de
la Société Archéologique de Namur , p.110.
4. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin ,
n°290, 1994, pp.120, 126.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine de Bruges et
de Tournai par T. Stasser.
5. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales de
la Société Archéologique de Namur , p.109.
6. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin ,
n°290, 1994, pp.120, 126.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine de Bruges et
de Tournai par T. Stasser.
7. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales de
la Société Archéologique de Namur , pp.92-110.
8. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales de
la Société Archéologique de Namur , p.111.
9. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales de
la Société Archéologique de Namur , p.111.
10. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales
de la Société Archéologique de Namur , p.111.
11. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin ,
n°290, 1994, pp.120, 126.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine de Bruges et
de Tournai par T. Stasser.
12. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales
de la Société Archéologique de Namur , pp.113-123.
13. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin ,
n°290, 1994, p.126.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine de Bruges et de
Tournai par T. Stasser.
14. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales
de la Société Archéologique de Namur , pp.124-130.
15. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales
de la Société Archéologique de Namur , pp.124, 130.
16. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales
de la Société Archéologique de Namur , p.123.
17. E. Warlop, The Flemish nobility before 1300 (Kortrijk,
1975-1976), p.1154.
18. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin ,
n°290, 1994, pp.117-127.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine de Bruges et
de Tournai par T. Stasser.
19. W. Newman, Les seigneurs de Nesles en Picardie (XIIe-XIIIe
siècles) (Paris, 1972), t.2 pp.19-21.
20. E. Warlop, De Vlaamse adel voor 1300, deel II (Handzame, 1968),
p.124.
21. E. Warlop, The Flemish nobility before 1300 , p.1154.
22. S.C.G.D., L'Intermédiaire des Généalogistes , 1961, p.127.
23. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin ,
n°290, 1994, pp.117-127.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine de Bruges et
de Tournai par T. Stasser.
24. E. Warlop, De Vlaamse adel voor 1300, deel II , pp.67, 159.
25. Office Généalogique et Héraldique de Belgique, Le Parchemin ,
n°290, 1994, pp.117-127.Gertrude de Montaigu châtelaine de Bruges et
de Tournai par T. Stasser.
26. W. Newman, Les seigneurs de Nesles en Picardie (XIIe-XIIIe
siècles) , t.2 pp.19-21.
27. E. Warlop, De Vlaamse adel voor 1300, deel II , p.124.
28. L. Vanderkindere, La formation territoriale des Principautés
Belges au Moyen Age (Bruxelles, 1902), t.II, p.150.
29. Th. Stasser, La descendance féminine du comte de Namur Albert
I, in Annales de la Société Archéologique de Namur (Namur, t.LXVII,
1991-92), p.10.
30. C.-G. Roland, Les Seigneurs et Comtes de Rochefort, in Annales
de la Société Archéologique de Namur , p.124.

Gjest

Re: Louvain- Ponthieu link

Legg inn av Gjest » 05 apr 2005 22:41:01

Dear Hans,
Thank you for the clarification . Kuno of Montaigu was
married to Ida, daughter of Lambert ` the Old` of Fouron, instead of Ida of
Boulogne.
Sincerely,
James W
Cummings
Dixmont,
Maine USA

Gjest

Re: Louvain - Ponthieu link

Legg inn av Gjest » 05 apr 2005 23:41:02

Dear Frederic,
Merci , mon ami. As I understand very little french, I
believe that Conon (not Kuno), Count of Montaigu married Ida, daughter of
Lambert the Old of Fouron and sister of Lambert the young. Conon took the cross,
accompanied by his eldest son Gonzelon who died at the siege of Antioch in
1097. Lambert, who would succeed as Count of Montaigu on his father`s death in
1106 married one of the unknown daughters of Henry III, Count of Louvain
and Gertrude of Flanders. Lambert was Count of Clermont from 1102 and also
Seigneur de Rochefort. He died in 1147 and had two sons Geoffrey d 1161 who
succeeded as Count of Clermont and Montaigu and Conon d 1140 as well as the daughter
Gertrude who was seen between 1143 and 1189 , wife of Raoul II de Nesle sen
1134-1153 and later of Radulf Everard III de Mortaigne who died in 1190. Conon
, hereditary Count of Mortaigne d 1106 also had Thibaut who was dead by
1186, Henry, Archdeacon (?) of Leige who died in 1128 and a daughter Gertrude,
wife of Giselbert II, Count of Duras by whom She had a son Otto II , Count of
Duras who married Bertha of Boucain and had a daughter Juliane who married her
cousin Count Geoffrey of Montaigu, Clermont and in her right, Duras.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 06 apr 2005 07:59:31

Bravo!

You did precisely the right thing, Chico.

This is why these genealogical, et al., "lists" are anathema -- they are
censored.

Salud,

Spencer

D. Spencer Hines

"Francisco Antonio Doria" <franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote in
message news:20050406060848.84776.qmail@web30902.mail.mud.yahoo.com...
|
| Please cancel my subscription.
|
| Francisco Antonio Doria
|
| --- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:
|
| > Yes, your posts are being moderated.
| >
| > When someone post messages to the list that should
| > be directed to me
| > because they concern administrative issues I put
| > that person on
| > moderate. All posts that person sends must be
| > forwarded by me to the list.
| >
| > When someone disagrees with administrative policies
| > they can put the
| > whole list into chaos. And this is something I
| > will not permit.
| >
| > Sincerely,
| >
| > Joan Asche
| > List Admin.
| >
| > Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005, 3:55
| > PM:
| >
| > >
| > > Dear Joan,
| > >
| > > May I ask you a question? Are my posts being
| > > `moderated'? Do I have to go through some kind of
| > > evaluation of what I say?
| > >
| > > I would greatly appreciate a clarification on
| > that.
| > >
| > > Yours,
| > >
| > > Francisco Antonio Doria

Francisco Antonio Doria

Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 08:10:02

Please cancel my subscription.

Francisco Antonio Doria

--- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:

Yes, your posts are being moderated.

When someone post messages to the list that should
be directed to me
because they concern administrative issues I put
that person on
moderate. All posts that person sends must be
forwarded by me to the list.

When someone disagrees with administrative policies
they can put the
whole list into chaos. And this is something I
will not permit.

Sincerely,

Joan Asche
List Admin.

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005, 3:55
PM:


Dear Joan,

May I ask you a question? Are my posts being
`moderated'? Do I have to go through some kind of
evaluation of what I say?

I would greatly appreciate a clarification on
that.

Yours,

Francisco Antonio Doria





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 06 apr 2005 08:14:35

Thanks for posting this, Chico.

I have great admiration for your taking this stand.

People such as Ms. Asche become "Listmistresses" or "Listmasters" on
these lists and the power and arrogance go straight to their heads.

Since they have the POWER to monitor, moderate, censor, admonish, rebuke
and chastise -- even the power to pull the plug on someone -- they just
can't resist the impulse to do it.

Lord Acton was right.

That's why I'm so happy we have a USENET NEWSGROUP in SGM -- not just
another list, running solo.

