Castelnuovo (Bosnia) and Lexington (Massachusetts)

The places are close to 90° apart from each other, so close that if you add exactly 90° W along the same equatorial parallel plane to the coordinates of Castelnuovo or Herceg Novi, you land between Acton and Bloomsbury, 11.9 miles being the distance between Lexington and Acton.

Now, each place was the place of a battle. The siege of Castelnuovo ended on Aug. 7th 1539. The battle of Lextington and Concord took place on April 19th 1775.

Date calculator allowed me to verify that, between these dates, there are 2828 months and 12 days.

In Castelnuovo, Machín de Munguía was killed by the Ottomans. The night before Lexington battle, Paul Revere was fortunately not killed by two English commissars.

Perhaps a reason to sing "El pendón estrellado"?

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Feast of the Sacred Blood
1.VII.2025

Does The Spanish Princess Misrepresent Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scots?

My daughter is like a commodity #movie #music #the Spanish princess
Many Sheldon | 104 k views
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_jFmbg1cb9Y

This is arguably a clip from The Spanish Princess. I look it up, yes, Georgie Henley is playing Margaret Tudor in The Spanish Princess, so, I look up Margaret Tudor to find out ...

First. She was born in 1489, on the 28th of November. She married by procuration in 1502 and in real life in 1503, her first husband being James IV of Scotland. As they were married on the 8th of August, she wasn't yet 14. So, for some modern minds, an ideal candidate to illustrate the idea that royal marriages were arranged and in practise forced marriages. Or indeed that girls marrying around 14 had arranged and in practise forced marriages.

Second, no. She was not shellshocked to find out that she was marrying the Scottish King in her teens. Her father had played around with this since she was 6 or somewhat earlier. In 1497, when she was 8, a truce was made with Scotland. Any raids around the border either ceased or ceaesed to be endorsed by the Scottish King. By the time she was twelve, when the marriage by procuration was concluded, she had known about the plan for long and England and Scotland had had a truce longer and better respected than that between Gaza and the Knesset.

Third, no again. This is what ticked me off. 1502 (I didn't know the exact year, but knew it was before the Deformation), England and Scotland were Catholic countries. Unlike a Jewish girl younger than 12 years and one day, a Catholic girl couldn't get married by the word of her father. She had a say. Yes, even if she were a teen. Or just twelve. It may seem outlandish to some modern parents to allow a twelve year old girl to take major decisions in her life, they would be imposed by dad and mum, and if for some reason marriage was there, they would conclude that marriage too was imposed, as in the daughter really having no say. Well, no. Sum of Theology, Supplement to the Third Part, Question 47, Article 3, I'm citing the authority and the explanation only first:

Article 3. Whether compulsory consent invalidates a marriage?

...

On the contrary, A Decretal says (cap. Cum locum, De sponsal. et matrim.): "Since there is no room for consent where fear or compulsion enters in, it follows that where a person's consent is required, every pretext for compulsion must be set aside." Now mutual contract is necessary in marriage. Therefore, etc.

Further, Matrimony signifies the union of Christ with the Church, which union is according to the liberty of love. Therefore it cannot be the result of compulsory consent.

I answer that, The marriage bond is everlasting. Hence whatever is inconsistent with its perpetuity invalidates marriage. Now the fear which compels a constant man deprives the contract of its perpetuity, since its complete rescission can be demanded. Wherefore this compulsion by fear which influences a constant man, invalidates marriage, but not the other compulsion. Now a constant man is reckoned a virtuous man who, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. iii, 4), is a measure in all human actions.

However, some say that if there be consent although compulsory, the marriage is valid in conscience and in God's sight, but not in the eyes of the Church, who presumes that there was no inward consent on account of the fear. But this is of no account, because the Church should not presume a person to sin until it be proved; and he sinned if he said that he consented whereas he did not consent. Wherefore the Church presumes that he did consent, but judges this compulsory consent to be insufficient for a valid marriage.

I would further say, this is one of the things that Sts. Lucy and Barbara died for. In the Pagan Roman world, in theory also the marriage was contracted freely, but this was not quite respected. Indeed, the patron saint of Margaret Tudor, in whose Church she was baptised, was also a martyr for opposing an unwanted marriage, though in her case the adoptive parent was set aside by the Roman prefect.

St. Margaret Virgin and martyr; also called MARINA; belonged to Pisidian Antioch in Asia Minor, where her father was a pagan priest. Her mother dying soon after her birth, Margaret was nursed by a pious woman five or six leagues from Antioch. Having embraced Christianity and consecrated her virginity to God, she was disowned by her father and adopted by her nurse.

While she was one day engaged in watching the flocks of her mistress, a lustful Roman prefect named Olybrius caught sight of her, and attracted by her great beauty sought to make her his concubine or wife.

...

The Greek Church honors her under the name Marine on 13 July; the Latin, as Margaret on 20 July. ...

So, no. If Margaret Tudor had said "no, I won't" (or "just like that?") she would NOT have been met with "you knew that one day a husband would be chosen for you" ... the person seemingly mother of Margaret* is also off. Margaret's real mother was Elisabeth of York, and she died when Margaret was still married by procuration, in England, namely at age 37. A woman of 37 doesn't look that wrinkled. Even if one late pregnancy too many was what killed her (she died in puerperal fever, i e infection after childbirth, when her last daughter was 7 days old).

This may be the key why the marriage may have been consumed some time later, she was still in mourning after her mother had died. I am no expert on the case, I do not have the books written about her, but it sometimes happened that marriages concluded early in the age of the bride were delayed in consummation, and wikipedia notes the first child of Margaret as Queen consort of Scotland was born in 1507. However, it could also be, it took time for her to get pregnant, but if not, recall, her mother had died before she left England and she suffered from nosebleeds for a while.

Did Margaret ever want to divorce? Yes, but that was her second husband, as she was a widow. Part of it was, there was a rumour that James IV hadn't really died at Flodden, so she doubted she was really a widow. If she hadn't been, I suppose he was killed, that would have made her second marriage invalid.

So, the scene in The Spanish Princess seems to have been written, while the parents aren't absolute monsters, only about as monstrous as some parents to teens these days, by people who had watched too much Game of Thrones. It's not a documentary, not even about the War of the Roses. And while the moral dissonance from what are now conceived as human values, and rightly so as far as horror from forced marriage is concerned, is far less than in Game of Thrones, it's still an extra layer of unnecessary moral distance.

Before I end, there is one more part of the Aquinas article I want to share. Objection 2 and its answer:

Objection 2. Further, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. iii, 1), that which is done on account of mixed violence is more voluntary than involuntary. Now consent cannot be compelled except by mixed violence. Therefore it is not entirely involuntary, and consequently the marriage is valid.

...

Reply to Objection 2. Not any kind of voluntariness suffices for marriage: it must be completely voluntary, because it has to be perpetual; and consequently it is invalidated by violence of a mixed nature.

Annulments due to lack of consent happened, and were somewhat scandalous. The parents of Margaret Tudor would not have wanted to risk that.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Maundy Thursday
17.IV.2025

* It seems this was not Elisabeth of York, but someone who spoke to "the Spanish Princess" (Catherine of Aragon) as regent after the death of Elisabeth of York. My bad. It would be Lady Margaret Beaufort, the most important lady after Elisabeth of York died. However, as she died at only 66, I don't think even so she would be that wrinkled. It's not as if "51 then was" (overall) "like 75 now" as someone said, it's more like women dying younger because of untreated breast cancer and things.

How Do We Know History?

Creation vs. Evolution: Forrest Valkai Debunked Will Spencer, or So He Thought · Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: How Do We Know History?

It's one of these topics where a Christian and an Atheist (or for that matter very vague Theist) are not likely to agree.

Here an ex-Christian is giving his point of view:

Do Apologists Prove Anything? Why Christian Arguments Fail? The Bible Is NOT Reliable As History.
DEBUNKING CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM | 24 Nov. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD5_5QpCBd0

5:34 — 5:50 sth

"they are not doing historical research, they are taking the Biblical story as true to begin with, accepting the supernatural myth as true to begin with, and then trying to manipulate the actual historical facts to make them fit their world view, which is based on non-facts"

History is an art of finding (or keeping) a reliable source, and drawing facts out of it. Or more reliable sources.

Reliable being to some degree subjective in evaluation, this means, not all will agree on what sources are reliable.

But here we have a man taking "the actual historic facts" as sourced in any material outside the Bible and outside the supernatural, and more specifically summaries by modern historians or archaeologists.

If one knew from a philosophical or religious viewpoint that the Bible were wrong, one would not have the right to presume the Bible reliable on all, but it would not automatically presume the Bible unreliable on history.

Now, one actually doesn't know the Bible wrong from a religious or philosophical viewpoint even in theology. But even if one were on the edge, even if one were not sure about the Bible being right, two things should stand out:

• one would have to consider the Bible on an a priori equal footing with other ancient texts
• one would have to consider the evidence for miracles on an equal footing with evidence for other events.

And if one wanted to go further, consider how much of the Biblical miracles are proof of how much of the Christian theology. But that's another enquiry beyond the strictly historic one.

However. Charles Hurst does not agree. He's a very vague Theist. To him, the historic facts are what we, the public get from "legitimate historians" who have for rather long now (since Prussia, a power steeped in Scepticism, a culture where Voltaire left his mark on Sanssouci) "held" the miraculous and the Bible "at bay". As if they were harmful things. They have in other words "defended" their Historian's craft from "undue" influence from the Bible or from acceptance of miracles.

Part of the background is a philosophy steeped in Kant. To him, as to Hume, empiric historic facts do not support supernatural claims. This is purely a decision a priori, a decision, not an observation. It probably started with wanting to avoid becoming Catholic on hearing of Catholic miracles in the present (Hume was part time in France). Both Hume and Kant were Protestants, the Anglican and the Calvinist or possibly Lutheran.

Those people set the tone for what's "academically correct" and Charles Hurst thinks it's logically correct to follow that prejudice.

I do not. I would not take that tone even for Pagan sources.

History is about sources, texts, written, oral, or even oral and later written down. They are usually narrative. Non-narrative texts and non-textual artefacts give back-ground. They are not the main source of certitude, they provide a filter. But that source of "a filter" should not be confused with the filter from a non-Christian world view. So, he says that after seeing archaeological facts about Jericho, Tim Mahoney and David Rohl "make up facts" (beyond those of archaeology) "to fit the square peg in the round hole" (of the Bible being true). Well, what Charles Hurst calls "make up facts" is what is more usually referred to a making hypotheses. And when it comes to the purpose, to show the Bible being true, that involves treating the Bible as at least a historical source. Which one should anyway. If its statement fit the other sources of information about Jericho, that's more usually referred to as a confirmation. But to a man like Charles Hurst, when confirmations go the direction of confirming the Bible, one would need extreme confirmation bias to accept that confirmation.

You see, everyone has some kind of confirmation bias, including the most anti-Biblical scholar. I simply disagree it is of the more extreme or useless kind when accepting the Bible or Christianity or miracles.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Abbess St. Fare of Faremoutiers
3.IV.2025

Eboriaci, in territorio Meldensi, sanctae Burgundofarae, etiam Farae nomine appellatae, Abbatissae et Virginis.

Lincoln, Francis Ferdinand, Kennedy

Is there some kind of connection?

Heads of state assassinated. More than these three. (Hoch Dollfuss!)

But there is a chronology thing ... from Lincoln to Kennedy, the time is 100 years, 7 months, 8 days excluding the end date.

