Aaron Fitz Roger, II - 10 Years old and a Father???????

Aaron Fitz Roger, II
Birth: circa 1260
Rome, Italy
Death: 1270 (10)
London, Middlesex, England
Immediate Family:
Son of Aaron Fitz Rogers, I and Mrs. Serlo Tancreed
Husband of Wife of Aaron Fitz Roger
Father of Aaron Fitz Roger, III
Added by: Dean Tanner, Sr. on May 11, 2007
Managed by: Jon Brees Thogmartin FTDNA Mcclendon and 18 others

@"Aaron Fitz Roger,11 is my 1st cousin 27 times removed Judy Rice

Aaron Fitz Roger, II is My 20th great grandfather. But 10 Years old?

He's my fourth cousin 22 times removed. But a father they had to get a wrong date.

Aaron's son (ie Aaron III) is a MP and in his About Me is the following text (unsourced):

"Religious upheaval in Sicily forced Aaron Fitz Rogers, a merchant of Rome, to flee to London where he engaged in business. The Rogers Family were given the right to bear the coat of arms accredited to Grand Count Roger I of Sicily. Aaron Rogers was born in Italy c1260/70.

1. Aaron FitzRoger born c1265 of Rome, Italy; died c1330 London, Middlesex, England. The family business was merchandising after settling in Kent, Gloucestershire and Somersetshire. "

The son's profile shows birth as circa 1280 so perhaps favour the lower date for Aaron II, ie born 1260 died 1330.

I'm not sure why religious strife in Sicily would result in someone fleeing Rome but perhaps a quick lesson on Sicilian history could provide a date for Aaron II emigrating to England?

Wow Very nice work

The fact that Aaron II has 19 managers means that there have been at least 18 merges, it only takes one profile where the birth and death dates are confused and someone not paying attention during a merge...

I am learning

This needs to be sourced, from several authors. If he was allowed to use the COA of Roger I of Sicily, he would have had to be Roger I Hauteville"s son.
Roger I Hauteville was one of the most powerful kings of his time.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_I_of_Sicily

Why would a son, who could inherit the entire kingdom, leave? With no other evidence, this sounds like a fable. Rogers sons, even illegitimate, were acknowledged. His daughters and son in laws are well documented. This branch needs to be pruned for lack of evidence.

The line is a well-known fake.

See, for example, https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!searchin/soc.genealogy.medi...

After a moment of confusion I had to laugh when i read the About Section of Aaron's profile this morning.
Perhaps it needs revising again in light of Justin's post above.

Let me know how I can help.