Queen Elizabeth II is Direct Lineage of the Roman Caesars by blood! (Proven Fact)

page: 4
169
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Wow thats some good work! truly amazing how far The queens bloodline goes.

Though truth be told, I think she's old enough to have seen the big match ups between the Christians fighting the lions in the skybox of the Colosium




posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Yeah, but when you go further back a lot of those genealogies are embellished to make a family look better; I know in my line, some errant work done by other people would have tied us to Swedish royalty, or something like that, but my aunt, a genealogist, disproved it all with her own work. It happens all the time, they even trace people back to Adam, but just because you have a list of begats does not mean it is entirely accurate, unless you can find corroborating documents to back it up, such as birth records, family documents, diaries, census records, marriage records, grave stones, etc.
edit on 25-11-2011 by bigrex because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


when speaking genealogy, you have to be very careful about using the term "direct lineage". this is pretty roundabout and in no way direct.

And probably most of us could find a connection if we had enough time to look. Like the 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Many of them are related and also have ties to British "royalty".

edit on 25-11-2011 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by SweetKarma
 


Wiki facts is your source? Seriously???

A tomb means nothing. Anyone could be in there. Maybe nobody is. Charlemagne regularly had breakfast in Paris, lunch in Rome, tea in London, diner in Kiev, then back in bed in Paris. All the while personally visiting everybody in and outside of his kingdom...

He signed a treaty with the Sultan of Arabia who was so impressed by him that he gave him an elephant. There is no mention of such an event in the Sultan's archives.

And these are just a few items. Many, many scholars, those willing to research rather than blindly accept everything fed to them, consider him a myth, a concotion made of several kings. And their research is much more thorough than "mainstream" research is.



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   
oops duplicate post. Sorry folks.
edit on 11/26/2011 by SweetKarma because: double post



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   
ajmusicmedia--

I have my own genealogical work to also back this up.In fact, more than 25 years of my own research and that of my family. I would LOVE to see your own resource links for the information you are trying to present here. I truly don't believe that there would be a tomb with an effigy of the man on top of it, if he didn't actually exist. Those tombs cost alot of money back in the day, and you didn't put up one with an effigy unless you were someone darned important. I'm not buying what you are selling unless I see the facts. Please, prove me wrong. And if you read my post carefully, you will see that I did say that some of his life was fictionalized, but he did exist, with 20 kids of his own, although few were legitimate, and a huge family lineage. If you are saying he didn't exist, then neither did the rest of the folks listed. Many rulers lives were "larger than life" back then. I'd post my own info but the disc I have contains 7.75 megs of info on it. I think that's a bit much to post on here.




Peace
SK
edit on 11/26/2011 by SweetKarma because: (no reason given)
edit on 11/26/2011 by SweetKarma because: (no reason given)
edit on 11/26/2011 by SweetKarma because: (no reason given)
edit on 11/26/2011 by SweetKarma because: been a long day....



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 01:11 AM
link   
I recently came across this video on Youtube which is related to the info here.

It is strange how many ties the same families in power have to each other, and forces me to think again about the conspiracies regarding bloodlines and control...



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by bigrex
 


I understand what you did.....I had to straighten out the Sperry family tree my grandmother had a copy of. It was like a huge jigsaw puzzle, with several missing pieces!! Eventually though I figured it all out and now have a huge lineage of nearly 10,000 individuals.
Amazing what one can come up with when you dig deep enough. I have 25 years of research into this lineage- wish I had it for the other one- but getting closer all the time.

Peace!
SK



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 01:30 AM
link   
I'm also a descendant of Fredrik. If you go back far enough...

What conspiracy? You craaaaazy. Eat my almonds.



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Mary Queen of Scots who had a son was the rightful heir to the Kingdom of Scotland and England. The child was murdered and so was Mary Queen of Scots. The Royal family that sits on the thrown of England are imposters and should be removed.

Its funny how, when this is common knowledge in the UK, no one says anything and lets it occur...

Good work though OP



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
And I'm a blood line descendent of Alexander through one of his mistresses. Does that mean I'm conspiring with royalty to rule the world?



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I can go a bit further if you would like.....