Now, the two other spaces up to and from Francis Ferdinand come fairly close to half.

Lincoln to Francis Ferdinand = 49 years, 2 months, 14 days excluding the end date.

Francis Ferdinand to Kennedy = 51 years, 4 months, 25 days excluding the end date.

Now, is there any other then chronological connection? I think so.

Lincoln wanted slavery to end and not to be replaced with Racism (no, not Xenophobia. Racism.) Also not to be replaced with Carpetbaggers, I think, but I could have got that wrong.
Francis Ferdinand wanted Serbs and Muslim Bosniaks to live in peace with each other and with Croats.
Kennedy went after the Deep State. And C. S. Lewis, whose death was overshadowed by the assassination, one hour later, went after fashionable Atheism and Liberal Theology./HGL

Was it Baronius and Did Galileo Recall His Words Accurately?

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Was it Baronius and Did Galileo Recall His Words Accurately? · Galileo Understood the Then Standard View, But Misunderstood its Application to Joshua 10 · Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl: Where exactly do we know from that the man who had said the famous quote "not how the heavens go, but how to go to Heaven" was Cardinal Baronius? Do we even know it?

I'll start out with a reddit thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/QuotesPorn/comments/9iry1x/the_bible_teaches_us_how_to_go_to_heaven_not_how/?rdt=33695

r/QuotesPorn

[deleted]

"The Bible teaches us how to go to Heaven, not how the heavens go." -Cardinal Caesar Baronius [1872×1102 pixels]

[Désolé, cette publication a été supprimée par son auteur.]

tydugusa

I thought this was Galileo’s quote.. at least that’s what Neil Degrasse Tyson has said multiple times.

oxymoronic_oxygen

From what I found online, it’s often attributed to Galileo, but he was referring to an argument that he had heard from Baronius. Apparently, he had said it behind closed doors and Galileo thought it was a cool saying and wrote it down, citing Baronius as the original author.

tydugusa

Oh, Galileo you cheeky bastard.

Time_Machine_lV

So Galileo is like the Columbus of this quote.

ArabInTheWest

Ya i was just thinking the same thing, he says it in like every interview...

nickstreet36

According to Wikipedia:

"He is also known for saying, in the context of the controversies about the work of Copernicus and Galileo, "The Bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go." This remark, which Baronius probably made in conversation with Galileo, was cited by the latter in his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina (1615). "

Is this what the wiki says?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_Baronius

I found the words as given:

He is also known for saying, in the context of the controversies about the work of Copernicus and Galileo, "The Bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."[11] This remark, which Baronio probably made in conversation with Galileo, was cited by the latter in his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina (1615).

Footnote 11

Cerrato, Edoardo Aldo.

"How to go to Heaven, and not how the heavens go"

I then changed the words, as I should, to the following:

He is also considered as saying, cited in the context of the controversies about the work of Copernicus and Galileo, "The Bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."[11] This remark, which probably Baronio (according to some) made in conversation with Galileo, before the controversy, as he died before it, was cited by the latter (without precise attribution) in his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina (1615).

This corresponds better to what Edoardo Aldo Cerrato actually said. Here I'll give two longish quotes, from an even longer work:

After citing a long quotation from St. Augustine’s De Genesi ad litteram about the Holy Spirit’s intent in inspiring the Bible – which culminates in the statement: Spiritus Dei noluisse ista docere homines nulli saluti profutura (“The Spirit of God did not want to teach people things that would be of no help to their salvation”) – Galileo writes: “It is clear from a churchman who has been elevated to a very eminent position that the Holy Spirit’s intention is to teach us how to go to Heaven, and not how the heavens go”2.

It is commonly held that Cesare Baronio is the person from whom Galileo directly heard the words just quoted, and he wanted people to know this. If this cannot be proven through documentary evidence, the attribution is nevertheless unanimously accepted3 and is in complete agreement with the thought of this wellknown member of the Oratory.

...

The biblical question in relation to Copernicus’ opinions had already been posed by Luther in 1539 – even before the publication of De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (1543)18 – with a clear condemnation of the astronomer. Luther called him “that madman [who] wants to throw the art of astronomy into confusion”, while going on to say, “as Sacred Scripture proves, Joshua told the sun, and not the earth, to remain still”19.

On the Catholic side, the question of compatibility with Scripture emerged more seriously when the Copernican hypothesis began to be defined more clearly. The position of the Church and of various religious orders was extremely diverse. The Dominican Order – at least one part of it – had immediately looked suspiciously upon Galileo’s Copernican struggle. Other religious orders and other illustrious3 churchmen were, however, less firmly bound to Thomistic Aristotelianism, and were closer to the Augustinian tradition. Among these stood out the Oratorians and Baronio, whose positions opened the way to an analysis of Scripture that would go beyond a literal interpretation. There were also the Jesuits; well aware of the crisis in the Aristotelian method, they, too, were interested in Galileo’s discoveries and his researching new solutions. But they maintained a cautious attitude, being more favorable toward the model proposed by Tycho Brahe20 who, with regard to that Ptolemaic scholar, agreed to better astronomical calculations and permitted ‘preserving’ the immovability and centrality of the Earth and the movement of the Sun, in conformity with the scriptural text.

_________________________

3 Cf. M. TORRINI, Prima recognizione della fortuna del Baronio tra critica e erudizione in R. DE MAIO – L. GULIA – A. MAZZACANE (editors), Baronio storico e la Controriforma, Sora, 1982, pp. 738-739. Antonio Nardia was a friend of Galileo, and in his Scene he acknowledged Baronio’s critical honesty regarding “exact and true information about ancient times and ecclesiastical rites”. Baronio went to ‘historical museums’ with Galileo and Copernicus; for example, G. GHILINI’s Teatro d’huomini letterati, Venezia, 1647. Among more recent publications concerning the attribution of Baronio to the celebrated statement, see: R. DE MAIO, Galileo e la competenza dei teologi, in “Il Centauro”, 2 (1981), p. 4; C. M. MARTINI, Gli esegeti al tempo di Galileo, in “Vita e Pensiero”, Milano, 1966, pp. 115-124; A. POPPI, Ricerche sulla teologia e la scienza nella Scuola padovana del Cinque e Seicento, Rubbettino Ed., 2001, p. 196; P. STEFANI, Le radici bibliche della cultura occidentale, Milano, 2004, p. 191.

18 This work, dedicated to Pope Paul III, was divided into six books that contained a generalvision of the heliocentric theory, astronomical principles of spheres, a list of stars, the apparentmovements of the Sun and related phenomena, a description of the Moon and its orbital movements,and finally a concrete exposition of the new system.

19 Werke, Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Tischenreden I, Weimar 1912, 419; Weimar, 1916, pp. 412 ff.

20 Brahe was born in 1546 at Schloss Knutstorp, today in the Kingdom of Denmark. He understood that astronomy’s progress as a science would happen only if it were subject to systematic and rigorous criticism, and by the use of instruments that were as accurate as possible. His measurements of the planetary parallax by the naked eye, accurate to the minute, became the possession of Kepler, his very famous assistant, who tried without success to persuade Brahe to adopt the heliocentric model of the solar system. Brahe believed in a geocentric model, which then became called the Tychonic (or Tychonian) system. In 1599 he moved to Prague where, sponsored by Rudolph II of Hapsburg, he built a new observatory in Benátky and worked there until his death (1601). PIERRE GASSENDI: Tychonis Brahei, equitis DAni, Astronomorum Coryphaei, vitae Accessit Nicolai Copernici, Georgii Peurbachii, & Joannis Regiomontani, Astronomorum celebrium, Vita. Hagae Comitum (Den Haag), Vlacq, 1655; KITTY FERGUSON, L’uomo dal naso d’oro. Tycho Brahe e Giovanni Keplero: la strana coppia che rivoluzionò la scienza, Milano, Longanesi, 2003.

I posed the question on Quora and got a preliminary e-bot answer, because similar things seem to have been already asked elsewhere:

Q

Galileo in his Letter to Grandduchess Christina said a highly promoted Church man had said "The Bible does not teach us how the heavens go, etc" and I wonder, since back when has that man been identified with Baronius?
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Galileo-in-his-Letter-to-Grandduchess-Christina-said-a-highly-promoted-Church-man-had-said-The-Bible-does-not-teach-us-how-the-heavens-go-etc-and-I-wonder-since-back-when-has-that-man-been-identified-with-Baronius

Importé

Assistant
https://poe.com/chat/3r7h4i9e2evrsw4czmz

Poe

The statement you’re referring to from Galileo's Letter to Grand Duchess Christina is often attributed to Cardinal Cesare Baronius, a prominent figure in the Catholic Church during the late 16th and early 17th centuries. Baronius is known for his work in ecclesiastical history and was a strong supporter of the Church.

The identification of this unnamed churchman with Baronius has been made by scholars over time, particularly as Baronius had expressed similar sentiments regarding the interpretation of Scripture and science. However, the exact attribution is somewhat debated, as Galileo does not name him directly in his letter.

This connection likely became more prominent in the 19th century as historians began to delve deeper into the context of Galileo's conflicts with the Church and the figures involved in those debates. The phrase encapsulates the broader tension between scientific inquiry and religious doctrine that characterized that era.

Follow up

Can you provide sources that support the Baronius attribution?

Assistant

Poe

The attribution of the statement "The intention of the Holy Spirit is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heavens go" to Cardinal Cesare Baronius in Galileo's Letter to Grand Duchess Christina has been supported by various scholarly sources. Here are some key points and sources that discuss this attribution:

Historical Context: Baronius was a significant figure in the Catholic Church during Galileo's time, known for his ecclesiastical history and theological writings. His views on the relationship between Scripture and natural philosophy align with the sentiment expressed in Galileo's letter, which argues against a literal interpretation of the Bible in matters of science [3].
Scholarly Consensus: Many historians and scholars have identified Baronius as the churchman referred to by Galileo. This identification has been reinforced by the examination of Baronius's writings and his role in the Church, which emphasized the need for a proper understanding of Scripture in light of scientific discoveries [2].
Galileo's Argument: In his letter, Galileo uses Baronius's statement to argue that the Bible should not be used as a scientific textbook. He emphasizes that the primary purpose of Scripture is spiritual guidance, not to provide detailed accounts of the physical universe. This argument reflects Baronius's perspective on the interpretation of biblical texts [3].
Modern Interpretations: Contemporary scholars continue to reference Baronius in discussions about Galileo's work and the Church's stance on science. For instance, Maurice Finocchiaro and others have noted the importance of Baronius's views in understanding the historical context of Galileo's arguments [3].
These points illustrate the scholarly support for attributing the statement to Cardinal Baronius, highlighting its significance in the discourse between science and religion during Galileo's time.

Learn more:

Letter to Madame Christina of Lorraine, Grand Duchess of Tuscany | Inters.org
Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina Summary and Study Guide | SuperSummary
Galileo’s Letter to Grand Duchess Christina

Follow up

Can you provide specific quotes from Baronius's writings supporting this?

Assistant

Poe

Certainly! While Cardinal Cesare Baronius does not explicitly use the exact phrase attributed to him in Galileo's Letter to Grand Duchess Christina, his writings reflect similar sentiments regarding the relationship between Scripture and science. Here are a few relevant quotes and ideas from Baronius that align with this perspective:

From Annales Ecclesiastici: In his comprehensive work on church history, Baronius emphasizes the idea that Scripture should be interpreted in a way that aligns with reason and observable reality:

“The sacred writers had no intention to teach us the nature of the heavens, but rather to lead us to the knowledge of God and our salvation.”

