The public discussion you requested has been deleted.

John I "Lackaland" of England (1166-1216)

Started by Gene on Sunday, October 17, 2010

Participants:

Profiles Mentioned:

Showing 1-30 of 218 posts
10/17/2010 at 5:17 PM

Hi ... anyone care to weigh in on the wives and children of John? Two references to start with:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:J8ss5xzoQFMJ:w...

http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/ENGLAND,%20Kings%201066-1603.htm#_T...

The first link references the only wife as Agatha de Ferrers, while the second lists Isabella of Gloucester and Isabella d’Angoulême with various mistresses.

Any thoughts?

10/17/2010 at 5:25 PM
10/17/2010 at 7:04 PM

"The Lives of the Kings & Queens of England" by Antonia Fraser lists:
wife one: Isabella of Glouster (annulled)
wife two: Isabella of Angouleme

Private User
10/17/2010 at 7:35 PM

John I Plantagenet has a profile on www.thepeerage.com. It is referenced and very scholarly for all European royalty.

10/17/2010 at 9:48 PM
Private User
10/17/2010 at 11:39 PM

Hi Gene,
Here is another one which connects King John with Agatha de Ferrers & Lady Joan of Wales

http://anderson.sacada.net/FamilyTree/individual.php?pid=I1797&...

Private User
10/18/2010 at 12:16 AM

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:s8jJcxiP4pwJ:w....
-----
Referal to Joan (Lady of Wales), daughter of King John & her marriage to Prince Llywelyn of Wales (1173-1240).

When I just checked (MP) Llywelyn Prince of Wales' tree on Geni. I couldn't find Joan & Llywelyn's daughter Angharad (1215- ) but "no name " was listed as Anghard's mother.

Ann

Private User
10/18/2010 at 12:21 AM
Private User
10/18/2010 at 5:41 AM

I'm blown away every day by what I find out about my family from Geni. I wonder if all the relationships are correct.

John Plantagenet King of England is your 21st great grandfather
Henry III, King of England is your 20th great grandfather
Edmund "Crouchback" Plantagenet, Earl of Leicester & Lancaster is your 19th great grandfather
Henry Plantagenet, Earl of Lancaster is your 18th great grandfather
Eleanor 'Alianor' Plantagenet, of Lancaster is your 17th great grandmother
John I FitzAlan, 1st Lord Of Arundel is your 16th great grandfather
down through Echingham, Clark(e), Crapo, Gifford, Molloy.

Thanks for this starting this discussion, Gene!

10/18/2010 at 8:36 AM

Gene, that web site listing Agatha de Ferrers as a wife is way off base (wrong!) on many counts. For one thing, there was no Agatha as a daughter of William de Ferrers and Sybil de Braose. There was a later Agatha who married Hugh deMortimer, but she was much younger.

The FMG Medieval Lands database is definitely the one that is most trusted and the best scholarly research. Even though the Peerage is usually reliable, there are times that the FMG corrects the Peerage's errors, too. So I would ultimately trust the FMG site the most. And that means that there was no Agatha Ferrers as a wife of King John.

Private User
10/18/2010 at 8:46 AM

Try Plantagenet Ancestry Also Anglo Saxon Chronicles and The Angevin Lings of England, This might help you out. Another one Royal Decent of 600 Immigrants. Judy

10/18/2010 at 10:04 AM

You might also do a search on the GEN-MEDIEVAL archives (also cross-listed as soc.gen.medieval) to find discussions on the matter between medievalists.

10/18/2010 at 10:15 AM

I don't think webcache.googleusercontent links are good to post. They're likely to change without notice, since they're just Google's image of something.

You can get to the other end of the link by clicking on a point in the top of the Google cache page.

10/18/2010 at 10:19 AM

So the biggest question that this thread raises for me is: Who was this Agatha Ferrers b 1168 (if she existed)? Who were her parents (since they do not seem to have been William de Ferrers and Sybil de Braose)? And was she one of the unnamed mistresses of King John?

There is a Geni profile for her but there, she is listed as the daughter of Walkelin (William) de Ferrers and Sybil de Braose. Well, that's a problem since Walkelin and William were NOT the same person--I spent a few hours trying to extricate them from each other a few weeks ago, since some people had merged them into one identity. In fact, I think I created a Discussion Thread about them then.

10/18/2010 at 10:23 AM

Here's the thread in which I posted on Oct 8 about Walkelin/William de Ferrers mix-up: http://www.geni.com/discussions/6000000009840568419?msg=60000000102...

10/18/2010 at 12:32 PM

Private User@bren
As for how correct the lines are , the less chance that they are correct. That's the point in MP. The more research done, the more reliable the info, the more accurate. You may find that you're related to someone today, but not tomarrow.
Then related again next week. Because there are so many changes taking place, the tree is in constant flux. As profiles are finalized, you'll get more consistant readings. The tree could never be 100% right, but it should be more acuratee and compleate than any tree that any one person could make in a lifetime.

Private User
10/18/2010 at 2:43 PM

People must realize that in many cases it is impossible to say who are the parents or parents of some people who lived long ago. I don't believe that several people can discuss who should be added as the mother or father or daughter if there is absolutley no proof that one or the other is right.
After researching "Clementia" & "Agatha de Ferrers" people decide which seems most logical to them. Both are strong possiblilites or since there is no way to prove which is right. They should therefore both be in the Geni Tree as the mother of "Joan Princess of Wales" strange it may seem.