Charles Martell--

whose father was
Pepin "dHeristal" of Austrasia

whose father was
Ansigisen Mayor of Austrasia

whose father was
St Arnoul de Heristal

whose father was
Bodegisel II Tongress

whose father was
Mummolin de Soissons

whose father was
Munderic de Cologne

whose father was
Cloderic of Cologne

whose father was
Sigebert le Boiteax de Cologne

whose father was
Chloedebaud de Cologne

whose father was
Clodion "Le Chevelu K France

whose father was
Pharamond King of France

whose father was
Marcomir Duke of the Franks

whose father was
Clodius Duke of the E Franks

whose father was
Dagobert Duke of the Franks

whose father was
Genebald Duke of the Franks

whose father was
Dagobert Duke of the Franks

whose father was
Walter, King of the Franks

whose father was
Clodius III King of the Franks (238-272 AD)

whose father was
Hilderic King of the Franks

whose father was
Sunno (Huano) King of the Franks

whose father was
Clodomir IV King of the Franks

whose father was
Marcomir IV King of the Franks

whose father was
Odomir King of the Franks (114-128 AD)

whose father was
Richemer King of the Franks (90-114 AD)

whose father was
Rathberius King of the Franks

whose father was
Antenor IV King of the Franks

whose father was
Clodimir III King of the Franks

whose father was
Marcomir III King of the Franks

whose father was
Clodius II (Clodie) King of the Franks (6-20 AD)

I stuck a few dates in there so you could see just how far back these kings go. Hope you enjoy this list to add to your own!!!
The last one is my 66th great grandfather.



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 02:15 AM
link   
They even related to Dracula

*Elizabeth II
*George VI
*Mary of Teck
*Francis, Duke of Teck
*Klaudia Rhédey de Kis-Rhéde
*Countess Ágnes Inczédy de Nagy-Várad
*Baron Gergely Inczédy de Nagy-Várad
*Baroness Ágnes Kendeffy de Malmoviz
*Katalin Kun de Osdola
*Kristina (Christiana) Racz de Galgo
*Peter (Petru) Racz de Galgo
*Adam Racz de Galgo
*Zamphira Logofat de Szazsebes (Female)
*Stanka (Stanca) Basarab of Wallachia (Female)
*Mircea "The Shepherd" (Voivode) of Wallachia (Male)
*Radu cel Mare Radu IV `the Great' (Voivode) of Wallachia
*Vlad Călugărul (half-brother to Vlad Dracula)
*Vlad II Dracul (father to Vlad Dracula)



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


something that crossed my mind while watching that video: why so many 9th cousins? there must some focal point 9 cousins ago in that family tree that is important to this somehow.



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by jrmcleod
 


wasn't that a big religious bruhaha? like catholic vs. protestant?



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 02:40 AM
link   
"By Blood" is many many people after many generations. Well off families, nobility have had the ability to keep records, understand those records, and of course, lie about their records for quite a long time.

It sure makes it easier when your lines run into them. So much easier than trying to find records kept by parish priests.

People are overly amazed by these things. What is more interesting is that you can trace these connections in the royal families through multiple lines over and over. They drill down on a set of traits. This is the thing that is most astounding.

Many people can find these people in their lineages. More than are accounted for, since the rich have often had a taste for leaving unaccounted for bastards around.

So to give you a different perspective, I am just some woman. I can trace back to Knights Templar, Lady Godiva (31 Gr-grandmother), Alfred "The Great" King of England (35), and Seigbert Merovigian (37), John (Duke of Lancaster) Gaunt Plantagenet (19), Edward I of England "Long Shanks" "The Hammer" Plantagenet King (24) etc.

If I could shake the Vatican to give my families records, I think I could get the connection back I need on another line, I think I can trace back to Olaf the White or Ivar the Boneless or the men who came with them.

Being a 5th cousin 5x removed from President Grant made it much easier to trace my Simpson line, because people have already obsessively obtained the records.

The only awesome thing about it, is that they have good records. Some of these people claim the most extraordinary descent, and without some genetic back up or documentation which can be authenticated it is best to view these distant relationships with a jaundiced eye.

The bigger picture isn't that they can trace to some Caesar, it is that they consistently breed back into the same lines over and over. They must be doing a better job of tracking it in the last hundred years, they aren't stooped short misshapen ugly wierdos they were starting to turn into.
edit on 2011/11/26 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 02:47 AM
link   
it dawns on me that if all but one of our presidents can be traced back to king john plantagenet, even obama, that means we can probably determine who will be next pres. if there are no repub candidates with johnny blood, guess who will be president again.
edit on 26-11-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 03:09 AM
link   
Outstanding.. S&F..

George W Bush, is also the 9th cousin to the royal british family...



posted on Nov, 26 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Genealogy is meaningless. If you go back about 500 years, you become related to everyone on Earth. Look at the math. Go back 11 generations and you have over 20,000 relatives that it took to make you. Those are also related to everyone on Earth. You are at least a 6th cousin to everyone, of all races and nations on this planet.
That includes murderers, horse thiefs, assassins, etc.





new topics
top topics
 
169
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join