On the Role of Scripture: Baronius argues that Scripture's purpose is spiritual, which implies that it should not be read as a scientific manual:

“It is not the office of the Holy Scriptures to teach us the natural sciences, but rather to instruct us in divine truths.”

Contextual Interpretation: He advocates for a contextual reading of the Bible, which can be interpreted as a call to separate scientific inquiry from theological doctrine:

“When the Scriptures speak of natural phenomena, the language is often metaphorical, and one must not take it literally in matters where science may provide a different understanding.”

These quotes illustrate Baronius's inclination toward a non-literal interpretation of Scripture regarding natural philosophy, supporting the broader argument that Galileo was making in his correspondence. For precise citations, it’s best to refer to Baronius's Annales Ecclesiastici or other theological writings where he discusses the nature and purpose of Scripture.

The problem is, no specific pagewise or bookwise quotes from any work was given. "On the Role of Scripture" and "Conceptual interpretation" are not titles of any works of his that I could find.

For the first of the quotes provided, I googled and found nothing in Annales ecclesiastici or Galileo, google directed me to St. Augustine.

For the second, the first hit, imprecise match, was for the Letter to Cristina, where we precisely do NOT find an attribution to specifically Baronius.

For the third, I find "the book of nature, the book of scripture" and I do still not find any page linked to Baronius.

For the quote purportedly from Annales ecclesiastici, no page citation was provided to an edition, nor any citation of book and chapter.

Let's be precise, the assistant Poe is not an intelligent being, it's an AI, and this means, it cannot understand the question. It can however scoure and plagiarise in seconds all that seems to match all or most of the words and chose what is most often repeated.

Let's also be precise, while St. Augustine does mention metaphor, it is not in this context in:

Augustine, On Christian Doctrine: Preface/Book I
https://faculty.georgetown.edu/jod/augustine/ddc1.html

Nor, when you scroll down and click to Book II and so on ...

So, what was Cerrato, Edoardo Aldo saying again?

Baronio went to ‘historical museums’ with Galileo and Copernicus; for example, G. GHILINI’s Teatro d’huomini letterati, Venezia, 1647.

Obviously, in English this is a kind of wooden translation of the Italian phrase. I suspect "historical museums" means their textual equivalent, texts and text collections about historical people. 1647 is 5 years after Galileo died, 40 years after Baronius died, 104 years after Copernicus died. G. Ghilini is Girolamo Ghilini. A nobleman and a priest.

Nel 1647, la pubblicazione veneziana del Teatro d'huomini letterati presso la tipografia Guerigli, successiva a una precedente edizione milanese non datata, probabilmente del 1635, segnò un passo importante nella sua carriera letteraria. L'opera, raccolta enciclopedica di biografie di scrittori italiani e stranieri, fu ripubblicata a Milano in una versione invariata, probabilmente nel 1684.

In 1647, the Venetian publication of Teatro d'huomini letterati printed in Guerigli's printers office, succeeding a previous Milanese and undated edition, probably from 1635, meant an impportant step in his litterary carreere. The work, an encyclopedic collection of biographies of Italian and non-Italian writers, was republished in Milan in an invariate version, probably in 1684.

Fortunately, it is in Google Books. Teatro d'Huomini Letterati, Venezia, per li Guerigli, 1647. It so happens, despite my not so very brilliant Italian, I could make out that both the article on Baronius and the one on Galileo were too short to involve such a thing. Galileo was praised for the multitude of his writings and the height of his talent and Baronius for only sleeping 4 hours per night and praying. Heliocentrism and Geocentrism is only alluded to in one of Galileo's titles, namely Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo tolemaico e copernicano. Ghilini never states what that means.

So, 1647 is not the terminus a quo we can consider the quote as sticking to Baronius. I think the terminus a quo is later, and I suspect it is 19th C. in attempts to "make Catholicism look good" to people who were fanatic Heliocentrics and not very Catholic. Unless the volume II actually gave more detail on each, since the google book was just up to what the index calls Il fine della Tauola del Primo Volume. But a volume II could have been instead even more writers, or it could have been planned and never executed.

How about someone did some double-checking on the earliest identification of the quote source with Baronius? My own hunch is, it's rather from another Cardinal, still alive when Galileo wrote, who later became ... Pope Urban. I think Pope Urban or rather Cardinal Barberini at this time, prior to becoming Pope, really thought this well through, and part time leaned somewhat favourably to Galileo's side. But not sufficiently to make us suspect he ever was a Heliocentric. He did end up solidly Geocentric at the thought of "God was free to create the world anyway He wanted, and make it appear to us anyway He wanted."

Meanwhile, though the reddit status remains visible, it is marked as deleted. Maybe the reddit user came to find the evidence for the Baronius-attribution too weak, or as I suppose, even suspicious.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Engelbert of Cologne
7.XI.2024

Apud Swelmensem civitatem, in Germania, passio sancti Engelberti, Episcopi Coloniensis, qui, cum illuc ex oppido Sosatio ad templum dedicandum pergeret, a sicariis interceptus in via multisque vulneribus caesus, gloriosum pro defensione ecclesiasticae libertatis et Romanse Ecclesiae obedientia martyrium subiit.

Encore en arrière (derrière les Monégasques) ?

Ancêtres de Louis II de Monaco · Encore en arrière (derrière les Monégasques) ?

Oui. On peut les tracer, en partie (bon, pas les Beauharnais, mais, bon ...). Comme le dit C. S. Lewis (qui était d'une mère noble, une Hamilton, donc apparentée aux ancêtres de Louis II), en traduction libre "le truc avec la noblesse n'est pas d'avoir une lignée, on a tous une lignée qui remonte à Adam et Ève, le truc est de la pouvoir tracer loin en arrière" ... le post avant, j'avais oublié de démarquer les parties directement citées de la wikipédie, ici je corrige et les mets en deux carrées, dedans tout, sauf [ce qui est entre crochets], est cité de la wikipédie. Bon, j'ai aussi donné alerte pour un franc-maçon, avec (!) autour de la citation pertinente.

Jacques Goyon de Matignon, comte de Torigni, né le 21 novembre 1689 à Torigni et mort le 23 avril 1751 à Paris, est prince souverain de Monaco sous le nom de Jacques Ier du 29 décembre 1731 au 7 novembre 1733. Louise-Hippolyte (monégasque : Luisa Ipo̍lita1 ; italien : Luisa Ippolita), née le 10 novembre 1697 et morte le 29 décembre 1731 à Monaco, fut princesse souveraine de Monaco — la seule de l'histoire de la principauté2. Elle mourut prématurément en 1731 après onze mois de règne. Après l'échec de la proposition d'union avec le chevalier Grimaldi d'Antibes3, elle épouse le 20 octobre 1715 Jacques de Goyon de Matignon, comte de Torigni (1689-1751). Giuseppe Maria Brignole Sale, francisé en Joseph Marie de Brignole Sale (né le 18 février 1703 et mort le 6 janvier 1769) est un noble italien du XVIIIe siècle. [apparemment, il épousa Maria Anna Balbi suite à la mort prématurée de son frère Gian Giacomo Brignole Sale (1696-1734), donc en 1734] Louis-Marie-Augustin d'Aumont de Rochebaron, né le 28 août 1709, mort à Paris, en son hôtel de la place Louis XV, le 15 avril 1782, 5e duc d'Aumont, pair de France, Premier gentilhomme de la Chambre du Roi, lieutenant-général des armées du Roi, chevalier de ses ordres, gouverneur de Boulogne et du pays Boulonnois, gouverneur et grand bailli de la ville de Chauny, etc. (!) Il a été le vénérable de la loge de Bussy-Aumont16. Cette loge aurait commencé à exister dès 1732, mais elle a demandé des constitutions à la Grande Loge que présidait J. H. MacLean. Derwentwater17. qui avait remplacé MacLean et les officiers de la Grande Loge installèrent la loge chez Landelle « à l'Hôtel rue de Bussy ». La loge de Bussy est considérée comme régulière à partir du 29 novembre 1736. Le 7 février 1737, elle a comme vénérable maître à sa fondation Louis Collins, peintre du roi. Une délégation de la loge a reçu de Derwentwater une patente constitutive le 14 février 1737 en remplacement de la patente provisoire. Le duc d'Aumont est maître dans cette loge dès avril 1737 et il a dû être vénérable peu de temps après sa réception. On ne sait pas à quelle date la loge de Bussy a pris le nom de Bussy-Aumont. Le duc d'Antin a été élu grand maître en 1738. Louis de Bourbon-Condé (1709-1771) lui a succédé comme « Grand Maître de toutes les loges régulières de France » en 1743. (!) Il épouse le 23 avril 1727 Victoire Félicité de Durfort Duras (1706-1753), fille de Jean-Baptiste de Durfort, duc de Duras, maréchal de France, et de Angélique Victoire de Bournonville. Elle était veuve en premières noces, sans enfant, de Jacques de Fitz-James, deuxième duc de Fitz-James. [Il meurt quand elle a 15, qui est donc l'âge maximale de ses premières noces] Emmanuel-Félicité de Durfort, duc de Duras (19 septembre 1715 - 6 septembre 1789 à Versailles), est un militaire, homme politique et diplomate français, pair et maréchal de France. Il se marie, une première fois, en mai 1733, avec Charlotte Antoinette de La Porte Mazarin (1719 - 1735), fille unique du duc de Mazarin : d'où Louise-Jeanne, qui épouse le duc Louis-Marie d'Aumont ; parents de Louise d'Aumont épouse d'Honoré IV de Monaco. James Hamilton, 4e duc de Hamilton et 1er duc de Brandon (11 avril 1658- 15 novembre 1712) est un noble écossais, le premier pair de l’Écosse, et garde du Palais de Holyrood. Il est maître de la grande garde-robe, maître général de l'ordre, ambassadeur et Colonel en chef de son régiment1. Il est un investisseur majeur dans le Projet Darién , qui a coûté leur fortune à de nombreux membres de la classe dirigeante écossaise, et il joue un rôle de premier plan dans les événements qui conduisent à l'acte d'Union de 1707. Il meurt le 15 novembre 1712, à l'issue d'un duel célèbre à Hyde Park avec Charles Mohun (4e baron Mohun), pour un héritage litigieux. En 1686, Hamilton épouse Anne Spencer, fille de Robert Spencer (2e comte de Sunderland). Ils ont deux filles, mais aucune n'a survécu à l'enfance. Anne est décédée peu de temps après la naissance de la deuxième fille en 1690. Hamilton épouse en secondes noces Elizabeth Gerard, fille de Digby Gerard, 5e baron Gerard en 1698, et ils ont sept enfants ... Frédéric de Bade-Durlach, né le 7 octobre 1703 et décédé le 26 mars 1732 à Karlsruhe, fut prince héritier de Bade-Durlach. Frédéric de Bade-Durlach épouse en 1727 Anne-Charlotte-Amélie d'Orange-Nassau (1710 – 1777), fille du stathouder Jean-Guillaume-Friso d'Orange, comte de Nassau-Dietz et prince d'Orange, et de Marie-Louise de Hesse-Cassel. La princesse Anne-Charlotte-Amélie de Nassau-Dietz (23 octobre 1710 à Leuvarde – 18 septembre 1777 à Durlach) est l'épouse de Frédéric de Bade-Durlach, et mère de Charles Ier de Bade, le premier grand-duc de Bade. Louis VIII de Hesse-Darmstadt (en allemand Ludwig VIII von Hessen-Darmstadt), né le 5 avril 1691 à Darmstadt et mort le 17 octobre 1768 dans cette même ville, est landgrave de Hesse-Darmstadt de 1739 à sa mort. Louis VIII se marie le 5 avril 1717 au château de Philippsruhe avec Charlotte (1700 – 1726), fille du comte Jean-René III de Hanau-Lichtenberg. Charlotte de Hanau-Lichtenberg, de son nom complet Comtesse Charlotte Christine Magdalene Johanna de Hanau-Lichtenberg, est née le 2 mai 1700 à Bouxwiller (Bas-Rhin) et décédée le 1er juillet 1726 à Darmstadt. Elle fut l'épouse du landgrave Louis VIII de Hesse-Darmstadt.

