周文王 King Wen of Zhou 昌 Chang is A. Saarinen's 90th great grandfather! *GREAT!* : )

Pontus, you asked where the uncertainties begin. I'm happy you asked that. I love these "traditional" lines. I did graduate work in medieval history, so I spend most of my Geni time working on them and I'm always happy to have a chance to talk about my favorite subject ;)

For those of us with European ancestry, there are no reliable lines before about 600.

That means there are no proven descents from China, none from Genghis Khan, none from the Roman emperors, none from Mohammed, none from Jesus, none from Odin, none from Adam and Eve.

There are good lines back to Charlemagne, but we only really know maybe 18 of his ancestors. There are good lines back to the Irish, Welsh and Scandinavian kings, but they start to disintegrate about 600. Too much political tampering in later generations.

Many of these lines are part of our "cultural mythology". The lines can't be proven, but our ancestors believed them. That makes them a part of our collective history, I think. We should keep them around on Geni, but we should learn not to trust them.

The specific problem with this European line to King Wen of Zhou is that someone has taken a list of Hun kings, both real and fictional, and linked them together as though they were all fathers and sons. We don't have any evidence of that.

This is a constructed line, not one of the traditional lines I mentioned earlier.

It's been a long time since I looked at this line, but a few things stand out.

1. The Gepid king Ardaric could have married a daughter of his ally Attila and her name might have been Escama, but there is no evidence.

2. There is no proof that Elemund was a son of Ardaric and Escama. Probably not. Elemund overthrew the dynasty descended from Ardaric and started his own new dynasty. Even if Elemund was a son of Ardaric, these old barbarian kings were polygamists, so there is no reason to think that Elemund was son of Ardaric's hypothetical wife Escama.

3. There is no proof the Austrigusa was a daughter of Elemund. Austrigusa was a Gepid, but we don't know more than that. The dating makes it likely she was a sister of king Thurisind, who overthrew Elemund's son and started a new dynasty.

4. Waldrada was really the daughter of Austrigusa and Waccho. No problem there, but there is no evidence that Waldrada had a daughter Gertrudis.

5. I need to do further checking about Pepin the Old. His father was Carloman, but I don't know a source for his mother being Gertrudis or why someone thought she might be a Bavarian.

This isn't a detailed critique of the line, just a general example of how these old lines have many problems.

I hope many people enjoy these old lines. The math shows that all of us with European ancestry are certainly descendants of King Wen of Zhou. This line is probably not correct, and we will never know the correct line, but in all the world we are cousins. That part doesn't change.

(No Name), you asked why on Geni we have "all kinds of false information and assumptions which are only hypothetical assumptions?"

The short answer is that there are only 24 hours in a day ;)

There are many people on Geni who know the lines are wrong. And there are many people who know how they're wrong and why they're wrong. But it takes time to do the cleanup.

Then new users come in and add them back, so we have to keep fixing them.

It all takes time. Lots of time.

Thanks a lot Justin. This was a clear and good answer. The thrill of finding these amazing fictional lines is certainly a passing one, and as its aftermath comes a general sense of doubt. It is great to have some reasonable limits to doubts as well as beliefs. With that, we can focus on the issues that actually can be resolved.
IBut for instance the biblical genealogies can be defended in a sense, as long as they follow the biblical data, regardless if true or false, and regardless the claims of individuals reaching the age of 700. And then, connecting these lines to constructed Jewish genealogies is understandable as well, as (I assume) this is part of religious and cultural history.

I would certainly sympathize with anyone making an effort to fill in the whole grunting ancestral line leading to Lucy. It would be obviously fictional, but entertaining, and reminding us of the actual time span evolution is about.

Thanks, Pontus. The Biblical genealogies are fascinating. Of course, they are an exception to the general rule that there are no reliable "European" genealogies before 600.

There are Jewish families who have fairly reliable genealogies going back to the Exilarchs, and from there back to King David and the Jewish scriptures.

Neil Rosenstein torpedoed some of those lines at the 2013 Jewish Genealogy Conference, but I don't remember the details. There are many people on Geni who are experts in these lines. I defer to them when I have questions about the details.

And even so, there are no fully reliable European connections into those lines, or at least none that have general academic support. There are a few tantalizing possibilities and one almost certain line. If someone claims Biblical descent from Paloma ha-Leví Benveniste, I don't think many people would quibble (or maybe quibble just a little).

Another line, through Charlemagne is an academic reconstruction that has a high chance of being correct even though it isn't considered to be proven and can probably never be proved.

Ooops. I should have said that the Biblical line through Charlemagne goes back through Salome Alexandra, Queen of Judaea. The generations that connect her to later Roman families are not clear, and it's not proven that Charlemagne had Roman ancestors. It's another example of the top and bottom being good lines, but the ones in the middle being the problem.

周文王 King Wen of Zhou 昌 Chang ismy16th great grandfather's wife's 74th great grandfather.

Paloma is my 8th cousin 21 times removed.