Cheers,

DSH

"Francisco Antonio Doria" <franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote in
message news:20050406062852.60857.qmail@web30908.mail.mud.yahoo.com...
|
| Let me explain what is going on.
|
| I was invited to gen-Ancient-L by Ford Mommaerts, when
| he started it. Recently Ms Joan Asche (I know that she
| has a homepage on her family; I am not aware if she
| has done any work on DFAs or ancient genealogy)
| announced that she had taken up administrative duties
| - whatever that might mean - for gen-Ancient.
|
| I was on a trip overseas at that time, and so it took
| me some 10 days to read about the change. Ms Asche
| circulated some guidelines for posting that were
| surprisingly restrictive. I then disagreed, noticed
| that forbidden actions would never violate copyright
| laws; also told her that I would check with RootsWeb
| about her own guidelines.
|
| Then she ordered me to the corner, under a dunce's
| hat...
|
| I'm too old, too senior in age and perhaps in other
| qualifications, to be shouted at by any
| schoolmistress. So, I quit gen-ancient. If and when I
| have anything to say on the matter, I'll post it here.
| If anyone wants to start another - non-moderated, even
| immoderate... - list on ancient genealogy, please do
| invite me.
|
| Immoderately,
|
| Francisco Antonio Doria
|
| --- Francisco Antonio Doria
| <franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
| >
| > Please cancel my subscription.
| >
| > Francisco Antonio Doria
| >
| > --- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:
| >
| > > Yes, your posts are being moderated.
| > >
| > > When someone post messages to the list that should
| > > be directed to me
| > > because they concern administrative issues I put
| > > that person on
| > > moderate. All posts that person sends must be
| > > forwarded by me to the list.
| > >
| > > When someone disagrees with administrative
| > policies
| > > they can put the
| > > whole list into chaos. And this is something I
| > > will not permit.
| > >
| > > Sincerely,
| > >
| > > Joan Asche
| > > List Admin.
| > >
| > > Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005, 3:55
| > > PM:
| > >
| > > >
| > > > Dear Joan,
| > > >
| > > > May I ask you a question? Are my posts being
| > > > `moderated'? Do I have to go through some kind
| > of
| > > > evaluation of what I say?
| > > >
| > > > I would greatly appreciate a clarification on
| > > that.
| > > >
| > > > Yours,
| > > >
| > > > Francisco Antonio Doria

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 08:31:02

Let me explain what is going on.

I was invited to gen-Ancient-L by Ford Mommaerts, when
he started it. Recently Ms Joan Asche (I know that she
has a homepage on her family; I am not aware if she
has done any work on DFAs or ancient genealogy)
announced that she had taken up administrative duties
- whatever that might mean - for gen-Ancient.

I was on a trip overseas at that time, and so it took
me some 10 days to read about the change. Ms Asche
circulated some guidelines for posting that were
surprisingly restrictive. I then disagreed, noticed
that forbidden actions would never violate copyright
laws; also told her that I would check with RootsWeb
about her own guidelines.

Then she ordered me to the corner, under a dunce's
hat...

I'm too old, too senior in age and perhaps in other
qualifications, to be shouted at by any
schoolmistress. So, I quit gen-ancient. If and when I
have anything to say on the matter, I'll post it here.
If anyone wants to start another - non-moderated, even
immoderate... - list on ancient genealogy, please do
invite me.

Immoderately,

Francisco Antonio Doria

--- Francisco Antonio Doria
<franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
Please cancel my subscription.

Francisco Antonio Doria

--- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:

Yes, your posts are being moderated.

When someone post messages to the list that should
be directed to me
because they concern administrative issues I put
that person on
moderate. All posts that person sends must be
forwarded by me to the list.

When someone disagrees with administrative
policies
they can put the
whole list into chaos. And this is something I
will not permit.

Sincerely,

Joan Asche
List Admin.

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005, 3:55
PM:


Dear Joan,

May I ask you a question? Are my posts being
`moderated'? Do I have to go through some kind
of
evaluation of what I say?

I would greatly appreciate a clarification on
that.

Yours,

Francisco Antonio Doria





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second
dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 08:41:02

I was wondering if Ms Asche did violate my First
Amendment rights somehow...

;-)))

--- "D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Bravo!

You did precisely the right thing, Chico.

This is why these genealogical, et al., "lists" are
anathema -- they are
censored.

Salud,

Spencer

D. Spencer Hines

"Francisco Antonio Doria"
franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote in
message

news:20050406060848.84776.qmail@web30902.mail.mud.yahoo.com...
|
| Please cancel my subscription.
|
| Francisco Antonio Doria
|
| --- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:
|
| > Yes, your posts are being moderated.
|
| > When someone post messages to the list that
should
| > be directed to me
| > because they concern administrative issues I put
| > that person on
| > moderate. All posts that person sends must be
| > forwarded by me to the list.
|
| > When someone disagrees with administrative
policies
| > they can put the
| > whole list into chaos. And this is something I
| > will not permit.
|
| > Sincerely,
|
| > Joan Asche
| > List Admin.
|
| > Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005,
3:55
| > PM:
|
|
| > > Dear Joan,
|
| > > May I ask you a question? Are my posts being
| > > `moderated'? Do I have to go through some
kind of
| > > evaluation of what I say?
|
| > > I would greatly appreciate a clarification on
| > that.
|
| > > Yours,
|
| > > Francisco Antonio Doria





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 08:51:01

Dear Merilyn,

Thanks, but I'm out. Let's go on with the posts here
to gen-med, and leave g-A to Ms Asche.

chico

--- Merilyn Pedrick <pedricks@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
What?? And lose people of the calibre of Francisco
Doria? You will lose
many more valuable contributors if you go on like
this.
Merilyn Pedrick
Aldgate, South Australia

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

From: Francisco Antonio Doria
Date: 04/06/05 15:42:40
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Please cancel my subscription.

Francisco Antonio Doria

--- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:

Yes, your posts are being moderated.

When someone post messages to the list that should
be directed to me
because they concern administrative issues I put
that person on
moderate. All posts that person sends must be
forwarded by me to the list.

When someone disagrees with administrative
policies
they can put the
whole list into chaos. And this is something I
will not permit.

Sincerely,

Joan Asche
List Admin.

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005, 3:55
PM:


Dear Joan,

May I ask you a question? Are my posts being
`moderated'? Do I have to go through some kind
of
evaluation of what I say?

I would greatly appreciate a clarification on
that.

Yours,

Francisco Antonio Doria





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second
dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com





__________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 08:51:02

Spencer,

There are lots of flame wars here at gen-med, but the
list's files contain a huge amount of valuable
top-quality scholarship.

chico

--- "D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Thanks for posting this, Chico.

I have great admiration for your taking this stand.

People such as Ms. Asche become "Listmistresses" or
"Listmasters" on
these lists and the power and arrogance go straight
to their heads.

Since they have the POWER to monitor, moderate,
censor, admonish, rebuke
and chastise -- even the power to pull the plug on
someone -- they just
can't resist the impulse to do it.

Lord Acton was right.

That's why I'm so happy we have a USENET NEWSGROUP
in SGM -- not just
another list, running solo.

Cheers,

DSH

"Francisco Antonio Doria"
franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote in
message

news:20050406062852.60857.qmail@web30908.mail.mud.yahoo.com...
|
| Let me explain what is going on.
|
| I was invited to gen-Ancient-L by Ford Mommaerts,
when
| he started it. Recently Ms Joan Asche (I know that
she
| has a homepage on her family; I am not aware if
she
| has done any work on DFAs or ancient genealogy)
| announced that she had taken up administrative
duties
| - whatever that might mean - for gen-Ancient.
|
| I was on a trip overseas at that time, and so it
took
| me some 10 days to read about the change. Ms Asche
| circulated some guidelines for posting that were
| surprisingly restrictive. I then disagreed,
noticed
| that forbidden actions would never violate
copyright
| laws; also told her that I would check with
RootsWeb
| about her own guidelines.
|
| Then she ordered me to the corner, under a dunce's
| hat...
|
| I'm too old, too senior in age and perhaps in
other
| qualifications, to be shouted at by any
| schoolmistress. So, I quit gen-ancient. If and
when I
| have anything to say on the matter, I'll post it
here.
| If anyone wants to start another - non-moderated,
even
| immoderate... - list on ancient genealogy, please
do
| invite me.
|
| Immoderately,
|
| Francisco Antonio Doria
|
| --- Francisco Antonio Doria
| <franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
|
| > Please cancel my subscription.
|
| > Francisco Antonio Doria
|
| > --- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:
|
| > > Yes, your posts are being moderated.
|
| > > When someone post messages to the list that
should
| > > be directed to me
| > > because they concern administrative issues I
put
| > > that person on
| > > moderate. All posts that person sends must be
| > > forwarded by me to the list.
|
| > > When someone disagrees with administrative
| > policies
| > > they can put the
| > > whole list into chaos. And this is something
I
| > > will not permit.
|
| > > Sincerely,
|
| > > Joan Asche
| > > List Admin.
|
| > > Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005,
3:55
| > > PM:
|
|
| > > > Dear Joan,
|
| > > > May I ask you a question? Are my posts
being
| > > > `moderated'? Do I have to go through some
kind
| > of
| > > > evaluation of what I say?
|
| > > > I would greatly appreciate a clarification
on
| > > that.
|
| > > > Yours,
|
| > > > Francisco Antonio Doria





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Gjest

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Gjest » 06 apr 2005 10:21:01

And long my it reign!