La génération avant:

Antoine Ier, né le 25 janvier 1661 à Paris et mort le 20 janvier 1731 à Monaco, succède à son père Louis Ier en 1701 et devient le 3e prince souverain de Monaco. Marié le 14 juin 1688 avec Marie de Lorraine (1674-1724), fille de Louis de Lorraine, comte d'Armagnac, fils du comte d'Harcourt, et de Catherine de Neuville. Marie de Lorraine (Paris, 12 août 1674 – Monaco, 30 octobre 1724) est l’épouse du prince souverain Antoine Ier de Monaco (1661-1731). Anton Giulio II Brignole Sale marchese di Groppoli (Genova, 1673 – Genova, 1710) è stato un ambasciatore italiano, al servizio della Repubblica di Genova. Parents de Louis-Marie-Augustin d'Aumont de Rochebaron : Louis Marie d'Aumont (1691-1723), Catherine de Guiscard (1687-1723) Jean-Baptiste de Durfort, duc de Duras, maréchal de France, fils de Jacques Henri de Durfort, né le 28 janvier 1684, mort le 8 juillet 1770 à Paris. Er heiratete am 6. Januar 1706 Marie Angélique Victoire de Bournonville (* 23. Januar 1686; † 29. September 1764), Tochter von Alexandre-Albert-François-Barthelemy, Duc et Prince de Bournonville, Comte de Henin, und Charlotte-Victoire d’Albert de Luynes. William Douglas-Hamilton, duc de Hamilton, (24 décembre 1634 - 18 avril 1694), également connu sous les noms de Lord William Douglas et de comte de Selkirk, est un noble et un homme politique écossais1. Il est le fils aîné de William Douglas (1er marquis de Douglas) de sa deuxième épouse, Mary Gordon, fille de George Gordon (1er marquis de Huntly) (en)2. Le 29 avril 1656, il épouse Anne Hamilton, duchesse de Hamilton. Elle appartient à une dynastie résolument royaliste. Oliver Cromwell a confisqué leurs terres après les activités de son père et de son oncle dans les Guerres des Trois Royaumes. Son père, James Hamilton (1er duc d'Hamilton), est exécuté par les Anglais en 1649 à la fin de la deuxième guerre civile anglaise5 et son oncle, William Hamilton, est décédé après la bataille de Worcester en 16514 Anne Hamilton, 3e duchesse de Hamilton (6 janvier 1632 1 - 17 octobre 1716) est une pair écossaise. Charles III Guillaume, né le 17 janvier 1679 à Durlach et mort le 12 mai 1738 à Karlsruhe, est margrave de Bade-Durlach de 1709 à 1738. Charles III Guillaume de Bade-Durlach épouse le 27 juin 1697 Madeleine-Wilhelmine de Wurtemberg (1677 – 1742, fille de Guillaume-Louis de Wurtemberg). Madeleine-Wilhelmine de Wurtemberg (7 novembre 1677, Stuttgart – 30 octobre 1742, château de Karlsburg, Durlach) est une margravine de Bade. Elle est régente pendant la minorité de son petit-fils de 1738 à 1742. Jean-Guillaume-Friso de Nassau-Dietz (en allemand Johann Wilhelm Friso von Nassau-Dietz), né le 4 août 1687 à Dessau et mort noyé le 14 juillet 1711 à Moerdijk, fut prince de Nassau-Dietz, stathouder de Frise de 1696 à 1711, prince d'Orange de 1702 à 1711, stathouder de Groningue de 1708 à 1711. En 1709, Jean-Guillaume-Friso de Nassau-Dietz épouse Marie-Louise de Hesse-Cassel (1688-1765), fille du landgrave Charles Ier. Marie-Louise de Hesse-Cassel (Cassel, 7 février 1688 - Leeuwarden, 9 avril 1765), est une fille du landgrave Charles Ier de Hesse-Cassel et d'Amélie de Courlande. Elle est la sœur du roi Frédéric Ier de Suède, du Landgrave Guillaume VIII de Hesse-Cassel et de Sophie-Charlotte de Hesse-Cassel, duchesse de Mecklembourg-Schwerin. Apparentée aux maisons souveraines européennes, elle est notamment une cousine germaine du roi Frédéric IV de Danemark et une cousine issue de germain du régent de France Philippe d'Orléans (1674-1723). Ernest-Louis, né le 15 décembre 1667 au château de Friedenstein à Gotha et mort le 12 septembre 1739 au château de Jägersburg près d'Einhausen, est landgrave de Hesse-Darmstadt de 1678 à sa mort. Ernest-Louis se marie le 1er décembre 1687 avec Dorothée-Charlotte de Brandebourg-Ansbach (1661-1705), fille du margrave Albert II de Brandebourg-Ansbach Dorothée-Charlotte de Brandebourg-Ansbach (28 novembre 1661, Ansbach 15 novembre 1705, Darmstadt) est une noble allemande devenue par son mariage avec Ernest Louis de Hesse-Darmstadt, Landgravine consort de Hesse-Darmstadt. Jean-Reinhard III comte de Hanau-Lichtenberg, né le 31 juillet 1665 et mort le 28 mars 1736, est le dernier comte de Hanau-Lichtenberg. Fils du comte Jean-Reinhard II de Hanau-Lichtenberg et d'Anne de Birkenfeld-Bischweiler. Il épousa en 1699 Dorothée-Frédérique fille de Jean-Frédéric margrave de Brandebourg-Ansbach et de Jeanne-Élisabeth de Bade-Durlach (cette dernière fille du margrave Frédéric VI de Bade-Durlach, gendre de Catherine Vasa et de Jean-Casimir de Deux-Ponts-Cleebourg). Leur fille Charlotte épousa Louis VIII margrave de Hesse-Darmstadt, d'où la succession des Hesse-Darmstadt, comtes de Hanau-Lichtenberg ; et par mariage : descendance dans les Bavière-Wittelsbach, Habsbourg-Lorraine, Danemark, Bade, Suède, Monaco, Belgique, Roumanie, Prusse-Hohenzollern, Pays-Bas-Nassau, Russie... Dorothée Frédérique de Brandebourg-Ansbach (12 août 1676, Ansbach – 13 mars 1731, Hanau) est la fille du margrave Jean-Frédéric de Brandebourg-Ansbach (1654 – 1686) et de sa première épouse, Jeanne Élisabeth de Bade-Durlach (1651–1680). Elle est une demi-sœur de la reine Caroline de Grande-Bretagne, l'épouse du roi George II.

Et le résultat statistique ?

Mort à l'âge
23 28 32 37 54 59 59 61 65 69 70 71 72 73 77 86
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

16 26 34 36 43 50 54 64 66 77 78 84
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

Marié (mariée première fois) à l'âge
16 17 18 19 21 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 31 34
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14

13 14 15 16 16 17 19 19 21 23 24 26
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

Les hommes meurent entre 23 et 86, autour de 61/65. Les femmes entre 16 et 84, autour de 50/54.

Les hommes se marient entre 16 et 34, autour de 22/23. Les femmes se marient (en premières noces) entre 13 et 26, autour de 17/19.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Luc Évangéliste
18.X.2024

In Bithynia natalis beati Lucae Evangelistae, qui, multa passus pro Christi nomine, obiit Spiritu Sancto plenus. Ipsius autem ossa postea Constantinopolim translata sunt, et inde Patavium delata.

Seven Female Lineages, Seventyone Women, High or Classic Middle Ages

I'll be linking more systematically to the wikis I quote. We speak of the period that English with German and Swedish tends to consider as "High Middle Ages" = the peak of the wave, so to speak, and which French considers as "Moyen âge classique" which means Classic Middle Ages.

A, First Lineage:

I Agatha (before 1030 – after 1070) Nothing is known of Agatha's early life, and what speculation has appeared is inextricably linked to the contentious issue of Agatha's paternity, one of the unresolved questions of medieval genealogy. As the birth of her children is speculatively placed at around the year 1045, her own birth was probably before about 1030. -> II, XVI

II Saint Margaret of Scotland (c. 1045 – 16 November 1093) After she and her family fled north, Margaret married Malcolm III of Scotland by the end of 1070. -> III, V

III Matilda of Scotland (originally christened Edith,[a] 1080 – 1 May 1118), Edith and Henry were married on 11 November 1100 at Westminster Abbey by Archbishop Anselm of Canterbury. -> IV

IV Empress Matilda (c. 7 February 1102 – 10 September 1167)

The couple met at Liège before travelling to Utrecht where, on 10 April, they became officially betrothed.[19] On 25 July Matilda was crowned German queen in a ceremony at Mainz.[20] There was a considerable age gap between the couple, as Matilda was only eight years old while Henry was 24.[21] After the betrothal she was placed into the custody of Bruno, the archbishop of Trier, who was tasked with educating her in German culture, manners and government.[22][23][nb 5] In January 1114 Matilda was ready to be married to Henry, and their wedding was held at the city of Worms amid extravagant celebrations.[24] Matilda now entered public life in Germany, complete with her own household.[25]

[So, "married at 8" = "betrothal at 8, married later" and in this case at 12 minus some)

V Mary of Scotland, Countess of Boulogne (1082–1116), Matilda finally left the monastery in 1100 to marry King Henry I of England. ... [It is unclear whether this reposes on some kind of misunderstanding, so Mary married some time between 1096 and 1104, as far as I'm concerned.] -> VI

VI Matilda I, Countess of Boulogne Matilda (c.1105 – 3 May 1152) was Countess of Boulogne in her own right from 1125 and Queen of England from the accession of her husband, Stephen, in 1135 until her death in 1152 -> VII

VII Marie I, Countess of Boulogne Marie I or Mary (1136 – 25 July 1182 in St Austrebert, Montreuil, France) was the suo jure Countess of Boulogne from 1159 to 1170. She also held the post of Abbess of Romsey for five years until her abduction by Matthew of Alsace, who forced her to marry him. She is one of several possible identities of the author Marie de France. -> VIII, X

VIII Ida, Countess of Boulogne Ida of Boulogne (c. 1160 – 1216) was suo jure Countess of Boulogne from 1173 until her death. ... Her father continued to rule until his death in 1173, when she succeeded. Upon the advice of her uncle, Philip I, Count of Flanders, she married first in 1181, to Gerard of Guelders, but he died in the same year. -> IX

IX Matilda II, Countess of Boulogne Mahaut or Matilda II of Boulogne (also known as Mathilde, Maud de Dammartin; 1202 – January 1259) was Countess of Boulogne in her own right and Queen of Portugal by marriage to King Afonso III from 1248 until their divorce in 1253. ... In 1223, Matilda married her first husband, Philippe Hurepel, Count of Clermont-en-Beauvais, a younger, arguably illegitimate son of King Philip II of France.

