Theophano Sklerina

Additional links to determine her parents:
http://www.manfred-hiebl.de/genealogie-mittelalter/_1_a_koenige/the...

Lexikon des Mittelalters: Band VIII Spalte 664

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantherios_Skleros

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco...

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_Byzantijnse_keizers

Ref. Christian Settipani: Contiguité des élites à Byzance durant les siècles obscurs. Les princes caucasiens et l’Empire du VIe au IXe siècle. De Boccard, Paris, 2006. ISBN : 978-2-7018-0226-8. P. 238, 239, 244-245.

Theophano Sklerina was the niece of John I “Tzimiskes” Eastern Roman Emperor but in fact she was a niece-in-law to him, as she was John's wife Maria Skeraina's brother Konstantin's daughter. In turn,
Theophano was at the same time also John's mothers brothers grand daughter, thus a cousin. Theophano Sklerina ought to have been born around or before 967, not after 967, either in the same decade as her husband Otto, or in the beginning at the next.

Theophanu, Empress Consort

The title "empress consort" was only right as long as her husband lived, he died before her, thus, she became, empress regnant, as her son was a minor at that time, is this of any interest at all, what title is correct, the one she had when married, or the one she had when she survived her husband?

HI Ulf,

You can see that Theophanu was detached from her parents, Konstantinos Skleros and Sophia Phokaina because there has been for a certain time some doubt about who her parents were, which resulted in the curator of that time, Justin Swanson, to state that 'her parents were unknown', warning other users not to add them again.

However, there appears to be plenty of evidence that her parents ARE known and that they were Konstantinos and Sophia. See the links above, especially the links in German based on the work of Prof. Christian Settipani from Tours University in France, which are in themselves already a synthesis of older German, Italian, Greek and Bulgarian sources.(and possibly Armenian). Even Emperor Otto II himself, who was well aware that he wasn't marrying a daughter of the Byzantine emperor but liked Theophanu very much, must have been conscious of who her parents were.
We think this situation has now lasted for too long and we are on the verge of giving Theophanu her parents back, but not without the necessary discussion and a minimum of reviewed consent and new sources. Everard van Dijk has a lot of very relevant links about this and the conclusion is obvious. Hope you agree.

Kind regards, Carl Gustav Verbraeken.

This an issue or discussion that is old and the last time I did open and closed it. The conclusion was we agreed to disagree.

In this situation we faced the fact that Geni software has it limits. Geni software is based on the fact that you are most of the time 100% sure how is the father and mother. It is not possible to add ? marks or situation that you are not 100% sure how is the fatther and mother.. But how longer you go back in time how more you come in situations were it is less 100% sure how the relations are.

Or the fact that you know the grandparents, but not the parents.

I need to check, but I was the Curator of this profile, but I am not a Curator anymore.

We can not change the facts of the history, but the way we look at our family tree and write it down changes and I hope with time we can look with a better tools to the past.

TNX Private User, it would have been difficult to find the discussion without any profiles mentioned ^^'

summing up the changed thing is that we have now more clearly rebuilt the family of Sophia Phokaina
daughter of the important general Leo Phokas the Younger
wife of Konstantinos Skleros,
whose sister Maria Skleraina is wife of John I “Tzimiskes” Eastern Roman Emperor.

So if Theophanu, Empress Consort just according to the primary sources, is nephew of John I “Tzimiskes” Eastern Roman Emperor,

now the only best place to connect she is precisely daughter of Sophia Phokaina because
Theophanu, Empress Consort named her second daughter:
-Sophie I, Abbess of Gandersheim

_____________________________
* "normal Byzantine practice being to name the first daughter after the paternal grandmother and the second after the maternal grandmother".
* "It also appears to be chronologically sustainable"
* http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/BYZANTIUM.htm#Theophanodied991

PS.
**summing up the changed thing is that we have now more clearly rebuilt all the families, that too ... ...

Parents on Theophany Sklerina is marked as duplicates, why?

Second, there is a curator commentar on the profile from Justin, another not so active curator, that actually is biased and not up to date, should be removed.

Third, history, Otto expected to be married with an emporors daughter, but the emporer John had no children, the solution for him was to choose the closest good second choice that Otto could accept, so he chosed his first cousin, who also was a niece in law, and Otto would not have accepted anything less, obvious he accepted Theophany as a wife, they got married.

Looking around to find another suitable candidates than this constellation presented here, shows only weaker suitable ones and no one else that in fact could be presented as a niece. So, what are you waiting for? Uncertainty in this case would have been if there actually existed any other good presented equal candidate, or more, but there ain't any, so any objection rest on the idea that there could have been, not that there is, ergo propter hoc, that's a false assumption only made to break or to prevent the recreation of history.

Private User I have marked clones those 2020 profiles because Everard van Dijk believed which he was the only one who has just discovered the "hot water" and had started in fourth place rebuilding the whole Byzantine part :D (part already naturally inserted for a long time, revised better last year:) so by placing a red billboard with the linck to the MPs in the info-about I hoped to disarm his neurons that went on the conquest! (do not be angry Everard, do you have any idea how much useless work I saved you!?:)

anyway I see that there are other old discussions about it .. maybe when they go on a little bit people don't read them anymore. (but in this case I don't know why, but I suspect ts weren't even searched>.<)

I very much agree with your analysis that I have summed up too much with "only best place to connect she"..
..but if we decide to make the connection I would not delete the old warning of "uncertain parents" already put by (C).

It's a constant pain and struggle, all these people wanting to make new profiles not understanding that most of them, already exist here, especially the noble ones, so thumbs up for your hard work on restraing them.

I understand that no records (surviving) shows any children to the suggested parents, but we know that not everything in history have been recorded or have survived, many times I got the picture that for them, certain things also were so known, that they didn't feel the need for writing it down, just cutting the story into what's absolute necessary, "the niece of", assuming that everyone else knew the rest.

Still, I would like to see the second best (idea) (theory) (assumption) on what else candidate it actually might have been, instead of just claiming that there could have been any one else, the fact is simple this, in a strictly hierarchical world, choices are extremely limited. ; )

I have been a Curator for several months or years, my memory is failing on that part, but I know that the job of a Curator is not easy and some times some things are done for a reason that can not shared publicly.

But it has to do with struggle and hard work. And working together on one tree with one profile for every person is not easy.

The parents are still unknown or not for 100 procent sure, but maybe it is wise to update the Curator text.