Rose

Gjest

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Gjest » 06 apr 2005 10:21:02

In a message dated 06/04/05 07:47:34 GMT Daylight Time,
franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br writes:

There are lots of flame wars here at gen-med, but the
list's files contain a huge amount of valuable
top-quality scholarship.


And long may it reign!

Rose

John Brandon

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av John Brandon » 06 apr 2005 15:39:42

| > When someone disagrees with administrative policies
| > they can put the
| > whole list into chaos. And this is something I
| > will not permit.
|
| > Sincerely,
|
| > Joan Asche
| > List Admin.

Ridiculous. Poor thing.

It's the one thing she can control, and, dammit, she's going to control it.

starbuck95

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av starbuck95 » 06 apr 2005 15:43:22

For a charming photo, see ...

http://www.jasche.com/

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 16:31:01

Well, stepmothers are the stuff of children's tales,
with good reason...

Of course one should know the subject matter: in order
to distinguish on-topic material from off-topic stuff.


Anyway I'm out. And from now on I'll be more careful
in my posts to RoostWeb lists.

Best,

Francisco Antonio Doria

--- RootsWeb HelpDesk <helpdesk-post@rootsweb.com>
wrote:
A response to your Help Desk message, "LISTS: New
manager at gen-ancient-L,"
of Wed, 6 Apr 2005, at 6:46 a.m. follows:



-------------------------
RootsWeb lists belong to RootsWeb. List Admins are
volunteers. They perform
the housekeeping chores for the list and see that
posts remain on topic
and within the guidelines of the AUP. They are not
required to be an "expert"
on the topic for the list.

If an Admin is unavailable or unwilling to perform
the required duties,
the list is put up for adoption, and may be adopted
by any volunteer who
is willing to perform those duties.

Please see
http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/listadmins/duties.html

Pat

Name of the list: gen-ancient-L
Are you
the administrator? No

Message: The list was
created by Stanford Mommaerts, an internationally
renowned scholar, who invited me to it. Ford had
problems, and a couple of weeks ago one Ms Joan
Asche (apparently without Ford's well-known
scholarly
credentials) took up the list as manager by
posting
her ``rules.'' I contested them - and was punished
by being subject to moderation, as an unruly
student
with a dunce's hat... Who is she? Who chose her?
Which are her credentials? Plain cronyinism or
is she some ignored but brilliant expert on the
field?

Francisco Antonio Doria
Prix Caumont-La
Force 1995

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

To respond to this message, please press your
'Reply' button.

To post a question on a different topic, revisit the
form located at
http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/help.cgi

Thank You!!




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

starbuck95

Re: Looks don't show abilities [was: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: chan

Legg inn av starbuck95 » 06 apr 2005 16:38:24

Tsk, John. Looks don't reflect abilities.

This is true, and she may be a genius. But I somehow doubt it ...

Dolly Ziegler

Looks don't show abilities [was: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change f

Legg inn av Dolly Ziegler » 06 apr 2005 17:20:02

On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, starbuck95 wrote:

For a charming photo, see ...

http://www.jasche.com/

Tsk, John. Looks don't reflect abilities. "I are smarter than you
think I look." A rogue's gallery of GEN-MED regulars might be
amusing. I spoke with a certain "spam czar" on Saturday....

Apparently Chico was unfairly treated, but he has signed off on this.
Back to genealogy and prosopography, please? Cheers, Dolly in Maryland

Gjest

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Gjest » 06 apr 2005 17:41:02

Rootsweb has to obey the voice of the people as well. I suggest we ALL send
their helpdesk mails until they realize the mistake made in appointing someone
of such petty qualities as a list admin.
Will Johnson

Ray Montgomery

RE: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Ray Montgomery » 06 apr 2005 17:41:02

To whom it may concern:
I for one would like to write such a letter. In reviewing this subject and
being aware of the help that Francisco has personally given me, and also
knowing of his astute scholarship, I know for a fact that there is a very
severe problem here.
I apologize for the stupid question but in light of my very heavy scheduled
day, does any one know of the email address to write this letter?
Sincerely,
Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: WJhonson@aol.com [mailto:WJhonson@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 8:31 AM
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Rootsweb has to obey the voice of the people as well. I suggest we ALL send
their helpdesk mails until they realize the mistake made in appointing
someone
of such petty qualities as a list admin.
Will Johnson


Gjest

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Gjest » 06 apr 2005 18:31:01

I have found the culprit email. A bouncing Ford email addr and look what
happens. The moral of the story is, step up to admin or else you get an
untenable situation. I point list members to the archives for MARCH where the new
admin "invites people to submit ANY brickwall ancient or not ..."
Luckily only a few people did, just imagine ....
Will Johnson



From: "Andrew Billinghurst" <DisplayMail('rootsweb.com','billingh');
billingh@rootsweb.com
Subject: GEN-ANCIENT List Administrator: please contact Rootsweb
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:34:39 +1100


Hi,

**This message is being sent to the GEN-ANCIENT mailing list.**

The email address that RootsWeb has for the GEN-ANCIENT list admin

DisplayMail('earthlink.net','smommaerts');smommaerts@earthlink.net

is bouncing, so RootsWeb is looking to make contact with the list
admin. Will the list admin please contact Andrew Billinghurst
(DisplayMail('rootsweb.com','billingh');billingh@rootsweb.com) so that we
know that you are still
maintaining this list and please reply quoting this message.

List members there is nothing for you to worry about and nothing for
you to do, it is probably just an email problem for the person
looking after the day-to-day management of this list. Rest assured
that this does not mean that your list is in danger.

Thanks!

Andrew Billinghurst, RootsWeb Staff
DisplayMail('rootsweb.com','billingh');billingh@rootsweb.com

CE Wood

Re: Louvain- Ponthieu link ?

Legg inn av CE Wood » 06 apr 2005 18:32:38

From the dates of marriage with and death of her two husbands, Gertrude
must have married Raoul as her first husband and Everard Radulf as her

second husband.

CE Wood


frederic.collin@lathuy.com wrote:

<snip>
.....11 F iii. Gertrude de MONTAIGU 17,18,19,20 died after 4 May
1189.<snip>

Gertrude married (1) Everard Radulf III de MORTAGNE 21,22,23,24 son of
Everard Radulf II de MORTAGNE and Richilde de HAINAUT about 1161.
Everard died on 14 Mar 1190.<snip>

Gertrude married (2) Raoul II de NESLE 25,26,27 son of Raoul Ier de
NESLE and Rainurde N. before 1143. Raoul died after 1160.<snip>

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 19:51:02

Thanks, but their answer is noncommital, like an
answering service.

fa

--- WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
You can address mail to
helpdesk-post@rootsweb.com







__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Gordon Banks

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 06 apr 2005 20:23:27

I complained to the rootsweb webmaster about her.

Her "welcome" post was that people should start by "posting their brick
walls." I responded that it would be better to post anything that
wasn't a brick wall, due to the paucity of established descents from
antiquity. I got a nasty note about that saying that if I didn't want
to participate I didn't have to. No one posted any brick walls.

Then someone posted that they had genealogies of non-royal ancient
persons which couldn't be traced to modern people. I posted that most
people on the list probably were most interested in those with living
descendants but to "go ahead and post them." She took that to mean that
I was trying to moderate her list and send me email saying "never do
that again."

My postings following that have come from her after she's looked at
them.