X Matilda of Boulogne, Duchess of Brabant Matilda of Boulogne (1170 – 16 October 1210) was the younger daughter of Matthew, Count of Boulogne, and Marie I, Countess of Boulogne.[1] Matilda became Duchess of Brabant by her marriage to Henry I, Duke of Brabant.[2] Matilda married Henry I, Duke of Brabant, in 1180.

[Given birth years of children, the couple "waited" pretty long after the formal marriage / betrothal] -> XI, XII, XIII

XI Maria of Brabant, Holy Roman Empress Maria of Brabant (c. 1190 – May/June 1260), a member of the House of Reginar, was Holy Roman Empress from 1214 until 1215 as the second and last wife of the Welf emperor Otto IV. ... Otto and Maria of Brabant got married on 19 May 1214 in Maastricht.

XII Adelaide of Brabant (also known as Alix of Brabant, Aleyde de Brabant, Alix of Louvain or Adelheid van Brabant), born around 1190, died in 1265, was Countess of Boulogne from 1262 to 1265, the third reigning Countess in succession. She was the daughter of Henry I, Duke of Brabant and Matilda of Boulogne. She first married Arnoul III, Count of Rieneck and Looz (died 1221), around 1206, without issue. / Widowed, she remarried ...

XIII Matilda of Brabant, Countess of Holland, also called Machteld (c. 1200 – 22 December 1267), was Countess of Holland by marriage to Floris IV, Count of Holland. She was regent of Holland and Zeeland in 1234–1235. ... She married Floris IV, Count of Holland[2] on 6 December 1224. -> XIV, XV

XIV Adelaide of Holland (Dutch: Aleide (Aleidis); c. 1230 – buried 9 April 1284), was a Countess of Hainaut by marriage to John I, Count of Hainaut. ... On 9 October 1246, Adelaide married John I of Avesnes, Count of Hainaut.

XV Margaret of Holland, Countess of Henneberg (1234 – 26 March 1276) was a Dutch countess, known for a famous medieval legend. She was a daughter of Count Floris IV of Holland and his wife, Matilda of Brabant. Margaret married on Pentecost of 1249 to Count Herman I of Henneberg-Coburg. This marriage had political background, because Hermann had hoped to be elected King of the Germans earlier in 1246, but had lost to Margaret's brother William II. In an attempt to strengthen his influence in Germany, William had arranged a marriage between his sister and a German count.

XVI Cristina, daughter of Edward the Exile and Agatha, was the sister of Edgar Ætheling and Saint Margaret of Scotland, born in the 1040s. Cristina's nieces Edith and Mary were sent to Romsey Abbey, near Southampton, in 1086 when she was abbess. The date of her death is not known, but she does not appear to have given evidence to the conclave, suggesting she died sometime before 1100. Additional evidence of her death includes the transfer before 1093 of her nieces to Wilton Abbey for further education and the appointment of Eadgyth as the next abbess of Romsey Abbey.

[No statistics possible]

B, Second Lineage:

XVII Gisela of Burgundy (c.  955 – 21 July 1007), a member of the royal Elder House of Welf, was Duchess of Bavaria from about 972 to 976 and again from 985 to 995, by her marriage with Duke Henry the Wrangler. She was the mother of Emperor Henry II. About 965 Gisela was betrothed to Otto's nephew Henry the Wrangler, who then ruled as Duke of Bavaria; the couple married some time before 972.[2] Emperor Otto I died in 973 and was succeeded by his son Otto II. The 18-year-old had to cope with the Burgundian relations of his Bavarian cousin, forming a considerable power bloc in the southern domains of his realm. -> XVIII

XVIII Gisela of Hungary (or Gisele, Gizella and of Bavaria; c. 985 – 7 May 1065) was the first queen consort of Hungary by marriage to Stephen I of Hungary, and the sister of Henry II, Holy Roman Emperor. She has been beatified by the Catholic Church. ... She married King Stephen I of Hungary in 996[1] as a part of Hungary's policy of opening up to the West.

C, Third Lineage:

XIX Estrid of the Obotrites (c. 979 – 1035) was Queen of Sweden in the Viking age, a West Slavic princess married to Olof Skötkonung, King of Sweden c. 1000–1022.[1] She was the mother of King Anund Jacob of Sweden and the Kievan Rus' saint and grand princess Ingegerd Olofsdotter.[2] -> XX

XX Ingegerd Olofsdotter of Sweden, also known as Irene or Anna (1001 – 10 February 1050), was a Swedish princess and the grand princess of Kiev from 1019 to 1050 as the wife of Yaroslav the Wise. She was the daughter of the Swedish king Olof Skötkonung by his wife Estrid of the Obotrites. She is venerated as a saint in the Eastern Orthodox Church. ... Olof Skötkonung subsequently arranged for the marriage of Princess Ingegerd to the powerful Grand Prince Yaroslav I the Wise of Novgorod with whom Sweden had a flourishing trade relationship. The marriage took place in 1019. -> XXI, XXII

XXI Anastasia of Kiev (Russian: Анастасия Ярославна; Ukrainian: Анастасія Ярославна; c. 1023 – 1074/1094) was Queen of Hungary by marriage to King Andrew the White. ... Around 1038 Anastasia married Duke Andrew of Hungary,[1] who had settled down in Kiev after his father Vazul took part in a failed assassination attempt aimed at King Stephen I of Hungary -> XXIII

XXII Anne of Kiev or Anna Yaroslavna[a] (c. 1030 – 1075) was a princess of Kievan Rus who became Queen of France in 1051 upon marrying King Henry I. She ruled the kingdom as regent during the minority of their son Philip I from Henry's death in 1060 until her controversial marriage to Count Ralph IV of Valois. Anne founded the Abbey of St. Vincent at Senlis.

Anne and Henry were married for nine years and had three sons: Philip, Robert (who died young), and Hugh. Anne is often credited with introducing the Greek name "Philip" to royal families of Western Europe, as she bestowed it on her first son; she might have imported this Greek name from her Eastern Orthodox culture.[5] There may also have been a daughter, Emma, perhaps born in 1055; it is unknown if she married or when she died.[2] Henry and Anne of Kiev are additionally said to have been the parents of the beatified figure Edigna.[8]

On whom:

According to legend, Edigna was a daughter of Henry I of France and Anne of Kiev,[1] and was born c. 1055.[2] In 1074, at the age of 19,[3] she fled to Bavaria on a farmer's bullock cart to escape an arranged marriage.[1] The farmer stopped in Puch, Fürstenfeldbruck, where a rooster in the cart crowed and a bell rang. Edigna took this as a sign that she should leave the cart. She remained in Puch until her death on 26 February, 1109, living as a hermit in a hollowed-out linden tree and revered by the people as a miracle worker.[1] She did not reveal her royal background, but it was discovered after her death.[3] When she died, holy oil flowed from the tree, but it dried up when attempts were made to sell it.[1]

Edigna has been venerated since her death, and regarded as the patroness saint of Puch.[1]

This would make it likely that Anne of Kiev introduced the idea of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary (before her held in the East but mostly not in the Augustinian West), to Paris, to Senlis, to Puch in Bavaria. Except that Militant Thomist argues the West was not all that against the Immaculate Conception in the first place. On to her niece:

XXIII Adelaide of Hungary (c. 1040 – 27 January 1062)[1] was the only daughter of King Andrew I of Hungary.[2] It has generally been assumed that her mother was Anastasia of Kiev,[3] but it has been hypothesised that Adelaide could be the result of Andrew I and a different wife, due to the idea that Yaroslav the Wise wouldn't marry his daughter to an exiled dynast, who didn't appear to have a strong claim to the throne, for which he wouldn't gain serious support for until 1045, five years after Adelaide is thought to be born. [4] She was the second wife of Vratislav II of Bohemia, whom she married in 1058. -> XXIV

XXIV Judith of Bohemia (c. 1056/58 – 25 December 1086), also known as Judith Přemyslid, was a member of the Přemyslid dynasty and duchess of Poland by marriage. She was a daughter of Duke Vratislaus II of Bohemia and Adelaide of Hungary, and was married to Władysław Herman.[1][2] ... Around 1080, Judith married Duke Władysław Herman of Poland to solidify the recently established Bohemian-Polish alliance.

D, Fourth Lineage:

XXV Gertrude of Saxony (c. 1030 – August 4, 1113), also known as Gertrude Billung, was a countess of Holland by marriage to Floris I, Count of Holland, and countess of Flanders by marriage to Robert I, Count of Flanders. She was regent of Holland in 1061-1067 during the minority of her son Dirk V, and regent of Flanders during the absence of her spouse in 1086–1093. ... In c. 1050, she married Floris I, Count of Holland (c. 1017 – June 28, 1061).[2] Upon the death of her spouse in 1061, her son Dirk V became Count of Holland.[2] Since he was a minor, she became regent. -> XXVI, XXVIII

XXVI Bertha of Holland (c. 1055 – 15 October 1094), also known as Berthe or Bertha of Frisia and erroneously as Berta or Bertrada, was Queen of France from 1072 until 1092, as the first wife of King Philip I of France. Bertha's marriage to the king in 1072 was a result of peace negotiations between him and her stepfather, Count Robert I of Flanders. -> XVII

XXVII Constance of France (1078 – 14 September 1125/1126) was Countess of Troyes from her first marriage and Princess of Antioch from her second marriage. She was regent during the minority of her son. Constance was the eldest of five children and was the only daughter from her father's first marriage. Her brother was Louis VI of France. Constance was the daughter of King Philip I of France and Bertha of Holland.[1] Between 1093 and 1095, Phillip I arranged for his daughter, Constance, to marry Hugh, Count of Troyes and Champagne.

XXVIII Gertrude of Flanders (c. 1070–1117[1]), was a Countess of Louvain and Landgravine of Brabant by marriage to Henry III, Count of Leuven, and a Duchess of Lorraine by marriage to Theodoric II, Duke of Lorraine.[2] At the time the duchy was the upper Lorraine, since 959 separated from the duchy of Lower Lorraine. ... Gertrude married firstly Henry III, Count of Leuven (died wounded in a tournament in Tournai in 1095), of the House of Reginar. He was count of Louvain from 1078 to 1095 and landgrave of Brabant from 1085. ... They had four children, probably all daughters (born about 1092-1096) -> XXIX

XXIX Adelaide of Leuven (died c. 1158) was the wife of Simon I, Duke of Lorraine (1076–1138), in what is now France. She was the daughter of Henry III of Leuven and his wife Gertrude of Flanders. After the death of her husband, Adelaide retired to Tart Abbey. -> XXX

[1094 is her latest date of birth, since her father died 1095 and she had a younger full sister Gertrude, while the wikipedians state these siblings were born 1092 to 1096, I'll assume that 1084 is the terminus a quo, a time at which her mother was 14. For her marriage, I'll cite the French wiki on her husband]

Simon Ier de Lorraine Il épouse en 1112 ou 1113 Adélaïde de Louvain, fille d'Henri III de Louvain et de Gertrude de Flandre, laquelle est la belle-mère de Simon

[In fact, it's improbable she was born as early as 1084, since that would make her marriage undertaken at 29, not just a record high age for a lady so far, but also hardly the best prelude for giving birth to eight children.]

XXX Agatha of Lorraine (c. 1120 – April 1147) was the wife of her relative Reginald III, Count of Burgundy.[1][2] She was the daughter of Simon I, Duke of Lorraine[3] and his wife Adelaide of Leuven.

