Armenia and Lachish

The Armenians are another people group DNA analysis has shown to be closely related to The Jews.

During much of the divided Kingdom Period the city of Lachish was the second largest city in Judah, and in fact the largest within Judah's proper tribal allotment since Jerusalem was originally a city of Benjamin.  Assyria failed to conquer Jerusalem, but in it's war with Judah during the reign of Hezekiah it did capture and carry away into captivity the population of Lachish.  Micah 1 is a Biblical reference to the Assyrian Captivity of Lachish, and it uses Eagle Imagery of Lachish which also became a symbol of Armenia.  But it's also referenced in 2 Chronicles 32:9 and possibly alluded to in 2 Kings 18:14-17 & 19:8 and Isaiah 36:2 & 37:8.  

Thing is even though the Biblical references to this are faint it's well documented in Assyrian Archeology.

There are no Biblical clues to where the Judeans of Lachish were taken like there are for the Northern Kingdom's Captivity.  However where Assyria settled the northern captives made sense in the context of what their other recent conquests were, Assyria liked to move populations from one conquered region to another to weaken local national identities.  So it's notable that between the Northern Kingdom's captivity in the 8th century BC and when Lachish was taken in the 7th century BC the Assyrian Empire had conquered Urartu extending it's borders further north.  And the Armenians first began to emerge in the former Urartu lands after Assyria conquered it.  It took awhile however, the Orontid Kings don't show up till 570 BC, and nothing is known to have been written down in the Armenian language till their translation of The Bible in the 5th Century AD.

Armenia's traditional claim to descent from sons of Gomer (chiefly Togarmah but Ashkenaz is also mentioned) I think refers to some of the ancestors of the Urartu who lived in the region before them and who they intermingled with.  Or maybe the Armenian Language being Indo-European is their influence.

Both the Six Pointed Star and a Red Lion are among Armenia's National Symbols.  Many insist the Six Pointed Start didn't become a Jewish Symbol till fairly recently, but archeological evidence does exist of it being used in Ancient Israel, and I have a hypothesis that the Hebrew Bible's Lily Imagery is partly where it comes from.  

Plato's Myth of Er son of Armenios is probably an adaptation of Armenian legends about their local hero Ara The Beautiful.  That draws attention to the possibility that the Armenian name Ara could be related to the Hebrew Er.  In Genesis 38:3-7, 46:12, Numbers 26:19 and 1 Chronicles 2:3 the name of Er is given to Judah's firstborn son who died childless.  I believe Er's widow Tamar did eventually marry Shelah after the events of Genesis 38 end and that she's the mother of Shelah's children (in addition to Zerah and Pharez) called Shelanites in Numbers 26:20 (and Shilonites of 1 Chronicles 9:5).  

It could be the real story behind the myth was this second Er being thought of as a symbolic rebirth of the first Er.  I don't think Semiramis was ever part of the Ara mythology prior to Hellenistic influence in the region, and Plato we also know would change the myths he talked about to suit his rhetorical purposes.  However if a literal belief in Reincarnation was part of the Pre-Christian Paganism of Armenia, my current theories about the origins of that belief suggests it would have came not from the Judean element of their ancestry but from the same people responsible for their language being Indo-European.

Contextually I think the use of Zimri in Jeremiah 25:25 could be to a Proto-Armenian tribe since it's in the same verse as other east of the Euphrates nations.  Zimri was also a son of Zerah son of Judah in 1 Chronicles 2:6.  

And the dynastic name Zariadres could identify descent from Judah's son Zerah. There is an Aramaic Inscription of Artaxias I proclaiming himself a "Son of Zerah" so the Artaxiad Dynasty is Zerahite as well.  Artaxias's claimed continuity with the prior Orontids is what's questionable, if true at all I suspect it's via a marriage.

There is also an Armenian folk hero named David of Sassoun who's father was called Lion Mher meaning "lion like".  

Maybe Lachish and/or these other cities were a frequent home to Cadet branches of the House of David, like Orleans was for France and York for England?  David himself, Rehoboam and Abijah are all known to have had a lot more children then just the Son who followed them on the Throne.  And Lachish is referred to as a city Rehoboam fortified. in 2 Chronicles 11:9, as are Marseha and Adullam.  Maybe established local leaders of Lachish married daughters of Rehoboam, and maybe they were of the Zimri and/of Shelanite clans?

It's also possible the Armenians aren't connected to Israelites only through Lachish.  At it's greatest extent Armenia overlapped quite a bit with Kurdistan so some deported Northern Israelites could have came there too.

