Individual Page

Marriage: Children:
  1. Sophia Abbess Of Gandersheim: Birth: Oct 975. Death: Abt 27 Jan 1039

  2. Adelaide Abbess Of Quedinburg: Birth: 977. Death: 1045

  3. Matilda Of Saxony: Birth: Abt Jun 978. Death: 4 Dec 1025 in Echtz

  4. Otto III Holy Roman Emperor: Birth: Jul 980. Death: Abt 23 Jan 1002 in Paterno By Civita Castellano/Mittelitalien

  5. (Dau) : Death: Bef 8 Oct 990

1. Title:   Royalty for Commoners
 Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists Who Came to New England between 1623 and 1650
Author:   Stuart, Roderick W.
 Frederick Lewis Weis
Publication:   Genealogical Publishing Co.
 Sixth Edition Genealogical Publishing, Inc. 1988 ISBN 0-8063-1207-6
Note:   ABBR Royalty for Commoners
 NS386753 Source Media Type: Book

a. Note:   BIBLIOGRAPHY: Borthwick, Richard, Theophano, wife of Otto II of Germany. Posting to soc.genealogy.medieval (email list GEN-MEDIEVAL) on 1/1/1999-033304. Subject: Re: Theophano, wife of Otto II of Germany. Available at Author address: rgbor at cyllene dot uwa dot edu dot au. Brook, Lindsay L, The Byzantine Ancestry of HRH Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, The Genealogist (APSG), vol 1 no 2 (1981), p3-51. Nypl APA-82-1000 v1. Felch, William Farrand, Ancestry of Agatha, in Notes & Queries, London: John C Francis, 1894. Eighth series, vol 5 (Jan-Jun 1894) pp 421-23, 461-2, and vol 6 (Jul-Dec 1894) pp 2-3. Available at s8notesqueries05londuoft/s8notesqueries05londuoft.pdf and s8notesqueries06londuoft.pdf Gifford, Paul, The Empress Theophano. Posting to soc.genealogy.medieval (email list GEN-MEDIEVAL) on 3/27/1996-214639. Subject: Re: The Empress Theophano. Available at Author address: gifford_p at LIB dot FLINT dot UMICH dot EDU. Hall, David, EMPRESS THEOPHANO. Posting to soc.genealogy.medieval (email list GEN-MEDIEVAL) on 3/5/1996-225430. Subject: Re: EMPRESS THEOPHANO. Available at Author address: dhall at ENTERNET dot COM dot AU. Moriarty, G Andrews, Plantagenet Ancestry of King Edward III And Queen Philippa. Salt Lake: Mormon Pioneer Genealogical Society, 1985. LDS Film#0441438. nypl#ARF-86-2555. Previte-Orton, C. W., The Shorter Cambridge Medieval History, Cambridge: University Press, 1952. Chatham 940.1PRE. Prinke, Rafal, Theophano. Posting to soc.genealogy.medieval (email list GEN-MEDIEVAL) on 3/28/1996-201834. Subject: Theophano. Available at Author address: VM dot AMU dot EDU dot PL at PLEARN dot EDU dot PL. Schwennicke, Detlev, ed., Europaische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der europaischen Staaten, New Series. I.1: Die frankischen Konige und die Konige und Kaiser, Stammesherzoge, Kurfursten, Markgrafen und Herzoge des Heiligen Romischen Reiches Deutscher Nation. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1998. Schwennicke, Detlev, ed., Europaische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Geschichte der europaischen Staaten, New Series. I: Die Stammesherzoge, Die Weltlichenkurforsten, Die Kaiserlichen, Koniglichen und Grossherzoglichen Familien. Marburg: Verlag von J. A. Stargardt, 1980. Wagner, Anthony, Pedigree and Progress, Essays in the Genealogical Interpretation of History, London, Philmore, 1975. Rutgers Alex CS4.W33. Watney, Vernon James, The Wallop Family and their Ancestry, Oxford:John Johnson, 1928. LDS Film#1696491 items 6-9. Weis, Frederick Lewis, Walter Lee Sheppard, Jr, David Faris, Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists who came to America before 1700, 7th Edition, Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co, 1992. RESEARCH NOTES: 984/91: Regent of Holy Roman Empire [Ref: ES I.1 #10] relative (neptis) of Basileus Ioannes Tzimiskes [Ref: ES I.1 #10] For many years the parentage of Empress Theopana, wife of the Emperor Otto II has been debated by German scholars. She has always been considered to have been the daughter of the Basilius Romanus II, of the Macedonian House, descended from the Basileus Basil, and his wife Theophana, daughter of a Larconian Inn Keeper, and the repetition of the name would suggest this, but objections exist. [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] Maltman, in a thesis at the Univercity of Gothen argues in 1878 that she was not a daughter of the Basileus Romanus. [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] Historian Ranke considered her to have been a daughter of the Basileus, but this was not his period. [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] Prof Gjasbrecht, a great medievalist, considered that she was not the daughter of Romanius; in accord with him are Hertzberg (Gescht. der Byzantiner), von Ottenthal (Register Otto I) and Mystakidis (Byz Deutsche Baziehungen). [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] Traditional view held by Von Ranke, Finley (History of Greece), Dunmber (Jahrbuch Otto I), Hirsch (Byz.), Schumberger (Nicophor Phocas), Detmer (Biss on Otto II), Muntz (Les Astistes Byzantiner), Labarte (Hist. der Arts industrials au morgen age aud), K Uhling (Uber die Herkunft der Theophano). [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] Prince von Isenburg in Stamtafeln (1836/7) calls her the "pretended daughter of Romanus"; the 1953 edition rejects the Romanus view and accepts that put forth by the Swiss scholar Benrath in his monograph "Wer war die Kaiserin Theophano (1939)" that she belonged to the Patrician family of Skleros. [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] Prof. Winkhaus also accepts family of Skleros in his Ahnen zu Karl dem Grossen and Widierkind (1950), but in his additions and corrections he reverts to the Romanus view [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] Facts are as follows: When Otto I had restored the Western Empire he wished to allay his family with that of the Eastern Ceasars and sent Luitpraud Bishop of Oremina on an Embassy to Constantinople to ask for the hand of a Byzantine Princess for his son Otto. The Byzantines bitterly resented the Western Empire and the Basilius Nikophonos Phocas refused the request. However, after the murder of Phocas in Dec 964, the new Emperor John Tzimicer, who wished to protect the Byzantine possessions in Southern Italy, agreed to Otto's request but the question is whether, as was quite in keeping with Byzantine diplomacy, he played a trick on Otto and substituted another lady in place of the Princess. Dr. Moltman points out that nowhere in contemporary authorities is Theophana called a daughter of Romanus, but is styled the neice of John Taimices and in his list of the children of Romanius the contemporary Byzantine historian George Cadremus does not include a Theophano. However, it was often the custom of Byzantine writers to ignore any marriages with the Western "barbarians." However, his failure to name Theophana is evidence, although not conclusive, that Romanus had no such daughter. It may be observed that Cadremus names Anna daughter of Romanis who married a barbarian Wladimir of Kiev. The chronicle of Bishop Thirmar, who was a Saxon Bishop living shortly after the marriage gives important evidence. As a Saxon Bishop he must have been acquainted with the ruling Saxon family. He says that, when Theophana arrived in Italy to be married to the young Otto, that "there were some who sought to prevent the Emperor from going on with the proposed marriage and who advised him to send her back. The Emperor, however, did not listen to them but married her to his son amid the laughter of all the Italian and German magnates." [Ref: Moriarty Plantagenet p88] While her identity will probably never be established, I incline towards the arguments put forward by Alexander A Vasiliev, "Hugh Capet of France and Byzantium", Dumbarton Oaks Papers 6:229-51 (951) as supported by Prince Toumanoff. See Cyril Toumanoff, Manuel de genealogie et de chronologie pour l'histoire de la Cascasie chretienne (Rome, 1976) pp344-46 and table 72b. In a letter to [Lindsay Brook] dated 27 June 1972 he writes "at the time of her marriage, she (Theophano) was indeed the reigning Emperor (John Tzimisces)'s niece (by marriage) and therefore was naturally referred to as such; which does not preclude her being an earlier Emperor (Romanus II)'s daughter. The only serious argument, from affinity, is vitiated by the fact that Zoe did ultimately marry her second cousin (once removed) Romanus III. Vasilev has shown that Romanus II had another child, who may very well have been Theophano [Ref: Brook ByzantineAnc p38#15] letter from Prince Tourmanoff to Anthony Wagner, dated Nov 5 1972. That she is referred to as niece of John Tsimiscdes, instead of as a daughter of Romanus II is no argument, because at the moment of her marriage she was indeed the niece of the then reigning Emperor, i.e. John I. Vasiliev has shown that Romanus and Theophano indeed had another child, so that there is room for Theophano in their family. Her name, rare enough, is that of Romanus II's low-born wife, assumed after her elevation. Finally, there is only one serious argument, cited by Rudt-Collenberg, namely, that of affinity and no trace of dispensation, in connection with the marriage, or just betrothal, of Romanus II's granddaughter Zoe to Theophano's son Otto III, i.e. her first cousin. But the situation is not as simple as that. On the Western side, the fact (adduced by Rudt-Collenberg) that we have no trace of a dispensation for such a marriage is rather an argument from silence, and silence complicated by the presence of an anti-Pope; he was a Byzantine creature and it was he who, prioir to becoming an anti-pope, carried on the negotiations for the marriage (CMH VI p184); he quite obviously would have acceded to the wishes of his Imperial protector at Constantinople. On the Byzantine side, one notices very often that the intransigence of the clergy withers before a forceful Emperor such as Basil II. Indeed, Zoe later married her second cousin (once removed) Romanus Argyrus and no questions were asked. in view of all this, I personally consider Theophano a daughter of Romanus II, unless stronger argument to the contrary is produced. [Ref: Wagner PedigreeProgress p258] the _Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium_ entry concerning her (3: 2065): Theophano (Lat. Theophanu), wife of the German emporer Otto II (973-83); born ca.955, died Nimwegen 15 June 991. Her grant of dowry from Otto II specifies that she was a niece of Emp. John I Tzimiskes, but M. Uhlirz attempted to show that she was descended from the Lekapenoi. F. Dvlger refuted this theory (HistJb 62-69 [1942-49] 649-58). Apparently because she was not a porphyrogennete, some in Otto I's court opposed her marriage to Otto II, but the wedding and coronation occurred at St. Peter's, Rome, 14 Apr. 972. Theophano bore Otto II daughters and a son, the future Otto III. Under her influence, Otto II revived the title Romanorum imperator augustus; he also undertook an attack on the Saracen invaders of southern Italy because such action was appropriate for an emporer. As regent for Otto III, Theophano stressed her imperial rank. ... [Ref: Paul Gifford SGM 3/27/1996-214639] From the book "The empress Theophano" edited by Adelbert Davids: These are papers presented at a symposium in the Netherlands in 1991, and the section that deals with the parents of Theophano was presented by Professor Adelbert Davids who is Professor of Patristics and the History of the Early Church, University of Nijmegen. "..After another embassy to the new emperor John Tzimiskes it was finally a Theophano, hitherto unknown, who arrived in Italy and was married to Otto 11 and crowned....This Theophano was not a porphyrogennete. In the marriage charter (14 April 972) she is called 'neptis clarissima' of the emperor; it is only in later western sources that she is known as 'daughter of the emperor'. There had been much discussion about her identity until Gunther Wolf firmly established that she belonged to the family of the Skleroi through her father Constantine, brother-in-law of John Tzimiskes, and to the family of Phokades through her mother Sophia; Maria Skleraina, sister of Theophano's father, had been the first wife of John Tzimiskes; Theophano's grand-father on her mother's side was a brother of the emperor Nikephoros 11 Phokas." [Ref: David Hall SGM 3/5/1996-225430] In a recent article in the German "Genealogie", vol. 22, 3/4, 1995, Walter Regula discards Romanos as her father (following P.E. Schramm's argument of "impedimentum consaguinitatis" of the first degree; "Kaiser, Basileos und Papst", Historische Zeitschrift 129, Muenchen 1924). He also does not accept Schwennicke's (ES) choice of the dukes of Taron of the Bagratids. He quotes: (a) G. Wolf, "Nochmals zu Frage: Wer war Theophano?", Byzantinische Zeitschrift, vol. 81, Muenchen 1988, (b) O. Kresten, "Byzantinische Epilegomena zur Frage: Wer war Theophano?", in: Kaiserin Theophano, vol. 2, Koeln 1991, (c) H. Benrath, Die Kaiserin Theophano, Muenchen 1978, as supportive of his choice, namely that she was a daughter of Konstantin Skleros, patrikios, and Sophia Phokaina, d. of Leon Phokas and niece of emperor Nikephoros II Phokas. [Ref: Rafal Prinke SGM 3/28/1996-201834] The one explicit genealogical detail we know about Theophano (and that from the best primary source!) is that in the imperial marriage diploma of 14 Apr 972 she is described as the emperor John Tzimiskes' "neptis" or niece. (John's first wife was Maria Skeraina, Theophano's putative paternal aunt.) Given the prime western requirement that the bride should be a porphyrogennete, if Th. had been the daughter (porphyrogennete or otherwise) of an emperor the marriage diploma would have proclaimed the fact (in addition to any relationship she may have had to the reigning Byzantine emperor). Whatever one's position on Wolf's hypothesis, one thing seems clear - Theophano was unlikely to be a daughter of Romanos II or any other emperor. the recent Davids paper to which I referred above are: A Davids "Marriage negotiations between Byzantium and the West and the name of Theophano in Byzantium (eighth to tenth centuries)" in *The Empress Theophano: Byzantium and the West at the turn of the first millenium* ed. by A Davids (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1995), pp.99-120. [Ref: Richard Borthwick SGM 1/1/1999-033304] PROBABLY DAUGHTER OF LEO PHOKAS, SON OF SOPHIA PHOKAS BY HER HUSBAND CONSTANTIN SKLEROS, BROTHER OF MARIE, 1ST WIFE OF THE BASILEUS JOHN TSIMICES
b. Note:   BI113478
c. Note:   DI113478 is NOT responsible for the content of the GEDCOMs uploaded through the WorldConnect Program. The creator of each GEDCOM is solely responsible for its content.