I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't believe he selected this
clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon the Gen-Ancient list
and post here instead.

It also might help if more people would complain about her. If enough
complain, they will probably bounce her.

On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 06:08 +0000, Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
Please cancel my subscription.

Francisco Antonio Doria

--- Joan Asche <jasche45133@aol.com> wrote:

Yes, your posts are being moderated.

When someone post messages to the list that should
be directed to me
because they concern administrative issues I put
that person on
moderate. All posts that person sends must be
forwarded by me to the list.

When someone disagrees with administrative policies
they can put the
whole list into chaos. And this is something I
will not permit.

Sincerely,

Joan Asche
List Admin.

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote on 04/05/2005, 3:55
PM:


Dear Joan,

May I ask you a question? Are my posts being
`moderated'? Do I have to go through some kind of
evaluation of what I say?

I would greatly appreciate a clarification on
that.

Yours,

Francisco Antonio Doria





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 06 apr 2005 20:24:00

Do you think she has ever managed anything even as complex as a Girl
Scout troop before falling heir to Gen-Ancient-L?

DSH

"starbuck95" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112798602.500553.321150@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

| For a charming photo, see ...
|
| http://www.jasche.com/

Chris Phillips

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Chris Phillips » 06 apr 2005 20:44:47

Gordon Banks wrote:
I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't believe he selected this
clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon the Gen-Ancient list
and post here instead.

It does sound like bizarre behaviour.

Is there anything to prevent you from starting a sensibly moderated list as
an alternative, named GEN-ANTIQUITY, or GEN-PREMEDIEVAL, or something?

Chris Phillips

starbuck95

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av starbuck95 » 06 apr 2005 20:47:33

Maybe a catering service.

I should stop being bad, but she has a strong resemblance to a cousin
of mine (a very resentful person).

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 06 apr 2005 21:02:43

Yes, just boycott her list and post here.

She needs a good kick in the rumpus.

DSH

"Gordon Banks" <geb@gordonbanks.com> wrote in message
news:1112815408.56c8d8cd138753fb1d9e6875e0cf7f33@teranews...

| I complained to the rootsweb webmaster about her.
|
| Her "welcome" post was that people should start by "posting their
brick
| walls." I responded that it would be better to post anything that
| wasn't a brick wall, due to the paucity of established descents from
| antiquity. I got a nasty note about that saying that if I didn't want
| to participate I didn't have to. No one posted any brick walls.
|
| Then someone posted that they had genealogies of non-royal ancient
| persons which couldn't be traced to modern people. I posted that most
| people on the list probably were most interested in those with living
| descendants but to "go ahead and post them." She took that to mean
that
| I was trying to moderate her list and send me email saying "never do
| that again."
|
| My postings following that have come from her after she's looked at
| them.
|
| I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't believe he selected this
| clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon the Gen-Ancient
list
| and post here instead.
|
| It also might help if more people would complain about her. If enough
| complain, they will probably bounce her.

Gordon Banks

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 06 apr 2005 21:51:02

Send copies of her posts along to illustrate.

On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 11:30 -0400, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Rootsweb has to obey the voice of the people as well. I suggest we ALL send
their helpdesk mails until they realize the mistake made in appointing someone
of such petty qualities as a list admin.
Will Johnson
--

Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com>

Gordon Banks

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 06 apr 2005 21:51:02

On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 12:29 -0400, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:

From: "Andrew Billinghurst" <DisplayMail('rootsweb.com','billingh');
billingh@rootsweb.com
Subject: GEN-ANCIENT List Administrator: please contact Rootsweb
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:34:39 +1100


List members there is nothing for you to worry about and nothing for
you to do, it is probably just an email problem for the person
looking after the day-to-day management of this list. Rest assured
that this does not mean that your list is in danger.


WRONG!
--
Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com>

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 06 apr 2005 22:21:03

I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.

fa

--- Chris Phillips <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk>
wrote:
Gordon Banks wrote:
I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't
believe he selected this
clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon
the Gen-Ancient list
and post here instead.

It does sound like bizarre behaviour.

Is there anything to prevent you from starting a
sensibly moderated list as
an alternative, named GEN-ANTIQUITY, or
GEN-PREMEDIEVAL, or something?

Chris Phillips







__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Gjest

Re:Gen Ancient L: a change for much worse ?

Legg inn av Gjest » 07 apr 2005 00:11:02

Dear Chico, Chris, Renia, Todd, John, Spencer and others,

I think We need to thank our List Owners for overlooking our
frequent forays into non- Medieval genealogy related topics, just because They don`t
have to. Now, as to names for a rival list; How about GEN Ancient Ancestors-L
?
Rather like a slap across the face, isn`t it ?
Sincerely,
James W
Cummings
Dixmont,
Maine USA

norenxaq

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av norenxaq » 07 apr 2005 00:11:03

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:

I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.

fa

google-groups?

what is that address?

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 07 apr 2005 00:31:01

I'll have to check it. Do you have a google mail
address? I'll send an invitation to you.

fa

--- norenxaq <norenxaq@san.rr.com> wrote:

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:

I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.

fa

google-groups?

what is that address?







Yahoo! Acesso Grátis - Internet rápida e grátis.
Instale o discador agora! http://br.acesso.yahoo.com/

norenxaq

Re: Gen Ancient L: a change for much worse ?

Legg inn av norenxaq » 07 apr 2005 00:31:02

Jwc1870@aol.com wrote:

Dear Chico, Chris, Renia, Todd, John, Spencer and others,

I think We need to thank our List Owners for overlooking our
frequent forays into non- Medieval genealogy related topics, just because They don`t
have to. Now, as to names for a rival list; How about GEN Ancient Ancestors-L
?
Rather like a slap across the face, isn`t it ?
Sincerely,
James W
Cummings
Dixmont,
Maine USA

sounds good. however, rather than simply discussing an alternate group, whatever needs
to be done to form it should be started

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 07 apr 2005 00:55:46

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.


Someone (? Matthew Rockefeller ?) posted a while back that they had
created a Google group along these lines. I see that in Google Groups
(groups.google.com) there already exists a group called:


soc-genealogy-ancient

Group description: Ancient genealogies, DFA's, anything prior to AD500
and/or leading into the medieval period.



The new Google Beta search engine 'fixed' something that wasn't broke,
so it is a little harder to navigate now. In the first search window,
search for "soc-genealogy-ancient", then open up the "related groups:
soc-genealogy-ancient" link to see the posts and do a group-specific
search. Note that this is a message board - an entirely different
animal than soc.genealogy.medieval, a USENET group for which Google is
providing a web-based gateway and archive. Google is trying to do the
same kind of thing AOL and other ISPs have done in the past (though AOL
goes a step further, applying the strategy to the entire internet) -
trick people into thinking that all of USENET is just a part of Google,
co-mingling authentic USENET groups with Google-exclusive groups, and
you have to look at the small, off-color print to see the distinction.

taf

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 07 apr 2005 02:31:01

thanks, Todd, for the remark, but for the moment I
think I'll simply go on posting here whenever I have
anything to say on DFAs and related stuff.

If and when one reaches a critical mass, I think we
can move to a more restricted group.

Best, chico

--- "Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote:
Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.


Someone (? Matthew Rockefeller ?) posted a while
back that they had
created a Google group along these lines. I see
that in Google Groups
(groups.google.com) there already exists a group
called:


soc-genealogy-ancient

Group description: Ancient genealogies, DFA's,
anything prior to AD500
and/or leading into the medieval period.



The new Google Beta search engine 'fixed' something
that wasn't broke,
so it is a little harder to navigate now. In the
first search window,
search for "soc-genealogy-ancient", then open up the
"related groups:
soc-genealogy-ancient" link to see the posts and do
a group-specific
search. Note that this is a message board - an
entirely different
animal than soc.genealogy.medieval, a USENET group
for which Google is
providing a web-based gateway and archive. Google
is trying to do the
same kind of thing AOL and other ISPs have done in
the past (though AOL
goes a step further, applying the strategy to the
entire internet) -
trick people into thinking that all of USENET is
just a part of Google,
co-mingling authentic USENET groups with
Google-exclusive groups, and
you have to look at the small, off-color print to
see the distinction.

taf





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com

norenxaq

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av norenxaq » 07 apr 2005 03:11:01

"Todd A. Farmerie" wrote:

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.

