Re: Burials and memorials at St Katherine Cree Church, London


"Leticia Cluff" <leticia.cluff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:qdvls3hfnsios4244i7025nolsa11drn7r@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 10:41:22 -0800 (PST), Douglas Richardson
<royalancestry@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Tish ~

Thank you for your good response. Much appreciated.

I've read statements that Sancha of Provence, the 2nd wife of Richard,
Earl of Cornwall/King of the Romans, originally had the named Cynthia
or Scientia, and that her name was changed to Sancha when she came to
England. This is presumably why you have found these names associated
with the name, Sancha, in the source you consulted. I haven't studied
the matter to determine if there is any truth to the story of the name
change.

That sounds like absolute nonsense. I find it hard to believe that any
serious scholar could have suggested that her original name was
Cynthia or Scientia, when these forms so obviously reflect the
workings of folk etymology.

Whoever wrote that knew nothing about this name, which is well known
in that part of Europe:

Spanish Sancha
Catalan Sança
French Sancie

It is the feminine form of the name well-known in Spanish as Sancho
(which hardly comes from Cynthius or Scientius). The source is the
Latin adjective "sanctus/sancta."

For even more medieval English variants see
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2005-03/1112074261

It is absolute nonsense, Tish, and no-one but Richardson and a few of his
groupies would be fool enough to offer it in vindication of his earlier
nonsense - assuming for the sake of argument that he is not himself the
person who wrote the "statements" for which he has hypocritically provided
no citations or weblinks.

Sancia of Provence (usually called Sanchia by English historians) was given
the name of her peternal great-grandmother, a princess of Aragon, and the
latter's daughter, a countess of Toulouse, who are consistently called
Sancia.

Richardson is making it up as he goes along, shamelessly. This is further
proof of his insensitivity to truth and commonsense - hence the need to be
forthright in response, not appearing to defer ironically to the charlatan
by apologising for not giving him sources and weblinks, etc.

Peter Stewart


.

Relevant Pages