Ioan Dragos - Sources?

Good question. To me this seems like someone is trying to make up the link between Dragos hospodars and Rachmaninoff - and eventually the composer Sergei Rachmaninoff - just by filling the centuries with many Rachmaninoff generations without any references to any sources. Yes, I have read in various sources that there might be a link, but I have never seen any real details.

I'm also wondering where did this Ioan Dragos got the name Dragos, when apparently there were no Dragos in his close relatives (at least according to Geni).

The romanian tree needs to be cleaned up.

I am following the official line. So this is the line I follow.

"Maria Voichița a fost fiica lui Radu cel Frumos și a Doamnei Maria. Era nepoata lui Vlad Dracul, strănepoata lui Mircea cel Bătrân. Căsătoria cu domnul Ștefan cel Mare, a avut loc în anul 1478. Din căsătoria lor au rezultat trei copii, un băiat, viitorul domn Bogdan al III-lea și două fete, Ana și Maria Cneajna, decedată în 1518 și înmormântată la Mănăstirea Putna."

Maria Voichița was the daughter of Radu cel Frumos and Lady Maria. She was the granddaughter of Vlad the Impaler, the great-granddaughter of Mircea the Elder. The marriage with Mr. Stefan the Great took place in 1478. Their marriage resulted in three children, a boy, the future Mr. Bogdan III and two girls, Ana and Maria Cneajna, who died in 1518 and was buried in Putna monastery.

So I suggest that the Ioan Dragos is removed from his parents because of lack of sources and https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Voichi%C8%9Ba and https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C8%98tefan_cel_Mare are both very well studied and documented romanian historical persons.

This answers not if he is the father of Vasily Ivanovich Rachmaninoff. But I think the safe answer is no. He is not the forfather.

It's a legend that Rachmaninoffs is descents from brother of princess Elena Voloshanka First family tree of Rachmaninoff with this legend was created by one of it's descendants in 1680-s, so it can't be taken too serious. Same situation with Romanoff tsar family, who's early ancestors are more legend, than truth.

There are big compagn in 1680-s in Russia with creation of genealogical tree of nobles with political and ecomonical goals. Some more information - see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestnichestvo
and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Book

So many of nobles created trees of their ancestors with big fantasy, to 13-14 centuries. Quite many russian families, as these trees confirmed, have a roots in Europe (for ex., Romanov, Naryshkin and other families). It's a matter of prestige,

Althought now most of these trees (or earlies parts of trees) are disputed and don't take seriously by respectful genealogists.

And it's impossible to confirmed these trees from independent sources, for sure.

Unfortunately, users who create profiles of Rachmaninoffs don't included sources, altough there are some of books and online sources created from this books with Rachmaninoff's tree.

But problem of sources - is a big problem of all geni. Users create big branched trees with many persons, but most (may be more than 90%) of them don't mentioned sources at all (or link to sources) with profiles of 19 century people and from more earlier time.... Later users stop using geni, but this profiles with no sources are continue to exist.

So we have trees leading to medieval legends (Merovingian, Muhammedian, Bible), what is hardly can be really confirmed by even secondary (tertiary and so on) sources.

But GENI, on another hand, is not science publication, but a volunteer project. So we see more users - more opinions, mostly opposite.

So the bigest rule - not take seriously medieval information including myths and legends. It's better to confirm local information what really must be confirmed from primary sources - ideally, from church and civil records and so so. And mention these sources (link to them) in profiles. This is more vital than to argue about legends and myths.