Someone (? Matthew Rockefeller ?) posted a while back that they had
created a Google group along these lines. I see that in Google Groups
(groups.google.com) there already exists a group called:

soc-genealogy-ancient

Group description: Ancient genealogies, DFA's, anything prior to AD500
and/or leading into the medieval period.



one post in january only, it seems... rather dead I think. as such, it
might work as a replacement for the rootsweb group

D. Spencer Hines

Re: The Inherent Opportunity For Tyranny On RootsWeb "Lists"

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 07 apr 2005 03:18:35

It is the very Cybernetic STRUCTURE which we have here ---- and which
Free-Standing USENET NEWSGROUPS also have -- that creates the Conditions
Necessary For Freedom.

THAT'S The POINT.

DSH
--------------------------------------

"Rick Eaton" <eaton.noble@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:BE79FE91.2C51%eaton.noble@sbcglobal.net...

<twaddlesnip>

Bottom Line:

Absolute Power Tends To Corrupt Absolutely.

Since SGM and GEN-MED are YOKED together -- "Listowners" cannot ever
become tyrants. They cannot CONTROL or CENSOR what is posted -- nor
SHOULD they.

Such is NOT the case on a Free-Standing LIST -- NOT yoked to a
NEWSGROUP.

We Have It Better -- Whereas LISTS Are Condemned To Mediocrity,
Homogeneity, Banality -- And Frequently Degenerate Into Tyranny.

Ergo, anyone who foolishly joins a Free-Standing Genealogical LIST --
where the "Listowner/s" can "MODERATE", CENSOR and "DISCIPLINE" the
posters at will -- and on a whim -- deserves what he or she gets.

'Nuff Said.

D. Spencer Hines

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Vires et Honor

| > Bingo!
| >
| > Which goes to show, yet again, that Chico is doing PRECISELY the
| > right thing by voting with his feet.
| >
| > Free-Standing Genealogical "Lists" are clearly an Invitation To
| > Tyranny.
| >
| > The only reason we have Freedom Of Speech here on SGM is that the
| > GEN-MEDIEVAL LIST is yoked to a Siamese Twin --
| > soc.genealogy.medieval.
| >
| > If it were not --- taf and Don would have been tempted to exercise
| > the same sort of Tyrannical Regime HERE long ago.
| >
| > Men and Women with unchecked power are inherently corruptible -- and
| > the desire for Comity, "Civility", Tranquility and Order will ALWAYS
| > out over Truth, Accuracy, Democracy and Freedom -- if given any sort
| > of opening.
| >
| > Our Founding Fathers wisely understood all that -- but the folks at
| > RootsWeb do NOT -- so boycott them.
| >
| > Rosa Parks was right....she refused to move to the rear of the bus
| > and sit with the "other colored folk."
| >
| > Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
| >
| > Deus Vult.
| >
| > "The final happiness of man consists in the contemplation of
| > truth.... This is sought for its own sake, and is directed to no
| > other end beyond itself." Saint Thomas Aquinas, [1224/5-1274]
| > "Summa Contra Gentiles" [c.1258-1264]
| >
| > "Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur. Odi profanum vulgus et
| > arceo."
| >
| > Quintus Aurelius Stultus [33 B.C. - 42 A.D.]
| >
| > Prosecutio stultitiae est gravis vexatio, executio stultitiae
| > coronat opus.
| >
| > D. Spencer Hines
| >
| > Lux et Veritas et Libertas
| >
| > Vires et Honor

Stanford Mommaerts-Browne

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Stanford Mommaerts-Browne » 07 apr 2005 06:10:02

----- Original Message -----
From: <WJhonson@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)


Rootsweb has to obey the voice of the people as well. I suggest we ALL
send
their helpdesk mails until they realize the mistake made in appointing
someone
of such petty qualities as a list admin.
Will Johnson


For what it is worth, this is an excerpt from
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GE ... 1112759630:

I may as well address, here, some questions which have arisen.
I 'disappeared' due to continuing software troubles. Since I can't afford
new, I have to muddle through.
I had started Gen-Ancient because I saw an
interest. It had been my hope to nuture it to a going concern, (further
than I succeeded), and then, bow out. Fortunately, Ms. (Dr./Prof.?) Asche
was willing and able to take the ball, and to run with same. I sincerely
wish her (& you all) a world of luck.
I no longer maintain the EarthLink sites as it was too costly to pay for EL,
(which does not offer highspeed/broadband internet in my area, and to pay
for Cox, which does not offer the support of Trellix for webspace
development. I still have the charts which appeared on all four EL sites,
(i.e. Ancient, Classical, Asian/Oriental, and Arab-&-Moslem), and can e-mail
them, (mostly in gif, though some in jpg, format), to interested parties.
PLEASE be reminded that they are ALL only TENTATIVE.
Also, due to the aforementioned difficulties, I have had to reload my
computer twice (2X) /week for acouple of months. I have lost all e-mail
prior to the very end of March, and all addresses. So I shall be remiss in
corresponding with some of you for a while. I have also been unable to
re-install IE6, (if anyone has suggestions on resolving that!).

Sincerest best wishes, and
Thanks for the concern which some have shown,
Ford

Stanford Mommaerts-Browne

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Stanford Mommaerts-Browne » 07 apr 2005 06:21:01

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Montgomery" <rmontgomery@calrepair.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 8:36 AM
Subject: RE: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)


To whom it may concern:
I for one would like to write such a letter. In reviewing this subject and
being aware of the help that Francisco has personally given me, and also
knowing of his astute scholarship, I know for a fact that there is a very
severe problem here.


My first thought when I saw Chico's unsubscription request was, 'Does she
know what she has driven away? Apparently not. How unfortunate!'
Fortunately, I still am able to correspond with the gentleman from Brazil,
without Gen-Ancient.
The saddest part of all is how counter-productive to the advancement of this
field of study these actions are.
A much-saddened Ford


I apologize for the stupid question but in light of my very heavy
scheduled
day, does any one know of the email address to write this letter?
Sincerely,
Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: WJhonson@aol.com [mailto:WJhonson@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 8:31 AM
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Rootsweb has to obey the voice of the people as well. I suggest we ALL
send
their helpdesk mails until they realize the mistake made in appointing
someone
of such petty qualities as a list admin.
Will Johnson

Paul K Davis

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Paul K Davis » 07 apr 2005 07:00:02

Is there a way of interacting with this group by e-mail, the way I'm used
to with gen-ancient-l and gen-medieval-l?

-- PKD [Paul K Davis, pkd-gm@earthlink.net]


[Original Message]
From: Todd A. Farmerie <farmerie@interfold.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Date: 4/6/2005 4:56:30 PM
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.


Someone (? Matthew Rockefeller ?) posted a while back that they had
created a Google group along these lines. I see that in Google Groups
(groups.google.com) there already exists a group called:


soc-genealogy-ancient

Group description: Ancient genealogies, DFA's, anything prior to AD500
and/or leading into the medieval period.



The new Google Beta search engine 'fixed' something that wasn't broke,
so it is a little harder to navigate now. In the first search window,
search for "soc-genealogy-ancient", then open up the "related groups:
soc-genealogy-ancient" link to see the posts and do a group-specific
search. Note that this is a message board - an entirely different
animal than soc.genealogy.medieval, a USENET group for which Google is
providing a web-based gateway and archive. Google is trying to do the
same kind of thing AOL and other ISPs have done in the past (though AOL
goes a step further, applying the strategy to the entire internet) -
trick people into thinking that all of USENET is just a part of Google,
co-mingling authentic USENET groups with Google-exclusive groups, and
you have to look at the small, off-color print to see the distinction.

taf

Gjest

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Gjest » 07 apr 2005 08:01:01

Paul and others. I just joined that google group and you can set a flag to send you emails whenever a posting is made. I didn't try to see if you can reply to those emails or not. And I didnt try to see if any such reply would go on the group or not.
Will

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul K Davis <pkd-gm@earthlink.net>
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 21:58:42 -0700
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?


Is there a way of interacting with this group by e-mail, the way I'm used
to with gen-ancient-l and gen-medieval-l?

-- PKD [Paul K Davis, pkd-gm@earthlink.net]


[Original Message]
From: Todd A. Farmerie <farmerie@interfold.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Date: 4/6/2005 4:56:30 PM
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.


Someone (? Matthew Rockefeller ?) posted a while back that they had
created a Google group along these lines. I see that in Google Groups
(groups.google.com) there already exists a group called:


soc-genealogy-ancient

Group description: Ancient genealogies, DFA's, anything prior to AD500
and/or leading into the medieval period.



The new Google Beta search engine 'fixed' something that wasn't broke,
so it is a little harder to navigate now. In the first search window,
search for "soc-genealogy-ancient", then open up the "related groups:
soc-genealogy-ancient" link to see the posts and do a group-specific
search. Note that this is a message board - an entirely different
animal than soc.genealogy.medieval, a USENET group for which Google is
providing a web-based gateway and archive. Google is trying to do the
same kind of thing AOL and other ISPs have done in the past (though AOL
goes a step further, applying the strategy to the entire internet) -
trick people into thinking that all of USENET is just a part of Google,
co-mingling authentic USENET groups with Google-exclusive groups, and
you have to look at the small, off-color print to see the distinction.

taf

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 07 apr 2005 08:55:55

Paul K Davis wrote:
Is there a way of interacting with this group by e-mail, the way I'm used
to with gen-ancient-l and gen-medieval-l?

No. It is not a mailing list, it is a message board, just like Genforum
or Ancestry's message boards. You read the messages on the Google
Groups web page, and you respond through a web-based form.

taf

Francisco Antonio Doria

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Francisco Antonio Doria » 07 apr 2005 10:01:02

Ford,

In case you need it, I can ask my friend Sergio
Buratto here in Brazil, who houses my genealogical
scrapbook, to house at least part of your pages.

(He will be receiving this msg as c/c.)

chico

--- Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
<StanfordMommaerts@cox.net> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: <WJhonson@aol.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L
(Pat #337830)


Rootsweb has to obey the voice of the people as
well. I suggest we ALL
send
their helpdesk mails until they realize the
mistake made in appointing
someone
of such petty qualities as a list admin.
Will Johnson


For what it is worth, this is an excerpt from

http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GE ... 1112759630:

I may as well address, here, some questions which
have arisen.
I 'disappeared' due to continuing software troubles.
Since I can't afford
new, I have to muddle through.
I had started Gen-Ancient because I saw an
interest. It had been my hope to nuture it to a
going concern, (further
than I succeeded), and then, bow out. Fortunately,
Ms. (Dr./Prof.?) Asche
was willing and able to take the ball, and to run
with same. I sincerely
wish her (& you all) a world of luck.
I no longer maintain the EarthLink sites as it was
too costly to pay for EL,
(which does not offer highspeed/broadband internet
in my area, and to pay
for Cox, which does not offer the support of Trellix
for webspace
development. I still have the charts which appeared
on all four EL sites,
(i.e. Ancient, Classical, Asian/Oriental, and
Arab-&-Moslem), and can e-mail
them, (mostly in gif, though some in jpg, format),
to interested parties.
PLEASE be reminded that they are ALL only TENTATIVE.
Also, due to the aforementioned difficulties, I have
had to reload my
computer twice (2X) /week for acouple of months. I
have lost all e-mail
prior to the very end of March, and all addresses.
So I shall be remiss in
corresponding with some of you for a while. I have
also been unable to
re-install IE6, (if anyone has suggestions on
resolving that!).

Sincerest best wishes, and
Thanks for the concern which some have shown,
Ford






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Gjest

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Gjest » 07 apr 2005 12:00:58

Francisco,

I am a lurker here, seldom post...but always enjoy yours. You know
your stuff, and I have learned from you. Sure hope you stay around...

John

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 07 apr 2005 17:51:56

In message of 7 Apr, geb@gordonbanks.com (Gordon Banks) wrote:

I guess it could be done if anyone wants to take it on. I'd just as
soon keep it here.

I would prefer that this group kept to its chartered period.

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

Gordon Banks

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 07 apr 2005 18:21:02

I guess it could be done if anyone wants to take it on. I'd just as
soon keep it here. There are those who can't take the incivility here,
but I've gotten used to it.

On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 20:44 +0100, Chris Phillips wrote:
Gordon Banks wrote:
I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't believe he selected this
clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon the Gen-Ancient list
and post here instead.

It does sound like bizarre behaviour.

Is there anything to prevent you from starting a sensibly moderated list as
an alternative, named GEN-ANTIQUITY, or GEN-PREMEDIEVAL, or something?

Chris Phillips


--

Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com>

Gordon Banks

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 07 apr 2005 20:41:02

I just got this today, so perhaps they have either been monitoring the
group or others have complained. Sounds like they are trying to rectify
the problem. I'm sure this isn't the first group that has had this kind
of problem.

Rootsweb:

A response to your Help Desk message, "Re: LISTS: Strange new
administrator
on Gen-Ancient (HelpDesk #335789) (fwd)," of Tuesday, 22 March 2005, at
09:53 AM follows:



-------------------------
Thank you for your email. This matter is known to us and we are trying
to navigate our ways through various options.


On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 13:18 -0700, Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.

fa

--- Chris Phillips <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk
wrote:

Gordon Banks wrote:
I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't
believe he selected this
clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon
the Gen-Ancient list
and post here instead.

It does sound like bizarre behaviour.

Is there anything to prevent you from starting a
sensibly moderated list as
an alternative, named GEN-ANTIQUITY, or
GEN-PREMEDIEVAL, or something?

Chris Phillips







__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
--

Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com>

Stanford Mommaerts-Browne

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Stanford Mommaerts-Browne » 07 apr 2005 21:00:02

This is how a nascent thread is appearing at Gen-Ancient:

Sh'ma Yisra'el by Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
Fwd: RE: [GEN-ANCIENT] Sh'ma Yisra'el by Joan Asche

It also shows up in my mailbox as coming from JA, not from Chico or Paul.
Now my first thought on this is that JA has responded to my req. for
interest/collaboration.
Since she is now the author of the reply, I dare not quote PKD's words here,
but that is the knowledgeable person who responded with
leads/input/communication/sharing. I think that this is a gross distortion
of what is happening, and a fraudulent misrepresentation of scholarship.

Now, JA and the powers-that-be at RW, (whom she claims to have consulted),
may or may not be right in their understanding or interpretation of
international copyright laws, (my study of law says that they are not); but,
assuredly, they violate the ethics of scholarly or academic research and
publication - ('publication' simply means making public - it's how we share
and collaborate and advance).

Stanford Mommaerts-Browne

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Stanford Mommaerts-Browne » 07 apr 2005 21:31:02

Dear Gordon,
I was going to send you a private message expressing my regrets at your
leaving. I had come to consider you to be as good a friend as one can
acquire via these lists. I enjoyed our private correspondence as well as
your gracious sharing on this list. I also appreciated the list on
Medievalia which you recommended to me. You, by now, have read of my
computer misadventures. (That is one of the items which I can't retrieve,
if you could reinform me, I should be appreciative.)
I also have been seeing your remark about my 'successor' reappearing in
subsequent posts. No, I did not screen and select anyone. Due to the
aforementioned problems, RootsWeb accepted someone, evidently, who found a
list on the 'adopt a list' list and applied for adoption. I am growing
increasingly remorseful over how this is all playing out. Apparently the
Powers-That-Be at RootsWeb equate disinterest with judiciousness.
Hoping that you'll continue to lurk,
Ford
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Banks" <geb@gordonbanks.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?