[Wiki on her husband]

About 1130, Reginald married Agatha, daughter of Duke Simon I of Lorraine.[4] They had a daughter, Beatrice I.[5] -> XXI

XXXI Beatrice I (1143 – 15 November 1184) was countess of Burgundy from 1148 until her death, and was also Holy Roman Empress by marriage to Frederick Barbarossa. She was crowned empress by Antipope Paschal III in Rome on 1 August 1167, and as Queen of Burgundy at Vienne in August 1178.

The wedding between Beatrice and Frederick took on 9 June 1156 at Würzburg.

E, Fifth Lineage:

XXXII Bertrade of Montfort (c. 1070 – 14 February 1117), also known by other names, was a Norman noble from the House of Montfort. She was countess of Anjou (1089–1092) through her first marriage to Fulk the Rude and then queen consort of France (1092–1108) through her initially bigamous marriage to Philip I. Condemned in her era's ecclesiastical histories, she played a role in the popularization of pigache footwear and founded a daughter house of Fontevraud Abbey at Hautes-Bruyeres.

Shortly after their 1089 marriage,[3] Bertrade bore Fulk's son and heir, Fulk V. -> XXXIII

XXXIII Cecile of France (1097 – 1145) was a French princess, daughter of Philip I of France and Bertrade de Montfort. Her first marriage was arranged while Bohemond I of Antioch was visiting the French court seeking support against Alexios I Komnenos. She sailed for Antioch at the end of 1106 and became Lady of Tarsus and Mamistra, in Cilician Armenia. Cecile married firstly (late 1106) Tancred, Prince of Galilee, Regent of Antioch, who succeeded in 1111 as Prince of Antioch.

F, Sixth Lineage:

XXXIV Gisela of Burgundy (1075–1135) was a Countess consort of Savoy[1] and a Marchioness consort of Montferrat. Gisela was the spouse of Humbert II, Count of Savoy and later of Rainier of Montferrat whom she married after Humbert's death. Gisela was the daughter of William I, Count of Burgundy[2] and his consort Stephanie.

[French wiki]

Vers 1090, elle épouse Humbert II, sixième comte en Maurienne, également seigneur du Bugey, d'Aoste et du Chablais et marquis de Suse4,5,6. -> XXXV

XXXV Adelaide of Maurienne, also called Alix or Adele[1] (1092 – 18 November 1154) was Queen of France as the second wife of King Louis VI (1115–1137). ... Adelaide became the second wife of King Louis VI of France, whom she married on 3 August 1115 in Paris, France. -> XXXVI

XXXVI Constance of France (c. 1126 – c. 1190) was a French princess of the House of Capet, the only daughter of Louis VI of France and his wife Adélaide de Maurienne. Amongst her siblings was Louis VII, who succeeded their father in 1137.

In 1140, Constance married Eustace IV, Count of Boulogne, son of Stephen, King of England.[1] The couple were married for thirteen years until Eustace's death, they had no children.

The following year, Constance was married to Raymond V, Count of Toulouse. -> XXXVII

XXXVII French wiki Adélaïde de Toulouse est née à Toulouse vers 1158 et morte en 1200.

La jeune mariée est belle, aux dires des troubadours et son parti est particulièrement avantageux pour Roger II. Le mariage a lieu en 1171.

G, Seventh Lineage:

XXXVIII Dangereuse de l'Isle Bouchard (Poitevin: Dangerosa; 1079 – 1151) was the daughter of Bartholomew of l'Isle Bouchard and his wife Gerberge de Blaison. She was the maternal grandmother of the celebrated Eleanor of Aquitaine. She was also mistress to her granddaughters' paternal grandfather, William IX, Duke of Aquitaine. As the mistress of William the Troubadour, she was known as La Maubergeonne for the tower he built for her at his castle in Poitiers. -> XXXIX

Dangereuse ("Dangerous") was a sobriquet she received for her seductiveness; her baptismal name may have been Amauberge or Amal(a)berge.

Dangereuse married Aimery I, Viscount of Châtellerault, at an unknown date. She advised her husband to donate property to the priory of Saint-Denis-de-Vaux in a charter dated 1109, which means they were married before this point.

Dangereuse and Aimery were married for around seven years before she left her husband to become mistress to Duke William IX; this became an infamous liaison.

Humiliated, in 1116, Philippa [her rival] chose to retire to the Abbey of Fontevrault.

[She was married at the latest at 30, but with 8 children, that is unlikely. I'll set her as married 25 to 29 years old. Wait ... her oldest son must have been born 1098 or 1099, so she was married c. 1097 or 1098, 16 to 19 years old]

XXXIX Aénor of Châtellerault (also known as Aénor de Rochefoucauld), Duchess of Aquitaine, (born c. 1103 in Châtellerault, died March 1130 in Talmont) was the mother of Eleanor of Aquitaine, who became one of the most powerful women of her generation in Europe. [May have been counted twice by mistake] -> XL, XLI

XL Eleanor of Aquitaine (French: Aliénor d'Aquitaine, Éléonore d'Aquitaine, Occitan: Alienòr d'Aquitània, pronounced [aljeˈnɔɾ dakiˈtanjɔ], Latin: Helienordis, Alienorde or Alianor;[a] c. 1124 – 1 April 1204) was Duchess of Aquitaine from 1137 to 1204, Queen of France from 1137 to 1152 as the wife of King Louis VII,[4] and Queen of England from 1154 to 1189 as the wife of King Henry II. As the heiress of the House of Poitiers, which controlled much of southwestern France, she was one of the wealthiest and most powerful women in Western Europe during the High Middle Ages. -> XLIV, L, LX, LXII, LXIX

XLI Petronilla of Aquitaine (c. 1125 – c.1151) was a French noble. She was the second daughter of William X of Aquitaine and Aenor of Châtellerault. She was the elder sister of William Aigret and the younger sister of Eleanor of Aquitaine, who was Queen consort of France, later England. She is variously called Alix (or Aelith in Occitan) and Petronilla; she typically went by Alix after her marriage, while Petronilla seems to have been her childhood name (she is referred to as such in her father's will). -> XLII

XLII Elisabeth (French: Élisabeth), also known as Isabelle Mabille (1143 – Arras, 28 March 1183), was ruling Countess of Vermandois from 1168 to 1183, and also Countess of Flanders by marriage to Philip I, Count of Flanders. She was the eldest daughter of Ralph I, Count of Vermandois and his second spouse, Petronilla of Aquitaine. -> XLIII

XLIII Eleanor of Vermandois (French: Éléonore or Aliéonor or Aénor de Vermandois, 1148 or 1149 – 19 or 21 June 1213) was reigning countess of Vermandois and Valois in 1182–1213 and by marriage countess of Ostervant, Nevers, Auxerre, Boulogne and Beaumont.

XLIV Marie of France (1145 – 11 March 1198) was a Capetian princess who became Countess of Champagne by her marriage to Henry I of Champagne. She served as regent of the County of Champagne three times: during Henry I's absence from 1179-1181; during the minority of their son Henry II from 1181–1187; and during Henry II's absence from 1190-1197. The daughter of Eleanor of Aquitaine and Louis VII of France, she was the sister of Alice of France and the half-sister of: William IX, Henry the Young King, Richard I, Geoffrey of Brittany, Matilda of England, Eleanor of England, Joan of England, John of England; Margaret of France, Alys of France, Agnes of France, Philip II of France; and the stepdaughter of Henry II of England, and Constance of Castile, and Adela of Champagne.

In 1153, Marie was betrothed to Henry of Champagne by her father Louis.[4] These betrothals were arranged based on the intervention of Bernard of Clairvaux, as reported in the contemporary chronicle of Radulfus Niger. After her betrothal, Marie was sent to live with the Viscountess Elizabeth of Mareuil-sy-Aÿ and then to the abbey of Avenay in Champagne for her Latin-based education. In 1159, Marie married Henry I, Count of Champagne. -> XLV, XLVI

XLV Marie of Champagne (c. 1174 – 29 August 1204[1]) was the first Latin Empress of Constantinople by marriage to Emperor Baldwin I. She acted as regent of Flanders during the absence of her spouse from 1202 until 1204. / On 6 January 1186, Marie and Baldwin were married at Valenciennes. -> XLVII, XLVIII

XLVI Scholastique of Champagne (also Scholastica;[1] 1172–1219) was the daughter of Marie of France and Count Henry I of Champagne.

XLVII Joan, often called Joan of Constantinople (c. 1199 – 5 December 1244), ruled as Countess of Flanders and Hainaut from 1205 (at the age of six[1]) until her death. She was the elder daughter of Baldwin IX, Count of Flanders and Hainaut, and Marie of Champagne.[2] / In 1211 Enguerrand III of Coucy offered the King the sum of 50,000 livres to marry Joan, while his brother Thomas would marry Margaret. However, the Flemish nobility was hostile to the project. Matilda of Portugal, widow of Joan's granduncle Philip I of Flanders, then offered her nephew, Ferdinand of Portugal, as Joan's husband for the same amount. The marriage was celebrated in Paris in January 1212.[3][4][5] Ferdinand thus became Joan's co-ruler.

XLVIII Margaret, often called Margaret of Constantinople (1202[1] – 10 February 1280), ruled as Countess of Flanders during 1244–1278 and Countess of Hainaut during 1244–1253 and 1257–1280. She was the younger daughter of Baldwin IX, Count of Flanders and Hainaut, and Marie of Champagne.[2] / In the presence of a significant number of bourgeois of Hainaut, she declared she did not want another husband than Bouchard, and before 23 July 1212 they were married.[4] Margaret was then twelve years old, while her new husband was twenty-eight. -> IL

IL Joan of Dampierre (c. 1225–1245/1246) was the eldest daughter of Margaret II, Countess of Flanders, and William II of Dampierre. / In 1239, her mother arranged her to be wed to count Hugh III of Rethel. Margaret stipulated that her dowry should be returned in case the count died without giving Joan a child. When this indeed happened, the money was refunded.

L Alix of France (July/August 1150 – 1197/1198) was countess consort of Blois by marriage to Theobald. She served as regent of Blois during Theobald's absence from in 1190–1191, and during the minority of their son Louis from 1191 until 1197. She was the daughter of Eleanor of Aquitaine and Louis VII of France. / In 1164, at age 14, Alix married Theobald, [2] who had previously attempted to abduct Alix's mother to force her into a marriage with him. Her sister Marie married Theobald's brother Henry I, Count of Champagne. -> LI, LVIII

LI Margaret of Blois (French: Marguerite; died 1230) was suo jure Countess of Blois in France from 1218 to 1230. From 1190 to 1200, she was the countess consort of the County of Burgundy and then regent for her daughters from 1200 until 1208.[1] -> LII, LIII, LVII

LII Joan I (1191–1205), also called Joanna of Hohenstaufen, was ruling Countess of Burgundy from 1200 to 1205. She was daughter of Otto I, Count of Burgundy, and Margaret, Countess of Blois. [Died at 14, unmarried]

LIII Beatrice II (1193 – 7 May 1231) reigned as Countess Palatine of Burgundy from 1205 until her death.[1][2] She was a member of the Swabian Hohenstaufen dynasty, the daughter of Count Otto I of Burgundy and Margaret, Countess of Blois,[3] thereby a granddaughter of Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. / In 1208 she married Duke Otto I, Duke of Merania. -> LIV, LV, LVI

LIV Agnes of Merania (c. 1215 – 7 January 1263) was a member of the House of Andechs and an Austrian royal consort.[1] By her two marriages, she was Duchess of Austria (AEIOU!) from 1230 until 1243 and Duchess of Carinthia from 1256 until her death. / In 1229 she married Frederick of Babenberg, son and heir of Duke Leopold VI of Austria. Her husband, who was known as "the Quarrelsome",[2] had just divorced his first wife Eudokia Laskarina ("Sophia"), a daughter of the Byzantine emperor Theodore I Laskaris, due to childlessness. He succeeded his father as Austrian duke in 1230. Based on the dowry of his wife including large Andechs estates in the March of Carniola and the Windic March, he also began to call himself a "Lord of Carniola" from 1232.