I just don't think it is possible for several people at Geni to make a decision about someone's life that no one else has been able to make in 800 years. It's an "open-end" with no conclusive answer & there never will be one. There will always be question marks !!!

I wonder why anyone has ever thought that the Monk who wrote in Latin about "Clementia" that he meant that he gave Agatha De Ferrers CLEMENTCY and not that her name was Clementia ?? That was the first thing which came to mind when I saw the name Clementia.

Take care ; - )
Depending on where you are in the bigwide world; have a nice day or "sleep tight",
Ann

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:P3h8274yL-YJ:w...

10/19/2010 at 11:36 AM

Hello cousin Gene,
I am a direct descendent of Edward I through his daughter Joan de Acre. Your discussion has really helped me find out more about my family tree and under stand my family dynamics and behaviors through out the generations. Lucky for me my family is well documented but I cant know everything. Thanks again

Private User
10/19/2010 at 11:42 AM

FYI Gene...This is a copy and paste. Can you help me out?

Mimi,

The reason you are unable to resolve the conflicting data here: http://www.geni.com/merge/resolve/4924870419470035934?k=vex22gav&am... (or able to get it to save) is Gene has already made this profile John Lackland, King of England the Master Profile.

Can you please ask him to remove the master lock and then try again. Once you have completed the merge, Gene can re-lock it.

Feel free to let me know if you are still unable to do so.

Thank you for using Geni,

Ashiya
The Geni Team

Ticket History
===================
Mimi Arcala (Client) Posted On: 2010-Oct-18 05:33 AM

===============================================================
There's a bug of some sort in my "Request" inbox. I go to John "Lackland" Plantagenet's profile and he has no pending merges. However, I go to my inbox and there's a request: http://www.geni.com/merge/resolve/4924870419470035934?k=vex22gav&am...

When I try and resolve it, it lets me, however, afterward I get an error and the request remains in my inbox.
Mimi

Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: LPU-848489
Department: Geni Pro (priority support)

10/19/2010 at 1:01 PM

Is the Richard Fitzroy connection (illegitimate son) to @John Plantagenet King of England an accurate one?

Private User
10/19/2010 at 3:07 PM

http://www.renderplus.com/hartgen/htm/plantagenet.htm#name3629

This site seems legitimate with accurate info and good resources.

Private User
11/6/2010 at 2:54 AM

Marvin,
personally I would refrase your message : My tree will never in my lifetime be as correct as it was before the curators hijacked it.

When you se statements of introducing alternative parents I think you would agree. When there are doubts you should stop. In the written materials from the last 1000 years there are lot of disinformation added, so that your family looked better.

11/6/2010 at 5:51 AM

Hijacked is a little strong, don't you think....
Knut:
So make a case for what YOU think is correct...if it is strong enough (and supported) I'm sure the curators will make corrections....They are more like traffic cops and TRY like hell to put people into the RIGHT lanes...they are NOT pirates or meddlers....

Give them a break ,will you

11/6/2010 at 5:51 AM

Hijacked is a little strong, don't you think....
Knut:
So make a case for what YOU think is correct...if it is strong enough (and supported) I'm sure the curators will make corrections....They are more like traffic cops and TRY like hell to put people into the RIGHT lanes...they are NOT pirates or meddlers....

Give them a break ,will you

Private User
11/6/2010 at 6:02 AM

Thank you, Fay.

Would you like to join me in collaborating on the "Pirates in Petticoats" project I've been meaning to start?

Private User
11/6/2010 at 6:26 AM

Raymond In the info I found yes Fitz Roy is connected with John Lackland. Now what the curators have to say is another story but I have several good ref. that I usually go by. Yor best bet is to check it out yourself. Judy

Private User
11/6/2010 at 6:28 AM

Myself I would have been just as happy not to be connected with him as he was not a very nice person. I prefer my ill. line but you can't pick your relatives can you? Besides he was very interesting person and o'course you to get to go back further from his line. So I guess there's a good side to him. Judy

11/6/2010 at 6:38 AM

I agree with you Knut! I have complained and complained about how suddenly my entire family tree has been completely destroyed by all these collaborators that changed our tree. We only wanted people directly descended to us and now it is so difficult to see things how we used to. On top of that information I put in has been altered, changed and names have been changed. I don't rely on anyone's information but my own.

Private User
11/6/2010 at 6:52 AM

This part of the tree is a mess, isn't it. I'll complete the mergers in the project. http://www.geni.com/projects/Plantagenets

Judith and Bridget, do you want to be part of the Plantagents project to help clean up the tree?

Private User
11/6/2010 at 7:12 AM

I would refrase both, Marvin and Knut messages. Before somebody got in messing everything, my tree was completely correct as if I had no relialable source or any doubt about somebody, I waited till having faithfull data and backing it up. Now I see, even in direct blood liner elatives only, multiplied profiles, father and son being the same, even partenrs married to their own, etc. I simply don't know if when developing a line upwards, I'll find out another mess in what I had before. It ussually happens and then, it takes me more time and a waste of energy I'd use in searching the ones that follows.
Best regards,
Sylvia.

Showing 1-30 of 218 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion