clan of Vimara Peres



in Francisco's rhetoric, I see elements of 'magnanimous' genealogy. Generously allowing many filiations, without there being proof of filiation nor logical reason to actually have been so filiated.

'....If nothing more is known, history is not offended and chronology is
not impeditive...'
this appears as one of roots of the troubles: this signals an approach -to generosity and magnanimity of genealogy- that 'anything goes' as long as it's not impossible. Perhaps Francisco does not actually mean it so freely, but this direction already is a signal of problems. Naturally, the less is known of an epoch, the more is *possible* without history and chronology being offended....
this sort of generosity in genealogy leads to invented pedigrees, flights of fancy: imagination can fill with names the unknown space to have a desired ancestor.

".... but to destroy them, something more solid than 'not documentally proved' should be provided."
Nope. it's the contrary: a reconstruction needs proof, but its demolition does not need proof, it well suffices that proof is lacking or unreliable.

'....reconstructions must be evaluated in larger frame of 2 or three generations.'
is -imo- a codeword for allowing wishful thinking.





.