The connection between the Eastern and the Western side for this set of genealogies hinges on Zhou Ly-sze at Ly-sze Si Zhou 周 (född Chou). The profile of Zhou Ly-sze was added by Shaun Chapman on 8 April 2009. Zhou Ly-sze was entered as the daughter of King You of Zhou 周幽王 宮湦 and Shen Hòu 申后 (both added by me). She is quoted as the wife of Bor of the Huns, King of the Huns by Shaun Chapman. My source I had used does not list daughters of King You of Zhou 周幽王 宮湦. Would Shaun Chapman or anyone else be able to quote the source?

I've found this as a possible source for "the traditional pedigree"

From http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=jwebe...

Quoting

From: William Addams Reitwiesner (wrei AT erols.com)
Subject: Re: Magyar kings to Attila the Hun
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 1998/05/23

>Can anyone describe this supposed connection via the Magyar kings to
>Attila? I've never seen such an attempt.

The only version I've seen was in *Die Ahnen von Irene Prinzessin zu Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg*, which was typed by a Dr. Schilling in 1947 in Glücksburg and is retained in the archives there. The line is on pp. 206-217, and it doesn't just stop at Attila. It goes like this (most recent people first and then going backwards, not translated from the German):

.....

================================================================

Bor's wife, and mother of Dama, is given as Ly-sze, daughter of the Chinese Emperor Yu-Wang (reigned 781-771 v.Zw. -- note that "v.Zw." means "B.C."). Yu-Wang was an Emperor of the Chou dynasty. The line back from Ly-sze is given by Schilling as follows:

......

Oh -- and Geni says she's my 79th great grandmother. My eyes are quite round however. :)

In fact we can find several "bridges" as personal connections between the Eastern and the Western side. The first one in mind, is in the family tree, and cames from very close of Átila <Attila the Hun, "Scourge of God", King of the Huns>
He was the 3rd great grandfather of Waldrada of the Lombards, my 37th greatgrandmother <Waldrada of the Lombards>

周文王 King Wen of Zhou 昌 Chang is Bjart Sterner Berge's 89th great grandfather! :-) It seems like "Escama of the Huns" may be a possible link between east and west. :-)

Deisi, this is the line I critiqued about. Waldrada was not a descendant of Attila -- at least not in the way shown on Geni.

There is no proof that Elemund was a son of Ardaric. Probably he wasn't.

There is no proof that Austrigusa was daughter of Elemund. Probably she wasn't.

King Wen of Zhou, 周文王, 昌, 40 周文王 King Wen of Zhou 昌 Chang is your 95th great grandfather.

since, i discovered the secrets in all the ancient calendars, for me, this is a very important link to my past

esp; since he did the iching calendar

(No Name)

Lord Youxiong is your 133rd great grandfather.

TOP of THE TREE

Erica Howton,

If Geni says that Zhou Ly-sze is your 79th great grandmother, it also says that she is my 10th cousin 94 times removed. So I should be connected to you then!

Alas Dr. Tan, Geni is not (yet) finding the "path between.". There is a way to "teach" it by stepping through the connecting links & building the trail which we know is there. Not sure I want to "walk" back 79 steps however! :)

周文王 King Wen of Zhou 昌 Chang is Susan Mary Rayner (Green)'s 94th great grandfather!
Thanks for this very impressive

周文王 King Wen of Zhou 昌 Chang is my 92nd ggrandfather! Hi relatives! This thread if fantastical and fascinating! Thanks!

King Wen of Zhou Chang is my 94th great grandfather . .

Hi Louise and A Saarinen,
King Wen is my 92nd great grand father
Greetings from Daphne Elaine Beames in Cape Town

looks like this got all screwed up again

who is making all the changes on this profile ???

Susan Lynne Schwenger the Revisions tab on the profile should be able to answer that question for you. (?)

Susan Lynne Schwenger I take it it's not changes on King Wen's profile (which are few) you're concerned about, but changes in the line?

Geni doesn't remember lines it finds for very long. When you ask again what the line is, Geni will often search for the line again, and sometimes it will find a different line than it found the first time.

Besides, we're all working to clean up and document the tree - if he's your 92nd ggf, there are 95 links that might need correcting between him and you. Better keep notes!

As far as I remember, although Charlemagne had loads of children, there are only five "accepted" descents from him. Four of them of them seem safe. One seems very dubious.

The theory is that if you had a poor peasant ancestor in (say) 1400 who still has descendants, you will have as good a chance of being descended from him as from a nobleman in the same year -although you are less likely to be able to prove it. If we were able to go back far enough this might be true. The reality seems to be (as we might expect) that the richer you were, the more likely you are to have surviving descendants - although genetic factors might exterminate your line. When we see a family which has a few children each generation, and one which has loads and loads - especially when they have matches with another pedigree - the result is not likely , always, to be simply difference of record-keeping.

Mark

I am responsible for making the cut, at Ly-sze Si Zhou 周 (född Chou) and noted it in another thread. If anyone could find the book that mentions this person, I would be happy to re-assess.

The East and West had many better-documented mixings in the last 150 years, and I'd like to see more attention to and efforts spent on this research instead.

I looked up the relationship for a lark - somehow I can't believe that there is a relationship. Too far fetched for me.