I just got this today, so perhaps they have either been monitoring the
group or others have complained. Sounds like they are trying to rectify
the problem. I'm sure this isn't the first group that has had this kind
of problem.

Rootsweb:

A response to your Help Desk message, "Re: LISTS: Strange new
administrator
on Gen-Ancient (HelpDesk #335789) (fwd)," of Tuesday, 22 March 2005, at
09:53 AM follows:



-------------------------
Thank you for your email. This matter is known to us and we are trying
to navigate our ways through various options.


On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 13:18 -0700, Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.

fa

--- Chris Phillips <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk
wrote:

Gordon Banks wrote:
I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't
believe he selected this
clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon
the Gen-Ancient list
and post here instead.

It does sound like bizarre behaviour.

Is there anything to prevent you from starting a
sensibly moderated list as
an alternative, named GEN-ANTIQUITY, or
GEN-PREMEDIEVAL, or something?

Chris Phillips







__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
--
Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com

Gordon Banks

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 07 apr 2005 22:41:02

I think if it is coming from JA it means she has vetted the post first.
In other words, it is coming from someone being moderated.

On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 14:23 -0700, Stanford Mommaerts-Browne wrote:
This is how a nascent thread is appearing at Gen-Ancient:

Sh'ma Yisra'el by Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
Fwd: RE: [GEN-ANCIENT] Sh'ma Yisra'el by Joan Asche

It also shows up in my mailbox as coming from JA, not from Chico or Paul.
Now my first thought on this is that JA has responded to my req. for
interest/collaboration.
Since she is now the author of the reply, I dare not quote PKD's words here,
but that is the knowledgeable person who responded with
leads/input/communication/sharing. I think that this is a gross distortion
of what is happening, and a fraudulent misrepresentation of scholarship.

Now, JA and the powers-that-be at RW, (whom she claims to have consulted),
may or may not be right in their understanding or interpretation of
international copyright laws, (my study of law says that they are not); but,
assuredly, they violate the ethics of scholarly or academic research and
publication - ('publication' simply means making public - it's how we share
and collaborate and advance).
--

Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com>

Renia

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Renia » 07 apr 2005 23:25:45

Gordon Banks wrote:

And to my ignorant eyes, it looks like she has composed the material. Is
this plariagism, or moderation?


Renia


I think if it is coming from JA it means she has vetted the post first.
In other words, it is coming from someone being moderated.

On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 14:23 -0700, Stanford Mommaerts-Browne wrote:

This is how a nascent thread is appearing at Gen-Ancient:

Sh'ma Yisra'el by Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
Fwd: RE: [GEN-ANCIENT] Sh'ma Yisra'el by Joan Asche

It also shows up in my mailbox as coming from JA, not from Chico or Paul.
Now my first thought on this is that JA has responded to my req. for
interest/collaboration.
Since she is now the author of the reply, I dare not quote PKD's words here,
but that is the knowledgeable person who responded with
leads/input/communication/sharing. I think that this is a gross distortion
of what is happening, and a fraudulent misrepresentation of scholarship.

Now, JA and the powers-that-be at RW, (whom she claims to have consulted),
may or may not be right in their understanding or interpretation of
international copyright laws, (my study of law says that they are not); but,
assuredly, they violate the ethics of scholarly or academic research and
publication - ('publication' simply means making public - it's how we share
and collaborate and advance).

Gordon Banks

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av Gordon Banks » 07 apr 2005 23:29:36

Ignorance, most likely. She probably doesn't know how to forward a post
she has moderated and so is posting it under her name. I'm sure she is
not pretending to have composed it herself, but it is interesting after
her spiel about reposting someone else's material being a violation of
copyright (see the gen-ancient archives if you want to see what she
said). She has never made any comments herself that relate to ancient
genealogy that I can recall.

On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 01:25 +0300, Renia wrote:
Gordon Banks wrote:

And to my ignorant eyes, it looks like she has composed the material. Is
this plariagism, or moderation?


Renia


I think if it is coming from JA it means she has vetted the post first.
In other words, it is coming from someone being moderated.

On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 14:23 -0700, Stanford Mommaerts-Browne wrote:

This is how a nascent thread is appearing at Gen-Ancient:

Sh'ma Yisra'el by Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
Fwd: RE: [GEN-ANCIENT] Sh'ma Yisra'el by Joan Asche

It also shows up in my mailbox as coming from JA, not from Chico or Paul.
Now my first thought on this is that JA has responded to my req. for
interest/collaboration.
Since she is now the author of the reply, I dare not quote PKD's words here,
but that is the knowledgeable person who responded with
leads/input/communication/sharing. I think that this is a gross distortion
of what is happening, and a fraudulent misrepresentation of scholarship.

Now, JA and the powers-that-be at RW, (whom she claims to have consulted),
may or may not be right in their understanding or interpretation of
international copyright laws, (my study of law says that they are not); but,
assuredly, they violate the ethics of scholarly or academic research and
publication - ('publication' simply means making public - it's how we share
and collaborate and advance).

D. Spencer Hines

Re: LISTS: New manager at gen-ancient-L (Pat #337830)

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 08 apr 2005 02:40:10

So, Joan Asche doesn't know anything about DFA per se, but just wanted
to be the listowner and moderator for an Ancient Genealogy list? And
she got her wish?

Hilarious!

DSH

"Gordon Banks" <geb@gordonbanks.com> wrote in message
news:1112912977.afba1778a33ed2d4439d5480868260c5@teranews...

| Ignorance, most likely. She probably doesn't know how to forward a
post
| she has moderated and so is posting it under her name. I'm sure she
is
| not pretending to have composed it herself, but it is interesting
after
| her spiel about reposting someone else's material being a violation of
| copyright (see the gen-ancient archives if you want to see what she
| said). She has never made any comments herself that relate to ancient
| genealogy that I can recall.
|
| On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 01:25 +0300, Renia wrote:
| > Gordon Banks wrote:
| >
| > And to my ignorant eyes, it looks like she has composed the
material. Is
| > this plariagism, or moderation?
| >
| >
| > Renia
| >
| >
| > > I think if it is coming from JA it means she has vetted the post
first.
| > > In other words, it is coming from someone being moderated.
| > >
| > > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 14:23 -0700, Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
wrote:
| > >
| > >>This is how a nascent thread is appearing at Gen-Ancient:
| > >>
| > >>Sh'ma Yisra'el by Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
| > >> Fwd: RE: [GEN-ANCIENT] Sh'ma Yisra'el by Joan Asche
| > >>
| > >>It also shows up in my mailbox as coming from JA, not from Chico
or Paul.
| > >>Now my first thought on this is that JA has responded to my req.
for
| > >>interest/collaboration.
| > >>Since she is now the author of the reply, I dare not quote PKD's
words here,
| > >>but that is the knowledgeable person who responded with
| > >>leads/input/communication/sharing. I think that this is a gross
distortion
| > >>of what is happening, and a fraudulent misrepresentation of
scholarship.
| > >>
| > >>Now, JA and the powers-that-be at RW, (whom she claims to have
consulted),
| > >>may or may not be right in their understanding or interpretation
of
| > >>international copyright laws, (my study of law says that they are
not); but,
| > >>assuredly, they violate the ethics of scholarly or academic
research and
| > >>publication - ('publication' simply means making public - it's how
we share
| > >>and collaborate and advance).

Paul K Davis

RE: a newbie to listt's opinion

Legg inn av Paul K Davis » 08 apr 2005 06:10:02

I'm not sure who you mean by "the person who originally complained". I
don't recall sending anything which I intended as a complaint. One of my
very first messages quoted one of my gen-med messages, and I was told, as I
recall, that this violated the gen-med copyright. I then rephrased the
message so there was no reference to gen-med, and, to my suprise, the
moderator stuck the gen-med material in. I'm confused.

I see from other comments here that my submissions to gen-ancient are
sometimes distributed so that, unless you are very careful, it looks like
the moderator is the author. This is clearly bad, and possibly a violation
of my copyright.