LV Beatrix of Merania (1210 – 9 February 1271) was a princess of Merania by birth, and the Countess of Weimar-Orlamünde by marriage. [She married, but at unknown date]

LVI Adelaide of Merania (Adélaïde or Alice, Alix – died 8 March 1279, Évian) was reigning Countess of Burgundy from 1248 until her death. She was also Countess of Savoy and Bresse through her marriage in 1267 to Count Philip I of Savoy. [Birthdate unknown to English wikipedians, but see this about her in French wiki] Naissance: 1218

LVII Mary, Countess of Blois, also known as Marie of Avesnes, (1200–1241) was countess of Blois from 1230 to 1241. She was the daughter of Walter of Avesnes and Margaret of Blois.[1] In 1226, Mary married Hugh I of Châtillon, a count from Châtillon-sur-Marne, son of Gaucher III of Châtillon and Elisabeth of Saint-Pol.

LVIII Isabelle of Blois or Elizabeth of Blois (died 1248 or 1249) was the lady of Amboise by marriage and from 1218 until her death the countess of Chartres in her own right. / Isabelle (Elizabeth) was born probably before 1180. / Isabelle was married twice. In 1190, she was married to Sulpice III of Amboise [fr]. -> LIX

LIX Matilda of Amboise (Mahaut, Mathilde d'Amboise; c. 1200 ‒ 12 May 1256) was the Countess of Chartres 1248-1256. She was the daughter of Sulpice III of Amboise and Isabella of Blois.

LX Matilda of England (June 1156 — June/July 1189) was an English princess of the House of Plantagenet[a] and by marriage Duchess consort of Saxony and Bavaria from 1168 until her husband's deposition in 1180.

LXI Matilda of Saxony, or Richenza of Saxony (1172-13 January 1209/10) was the Countess of Perche followed by the title of Lady of Coucy from the German Welf dynasty. She was also the niece of Richard the Lionheart. / Matilda married Geoffrey III, Count of Perche in 1189.

LXII Eleanor of England (Spanish: Leonor; c. 1161[1] – 31 October 1214[2][3]), was Queen of Castile and Toledo[4] as wife of Alfonso VIII of Castile.[5][6] She was the sixth child and second daughter of Henry II, King of England, and Eleanor of Aquitaine.[7][8] She served as Regent of Castile during the minority of her son Henry I for 26 days between the death of her spouse and her own death in 1214.[9] -> LXIII, LXVI, LXVIII, LXX

LXIII Berengaria (Castilian: Berenguela), nicknamed the Great (Castilian: la Grande) (1179 or 1180 – 8 November 1246), was Queen of Castile[1] for a brief time in 1217, and Queen of León from 1197 to 1204 as the second wife of King Alfonso IX. -> LXIV

[Berengaria's first engagement was agreed in 1187 when her hand was sought by Conrad, the fifth child of Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa.[10] The next year, the marriage contract was signed in Seligenstadt, including a dowry of 42000 Maravedí.[10] Conrad then marched to Castile, where in Carrión the engagement was celebrated and Conrad was knighted[11] making him a servant of his new lord, Alfonso. Berengaria's claim to the throne was based in part on documentation in the treaty and marriage contract,[12][13] which specified that she would inherit the kingdom after her father or any childless brothers who might come along.[12] Conrad would only be allowed to co-rule as her spouse, and Castile would not become part of the Empire.[10] Furthermore, he was not allowed to claim the throne for himself in case of Alfonso's death, but was obliged to defend and protect the kingdom until Berengaria arrived.[14] The treaty also documented traditional rights and obligations between the future sovereign and the nobility.[15]

The marriage was not consummated because Berengaria was less than 10 years old.[16] Conrad and Berengaria never saw each other again.[17] By 1191, Berengaria requested an annulment of the engagement from the pope, influenced, no doubt, by third parties such as her grandmother Duchess Eleanor of Aquitaine, who was not interested in having a Hohenstaufen as a neighbor to her French fiefdoms.[17] Those fears were neutralized when Conrad was assassinated in 1196.[17]]

Berengaria married King Alfonso IX of León, her first cousin once removed, in Valladolid in 1197.

LXIV Berengaria of León[a] (1204 – 12 April 1237) was the third wife but only empress consort of John of Brienne, Latin Emperor of Constantinople. She was a daughter of Alfonso IX of León and Berengaria of Castile.[1] She was a younger sister of Ferdinand III of Castile and Alfonso of Molina. -> LXV

LXV Marie of Brienne (c. 1224–1275) was Latin Empress as the wife of Baldwin II of Courtenay. She served as regent during the absence of Baldwin II twice: in 1237–1239, and in 1243–1257. / Their marriage took place in 1234. The bride was about ten years old, the groom seventeen. Their marriage was recorded in the chronicle of Alberic of Trois-Fontaines. By her marriage, Marie became the junior co-empress of the Latin Empire, the senior one being her mother.

LXVI Urraca of Castile (1186/28 May 1187 – 3 November 1220) was a daughter of Alfonso VIII of Castile[1] and Eleanor of England.[2] Her maternal grandparents were Henry II of England and Eleanor of Aquitaine. -> LXVII

LXVII Eleanor of Portugal (Portuguese: Leonor [liuˈnoɾ]; c. 1211 – 28 August 1231) was a Portuguese infanta, the only daughter of Afonso II of Portugal and Urraca of Castile, Queen of Portugal.[1] Eleanor was Queen of Denmark by marriage to Valdemar the Young, son of Valdemar II, in 1229.[2]

LXVIII Blanche of Castile (Spanish: Blanca de Castilla; 4 March 1188 – 27 November 1252) was Queen of France by marriage to Louis VIII. She acted as regent twice during the reign of her son, Louis IX: during his minority from 1226 until 1234, and during his absence from 1248 until 1252.

Blanche was twelve years of age, and Louis was only a year older, by the time the marriage treaty was finally signed. King John ceded the fiefs of Issoudun and Graçay as a dowry. The marriage was celebrated 23 May 1200, at Port-Mort on the right bank of the Seine, in John's domains, as those of Philip lay under an interdict.[5][6] Blanche bore her first child in 1205.[3] -> LXIX

LXIX Isabelle of France (March 1225 – 23 February 1270) was a French princess and daughter of Louis VIII of France and Blanche of Castile. She was a younger sister of King Louis IX of France (Saint Louis) and of Alfonso, Count of Poitiers, and an older sister of King Charles I of Sicily. In 1256, she founded the nunnery of Longchamp in part of the Forest of Rouvray (now called the Bois de Boulogne), west of Paris. Isabelle consecrated her virginity and her entire life to God alone. She is honored as a saint by the Franciscan Order. Her feast day is 22 February.

LXX Eleanor of Castile[1] (1200[2][3]—1244) was Queen of Aragon by her marriage to King James I of Aragon. / Eleanor was the daughter of Alfonso VIII of Castile and Eleanor of England. In 1221 at Ágreda, Eleanor married King James I of Aragon; she was nineteen and he was fourteen.

[Like here niece above, she died in a monastery.]

LXXI Joan of England (October 1165 – 4 September 1199) was by marriage Queen of Sicily and Countess of Toulouse. She was the seventh child of King Henry II of England and Duchess Eleanor of Aquitaine. From her birth, she was destined to make a political and royal marriage. She married William II of Sicily and later Raymond VI, Count of Toulouse, two very important and powerful figures in the political landscape of Medieval Europe.

... After a hazardous voyage, Joan arrived safely in Palermo, and on 13 February 1177, she married King William and was crowned Queen of Sicily at Palermo Cathedral.

Deaths at:
14 20 21 22 26 28 28 30 31 33 33 33 34 34 37 38 38
13 18 19 20 23 25 25 28 29 32 32 33 33 33 35 37 37
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
40 40 41 41 41 42 43 44 44 45 46 46 46 47 47 48 48 48 48 48 48
38 39 39 40 40 41 41 41 41 43 43 44 44 45 45 45 46 46 46 46 46
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
48 48 51 53 53 53 55 56 57 57 57 60 60 61 61 61 62
47 47 48 50 51 52 52 53 54 55 55 56 59 59 60 60 61
39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
64 65 65 66 67 68 71 71 72 75 76 78 81 81 84
62 62 63 64 65 66 66 69 69 71 73 77 78 79 81
56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70

Died after 59, 17 to 21 / 70, 24.286 to 30 %.

Middle two quartiles died 40 to 61 or 38 to 60.

Married at:
09 09 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 14
09 09 09 09 09 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 18 18 18
12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
18 18 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 21
16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 18 19 19 19 19 19 19 19
39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 56
22 22 22 23 24 25 25 25 25 26 29
19 20 20 20 22 22 23 23 24 25 25
57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

Married before 15 : 22 to 34 / 67, 32.836 to 50.746 %.

Middle two quartiles married, 14 to 20 or 12 to 19.

It was nearly eery, how added stat after added stat, the middle of deaths stats was 48 higher and 46 lower count, and the middle of marriages was 17 higher count and 14 lower count.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Xth LD after Pentecost
28.VII.2024

Questions on the Reformation

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Persecutions of Catholics by Protestants, Reformation Era · Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Questions on the Reformation

I answered one on quora, was prompted to answer another one, for both I looked at "related questions" ...

What do Catholics think about Protestants?

The Catholic Church teaches that Protestantism is wrong, in each case when they actively oppose some of the anathemas of the council of Trent, and some other later or earlier definitions.

The Catholic Church also teaches that the Protestant communities born from the Reformation, or later on from this first generation of Protestant communities are lacking in Church structure, generally lack valid bishops, priests, confirmations, eucharists, absolutions and extreme unctions.

There are Catholics who agree on this Church teaching, and I do. There are Catholics who go beyond it and accuse every Protestant irrespectively of community of every error any Protestant embraced, I do not. And there are Catholics who disagree, which I also do not.

One more thing. Some of the Church teachings on my view would be targetting mainly Mainstream European Liberal Protestantism, for instance Gregory XVI saying they are not Christian. Partly because US was geographically marginal, while in any European country, Revivalism was marginal, and on top of that the Revivalism there was, Pietism, had an ugly Anti-Intellectual slant. On my view it has some significance that this was before both Asuza Street and John C Whitcomb & Henry M Morris.

What books were discarded by Catholics during the reformation process and why did Protestants not include them in their own Bible(s)?

Catholics didn't discard books, it was Protestants who discarded books, and book parts. Some discarded them from full canonicity, but included them in Bibles, some even banned them from the Bibles.

Why didn't the Catholic and Protestant churches reunite after the Protestant Reformation?

Because the Protestant Reformation was how the Protestant Churches split from the Catholic Church. In visible assymetry.

Let me clarify the last point. In 1054, Michael Caerularius and the legate of Pope St. Leo IX excommunicated each other. Both parties said they were just staying in the Church they had previously been in, and that the other party was guilty of leaving it. The symmetry is not true, one of the parties is wrong, but the assymetry was not as visible and as obvious.