I have no intent of offending anyone or violating either copyright or
professional ethics. If I goof, please explain to me what I did and why
you conclude it was wrong.

I'm also not some high-school kid stumbling into this. I have a Ph.D. in
physics, a list of scholarly publications, including some disagreements
with editors, and I am very well respected in both my vocational and
avocational associations (which include community theatre as well as
genealogy) for my ability to get along with nearly everyone and contribute
positively.

-- PKD [Paul K Davis, pkd-gm@earthlink.net]


[Original Message]
From: Faye Parker <fairplay51@yahoo.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Date: 4/7/2005 2:21:28 PM
Subject: a newbie to listt's opinion

The person who originally complained about the new manager, got what they
wanted. Disruption of list/arguments, and attention. So the best thing to

do(my opinion) is quit feeding them or giving them attention and they will
leave.

"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
by Lazarus Long

proud member of the IBSSG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Stanford Mommaerts-Browne

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Stanford Mommaerts-Browne » 08 apr 2005 10:30:02

----- Original Message -----
From: Faye Parker
To: Stanford Mommaerts-Browne
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?


Am ew to the list, can you tell me if anyone knows anything about Germany
pre-1690's or is that tooo soon for this list.


Very telling coïncidence that the thread which you happened to tag should be
so apropos to the quote you included.


"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
by Lazarus Long

proud member of the IBSSG


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.

Peter Stewart

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 08 apr 2005 11:26:45

""Stanford Mommaerts-Browne"" <StanfordMommaerts@Cox.net> wrote in message
news:010d01c53c30$85063340$79890d44@LocalHost...
Sorry folks! Should have looked beyond first name. Thought that I was
responding to Gordon Hale.
Apologetically and contritely,
Ford
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stanford Mommaerts-Browne" <StanfordMommaerts@cox.net
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?


Dear Gordon,
I was going to send you a private message expressing my regrets at your
leaving.

So which is it - either you were genuinely "going" to respond to him
privately but then for some reason took another course, or you thought that
you had actually done so but made a mistake?

Either way, SGM doesn't need to hear about it a second & third time.

And if you are "going" to make forced & pretentious quotes from Niemöller,
deliberatley or otherwise, try to get his name right.

Peter Stewart

Stanford Mommaerts-Browne

Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?

Legg inn av Stanford Mommaerts-Browne » 08 apr 2005 11:30:02

Sorry folks! Should have looked beyond first name. Thought that I was
responding to Gordon Hale.
Apologetically and contritely,
Ford
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stanford Mommaerts-Browne" <StanfordMommaerts@cox.net>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?


Dear Gordon,
I was going to send you a private message expressing my regrets at your
leaving. I had come to consider you to be as good a friend as one can
acquire via these lists. I enjoyed our private correspondence as well as
your gracious sharing on this list. I also appreciated the list on
Medievalia which you recommended to me. You, by now, have read of my
computer misadventures. (That is one of the items which I can't retrieve,
if you could reinform me, I should be appreciative.)
I also have been seeing your remark about my 'successor' reappearing in
subsequent posts. No, I did not screen and select anyone. Due to the
aforementioned problems, RootsWeb accepted someone, evidently, who found a
list on the 'adopt a list' list and applied for adoption. I am growing
increasingly remorseful over how this is all playing out. Apparently the
Powers-That-Be at RootsWeb equate disinterest with judiciousness.
Hoping that you'll continue to lurk,
Ford
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Banks" <geb@gordonbanks.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: Gen-Ancient-L: change for much worse?


I just got this today, so perhaps they have either been monitoring the
group or others have complained. Sounds like they are trying to rectify
the problem. I'm sure this isn't the first group that has had this kind
of problem.

Rootsweb:

A response to your Help Desk message, "Re: LISTS: Strange new
administrator
on Gen-Ancient (HelpDesk #335789) (fwd)," of Tuesday, 22 March 2005, at
09:53 AM follows:



-------------------------
Thank you for your email. This matter is known to us and we are trying
to navigate our ways through various options.


On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 13:18 -0700, Francisco Antonio Doria wrote:
I suggest doing it in Yahoogroups! or in
Google-groups. I've been concerned about the
Ancestry.com / RootsWeb link.

fa

--- Chris Phillips <cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk
wrote:

Gordon Banks wrote:
I don't know what happened to Ford. I can't
believe he selected this
clown as his successor. I propose we just abandon
the Gen-Ancient list
and post here instead.

It does sound like bizarre behaviour.

Is there anything to prevent you from starting a
sensibly moderated list as
an alternative, named GEN-ANTIQUITY, or
GEN-PREMEDIEVAL, or something?

Chris Phillips







__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
--
Gordon Banks <geb@gordonbanks.com


Gjest

Re: gen-ancient-L admin [OFF-TOPIC]

Legg inn av Gjest » 08 apr 2005 16:31:01

Chris I disagree. Consider this example. You read a book and quote a
paragraph in a new work and cite the source. Is this copyright infringement? No,
it's normal scholarly citations. You are not reproducing their *work* you are
quoting from it.
This is not a copyright infringement and Ms Ache points at an AUP that
does not say this at all. I pointed that out to her and she just replied "That's
just the way it is." I mean seriously that's a bit Napoleonic. "It's not
the law, it's what I say that matters." No dear, it's not.
Will Johnson

In a message dated 4/8/2005 4:42:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
chris@dickinson.uk.net writes:

There's a difference between quoting from posts and reposting them in full
in a different forum. Doing the latter without the knowledge or consent of
the author does seem to go against general copyright principles (as well as
being an academic discourtesy) and is, as I understand it, against Rootsweb
policy.

Gjest

Re: [OT] gen-ancient-L admin

Legg inn av Gjest » 08 apr 2005 17:00:02

Interesting. It appears that all of Ms Ache's public responses on the
copyright issue have been removed. Maybe she did this herself? I'm not really
sure whether an admin has this ability. Maybe this was done to try to divert
the flames :)

At any rate on google groups soc-genealogy-ancient only has 3 threads while
soc-genealogy-medieval has 1463

Maybe there's a better group like soc-HISTORY-ancient that might work for us?
I don't know. I see rootsweb has turned down the quite useful request for
another list, which is strange as they have something like a gazillion lists
already.

By the way, I WAS able to response BY EMAIL ONLY to a thread that was started
in googlegroups soc-genealogy-ancient and guess what ? I response went back
to the google groups page and to email as well ? So that's pretty nifty
peachy keen in my book. You have to select the option on the options page that
says to send everything to you by email.

Will Johnson

D. Spencer Hines

Re: The Inherent Opportunity For Tyranny On RootsWeb "Lists"

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 08 apr 2005 18:00:29

It sounds as if Joan Asche has pulled up the drawbridge and gone into
Siege Mode.

DSH

<WJhonson@aol.com> wrote in message news:59.253196a4.2f87eea9@aol.com...

| This is not a copyright infringement and Ms Ache points at an AUP that
| does not say this at all. I pointed that out to her and she just
| replied "That's just the way it is." I mean seriously that's a bit
| Napoleonic. "It's not the law, it's what I say that matters." No
| dear, it's not.
|
| Will Johnson

D. Spencer Hines

Re: The Inherent Opportunity For Tyranny On RootsWeb "Lists"

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 08 apr 2005 18:06:24

Bingo!

That's definitely the best solution -- just let her stew in her own
juice -- behind her drawbridge.

Tyrants lose their power when people start laughing at them.

Leo's argument has merit too -- we are building a Critical Mass of
focused, intelligent interest and expertise in SGM -- no need to
fragment it.

DSH

"Francisco Antonio Doria" <franciscoantoniodoria@yahoo.com.br> wrote in
message news:20050408111748.62845.qmail@web30909.mail.mud.yahoo.com...

| Well, I prefer to stay at gen-med, where one has
| already lots of stuff about DFAs, and simple leave Ms
| Asche's list to herself...
|
| chico

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»