In 1522, Martin Luther was excommunicated by the Pope. He did not pretend to pronounce an excommunication back. He pretended to consider the Pope as Antichrist, and this not simply for the then Pope, Leo X, but for all recent Popes, way back, as long as there were indulgences, as long as there were monastic vows, and so on.

He also pretended he had been previously wrong, by being Roman Catholic, and had "woken up" ... so Leo X, like both parties in 1054, said he was continuing the faith and Church he had been born into, and Luther did not say that. Visible assymetry. Or if he said so in a subtle way, it was by pretending there were factions agreeing with himself (on each issue? on all issues? he wasn't clear) in times where official Church teaching was "wrong" ...

Lutherans sometimes believe that Luther was pretty wrong on some, but because of this or that detail, one should still hold to Lutheranism. A more common opinion among Lutherans is wanting to stay clear of Catholic dogmatism ... avoiding a Church which doesn't encourage a totally free enquiry.

Some other types of Protestant will be more likely to shout out "unbiblical" about this or that Marian doctrine or this or that practise. That's their rationale for not becoming Catholic.*

The Catholics' rationale for not becoming Protestant (except some in the Vatican II connexion seem to have subreptitiously or not so subreptitiously embarked on that road**) is, as above, the result of the Reformation was, in the countries that went through that evil process and in the communities in other countries that resulted from it, a maimed Church with an adulterated or in some cases at best just very incomplete doctrine.

What led to the split between Protestants and Catholics? Why do some Protestants still identify as Catholics?

I would say that lots of the reasons for the split was Protestants being more woke about how to re-read things in the light of recent discoveries about Ancient Roman society.

And the reason why many Protestants at the time tried to claim the title Catholic and pretend that the actual Catholics were "Papists" was, they hoped back in the 1520's and 1530's that their discoveries would hold sway over all of the Catholic Church. They were wrong.

Was Protestantism more secular or fundamental during the time of its conception than the Catholic Church was at that time?

In the Reformation period, Protestantism prefigured modern Secularism in many ways, while the Catholic Church were more like Fundamentalists at least in so far as they believed more miraculous things and followed more rules.

Was protestantism [a] more secular movement during the time of it's conception?

Arguably, yes. As said, the Reformation was inspired by the discoveries about Ancient Rome, parts of which were about secularist views. In 1527 Gustav Wasa supported it because he wanted to secularise Church property, and in 1534, while Henry VIII didn't quite want to secularise marriage like Luther had done, in defiance of Mark 10:6, he found the Fundamentalist views on Christian marriage by Pope Clement VII a bit too irksome.

Why didn't protestants split from the Catholic church around 350 A.D. instead of 1523?

If Protestantism is what Protestants sometimes claim, a very good question.

If the original Christians were Protestants, as Protestants claim, at the time when they claim the Catholic Church departed from original Christianity, there should have been not just a verbal protest, but dissent from that apostasy, as they presume it was.

Some Protestants have pretended this actually happened, and have identified any degree of dissent from and marginality within the Catholic Church over the centuries as a continuing Protestant Church, under different names. Obviously, such a Protestantism, if it had been one, would have been more like modern Evangelicals than like the daughters of the Reformation in terms of structure, namely lacking a firm organisation and a visible undisputable continuity.

What changes in the Catholic Church prompted the Protestant Reformation?

Let's see ... excommunicating Luther? Wait, Luther was already involved.

Some Protestants have pretended to make a list of "changes" that the Catholic Church implemented over several different centuries, and at the Reformation it was time (somehow than rather than 100 years earlier or later) for faithful Christians to jump ship from this ever changing ... well, the problem is, they have a problem proving the Catholic doctrines they attack were actually changes. Their methodology is faulty. They will take "we don't think we can find it in the Bible and we don't think very early Church fathers mentioned this" (a sometimes very subjective impression) as a guarantee of "therefore, this is a new thing, a change, on part of the Catholics" ... I have lampooned their methodology in my story about the Mexican in Edinburgh. The letters the Mexican had received hadn't mentioned kilts or whisky or haggis, so, the Mexican when arriving in Edinburgh imagines his host is gradually going mad.***

When did the Catholic Church finally accept the split between Catholicism and Protestantism?

What do you mean by "finally accept the split"? If you mean accept that there are people who are outside the Catholic Church and are baptised and are heretics, and those heresies are heresies of Protestantism, as soon as the heresies were there and She excommunictated heretics or anathematised heresies.

If you mean accept the split is final, well, we haven't. We still pray for the conversion of heretics.

If you mean accept that people in some countries have a civil right to be Protestant, we consider that a question of politics, and in some countries it would very quickly have become impossible to enforce the Inquisition, chief and first of them Holy Roman Empire, also known as Germany.°

Has the Catholic Church doctrine changed over time?

Doctrines have become formal dogmas.

The Catholic Church is older than Protestantism and the oldest form of Christianity in Europe. When did the first Protestant sects start appearing like lockust?

That depends on what you count as Protestantism. Are Medieval Waldensians Protestant? Or aren't they?

Some would count them as a very different heresy (and they are closer to Evangelicals than to the Reformation, but the Evangelicals are also closer to Catholics than the Reformation is). Lewis XI of France refused to count them as heretics, contrary to the Pope finding they were so.

In the Reformation period, however, Waldensians came to join cause with Calvinists, and Hussites with Lutherans.

Hussites are closer to an actual precursor of the Reformation. Even so, not all agree on that either:

In contrast to the popular perception that Hus was a proto-Protestant, some Eastern Orthodox Christians have argued that his theology was far closer to Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Jan Hus is considered a martyr saint in some jurisdictions of the Orthodox Church.[65] The Czechoslovak Hussite Church claims to trace its origin to Hus, to be "neo-Hussite", and contains mixed Eastern Orthodox and Protestant elements. Nowadays, he is considered a saint by the orthodox churches of Greece, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, and several others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Hus

Either way, he was, like the Reformers, closer to Catholicism than early Waldensians were.

What were the causes of the Protestant Reformation?

The devil, the world and the flesh. It is possible that witches managed curses to make Germany less Catholic, it is certain that the Devil is anyway prone to promote religious errors. As men are not quite as eager to take them directly from him, his helps are the world (general society in Protestant countries from Reformation on) and the flesh (Protestantism pandering to evil lusts in different key promoters of Protestantism, greed and revenge for Gustav Wasa, lust after Anne Boleyn in Henry VIII, a dissatisfaction with fasting in many (including Luther) as well as with monasteries (including Luther).

What was the Catholic Counter Reformation?

• a Catholic revival, just as Fundies have had Fundie revivals against Darwinism and Rock'n'Roll
• reforms in Church administration
• efforts on the missionary and military side to bring back populations and territories to Catholicism.

When did the Protestant Reformation end?

One could say, when the last group of people leaving the Catholic Church had become some sort of Protestants. This would be the Mennonites.

After the foundation of the Mennonites, all later Protestant groups have left only Protestant groups, and sometimes clearly for the better, like when Bertil Gärtner°° left the Swedish Church and joined the Augustana synod of Missouri, I think, which is, apart from agreeing with Catholicism on refusing female ordination, also has some Catholic and Liturgy friendly sides. It's High Church. Both I and Father Caesarius Cavallin OSB and lots of others either come from Gärtner's Free Synod or from sympathisers with it (I never personally accessed it).

After the Reformation, who burned more "heretics", the Catholics or the Protestants?

If you only count executions for the religious crime heresy and the execution method burning (often after strangulation, so it was only a dead body that was burned), there is no doubt that it's Catholics.

This doesn't by any stretch mean that Protestants didn't execute Catholics or burn heretics. Servetus was burned in Calvin's Geneva, Bartholomew Legate and Edward Wightman were burned in the England where James I had issued the King James Bible the previous year. However, they preferred executing Catholics over executing heretics. And most Catholics were executed as traitors to the King. Or, in the case of Elisabeth I, traitors to the Queen.

Cardinal David Beaton was however murdered in a kind of execution ritual, probably as persecutor of George Wishart, since after the killing, he was hanged from the castle window.

The peasants that were hung by Coligny during the Religious Wars in France were probably hung for being "rebellious peasants" (they tried to defend their church and priest) and in the case of the Pilgrimage of Grace executions and Dacke executions, the charges of peasant rebellion and treason to the king were combined (in both cases, there were churches to defend).

This is only counting actual executions. Far more recently, in Ireland, the Catholic peasants cultivated sufficient wheat to not starve to death, but their landlords refused them the wheat for survival, they wanted it for "business as usual" and told them "as per contract, your food is potatoes" (the crops of which had just failed). Lots of Anglo-Irish landlords were more than happy to see Catholics starve to death and replace them with Ulster Scots.

What will it take to get Protestants and Catholics to come together as one?

It will happen two ways.

• Protestant conversions.
• Catholic apostasies.

As said, some count Vatican II in that latter league.

Who started the Protestant Reformation?

Luther, Zwingli and Oecolampadius, unless you want to go on to kings or back to Hus.

Did any Catholics convert to Protestantism during the Reformation?

I wouldn't call it "convert" but that's where the Protestant populations come from. Gustav Wasa and Henry VIII were raised Catholics, so were all of the one's and most of the other's subjects. When they died, the populations had been wedged away from Rome.

Have Protestants been executed by Catholics?

Yes, and vice versa.

What do Catholics and Protestants have in common?

When neither is Modernist, what Lita Cosner in 2009 called "generic Christianity" (she's married since, so now she's Lita Sanders). That would include Young Earth Creationism or at a minimum the special creation of Adam before there were any other human people and within reasonable time for Genesis 3 to be transmitted from Adam to Moses.

Two last questions, I think they go together:

What are some reasons why some Protestants may not like Catholics?

Why are Protestants not Catholic?

For some the latter question is not a question of dislike, but of historical habit. This was also my case before I became a Catholic. Or Caesarius Cavallins. In some of these cases, you add a few principled objections, that are often somewhat superficial, sometimes misinformed.

When there is actual dislike, I'd count things like these as probable:

• descending from Hussites
• descending from Huguenots
• descending from Waldensians
• descending from Ulster Scots
• cultivating theological prejudice against Catholic doctrines like they (more or less) are
• inventing histories like those of Hislop or of Ruckman.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris, Georges Pompidou
IX LD after Pentecost
21.VII.2024

* Some of my answers to such points:

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Matthew 6:7 and the Rosary
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2022/01/matthew-67-and-rosary.html

Great Bishop of Geneva! Jeremias 7 and 44 and the Duchess of Dorchester
http://greatbishopofgeneva.blogspot.com/2023/06/jeremias-7-and-44-and-duchess-of.html

New blog on the kid: Refutation of Dr. Steven Nemes
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2024/07/refutation-of-dr-stephen-nemes.html

** The accusation is debated.

*** For the full story, see here:

Great Bishop of Geneva! The Mexican in Edinburgh and Church History
https://greatbishopofgeneva.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-mexican-in-edinburgh-and-church.html

The greater part is actually discussing some of the accused "changes" ...

° The Inquisition is, therefore, not a thing we regard as an outrage against human dignity, still less as a persecution of real Christians (except in miscarriages of justice, St. Joan, some would also say Savonarola), but also not as a duty, something we have a duty to bring back. Conditions vary. In Babylon, Jews couldn't stone idolaters.

°° I liked Bertil Gärtner before I heard of Archbishop Lefebvre.