Perhaps I should give some more thought to Armenia's close relationship to Georgia however.  The oldest civilization in what is today called Georgia was Colchis.  Certain classical Greek writers like Diodorus Siculus (in Section 28) said that the Colchi descended from the same "foreigners exiled from Egypt" that the Jews descended from, and that they also practiced circumcision. "The nation of the Colchi in Pontus and that of the Jews, which lies between Arabia and Syria, were founded as colonies by certain emigrants from their country; and this is the reason why it is a long-established institution among these two peoples to circumcise their male children."  The Georgians were called Iberians during Greco-Roman times, a name which could derive from Eber/Hebrew.  So maybe the Colchi were the lost clan of Calchol son of Zerah son of Judah?  

The Colchi definitely existed on the shores of the Black Sea before the captivity of Lachish however, so we'd need an additional route for how they got there.  They could have just been a colony founded by Judean sea faring merchants.  However Joel 3 speaks of Tyre & Sidon and the Philistines selling children of Judah and Jerusalem to Ionians(Javan) as slaves.  Ezekiel 27:13 speaks of Javan, Meshach and Tubal trading in commodities including Slaves that they got from Tyre.  Meshach and Tubal are the names of two ancient cities in Georgia.  

Herodotus also claimed the Colchi practiced Circumcision though his theory on why was that they were an Egyptian colony.  Modern scholars tend to dismiss these Greek references to Circumcision in Colchis because none of the Karvelian tribes seem to have ever practiced it.  However the Georgian Jews were already present in the region by the time of Nebuchadnezzar, so it could be they were who these Greek authors were thinking of.

It's possible additional Jewish migrations to these regions happened later, like during the Babylonian Captivity or when it ended.  Two patrilineal descendants of Herod The Great were Roman Client Kings of Armenia as Tigranes V and Tigranes VI.  And then Jewish Christians of the first couple centuries eventually brought The Gospel to Armenia, Armenia even claims to have beaten Rome to making Christianity their State Religion in 301 AD. I think it actually happened a little later probably at the same time as Iberia in the 330s and like them perhaps partly because of diplomatic relations with Constantine. 

It is sometimes claimed that only the Georgian Bagratuni claimed Davidic descent, but their heraldry was a Lion even in Armenia. Indeed our first recorded reference to this from Pseudo Juansher says it was Adamase himself who was of Davidic stock not his father in law.

The Sumbat Chronicle genealogy of the Georgian branch connects them to David in a way that seemingly excludes the Armenian branch, but that link alone may not be the whole story.  I think the Isaac who is generation 87 of the Sumbat Chronicle genealogy is Isaac/Sakah II of the Armenian Bagratuni and Dhan is Vahn I Mamikonian.  

I think this Isaac is Sakah I and Sakah II of the Armenian Bagratuni being combined and the generations in-between skipped and it's the generations after him that are mistaken in connecting this line to Iberian royalty too early.  

https://archive.org/details/toumanoff-cyril-1967.-studies-in-christian-caucasian-history.-georgetown-university-press/page/n167/mode/2up

The Genealogy of Armenian Bagartuni starts on page 338 (or 168 of 304).

(I'm thinking of making a post arguing that Cleopas was married to a Sister of Jesus)

The name of the Bagartuni comes from a Persian word meaning "Gift of God", so it could be a name a clan of Davidic Ancestry chose to honor claiming descent from David's son Nathan since Nathan in Hebrew means Gift. Nathan is also the Son of David who Luke 3's Genealogy of Jesus goes back to. 

And the reference to this in the De Adrministrando Imperio by Constantine VII Porphryogentius says they traces their ancestry through Mary's Genealogy (which Christians tend to view as Luke's) rather then Joseph's from Matthew.  And Constantine's claim of there being a David ruling as a vassal of Heralcius is also him saying something of Iberia that was actually the case with Armenia.  David Saharuni wasn't a Bagratuni but he could have had kids who become intermarried into the Dynasty that the other histories failed to record.

But regardless of the Bagratid's origins they were by the 8th Century both in Armenia and Georgia of Atraxiad Ancestry. 

Zariadres

Artaxias I of Armenia

Artavasdes I of Armenia

Artaxias I of Iberia

Artoces of Iberia

Pharnavaz II of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown wife of Kartam of Cholchis]

Pharasmanes I of Iberia

Mihrdat I of Iberia

Amazasp I of Iberia

Pharasmanes II of Iberia

Ghadam of Iberia

Pharasmanes III of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown wife of Vologases II]

Khosrov I of Armenia

Tiridates II of Armenia

Khosrov II of Armenia

Tiridates III of Armenia

Salome of Ujarma

Trdat of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown-Wife of Varaz-Bakur II]

Pharasmanes IV of Iberia

Mihrdat IV of Iberia

Archil of Iberia

Mihrdat V of Iberia

Vakhtang I Gorgasali

Dachi of Iberia

Bacurius II of Iberia

[Name Unkown]

Pharasmanes VI of Iberia

Bacurius III of Iberia

Adarnase I of Iberia

Stephen II of Iberia

Adarnase II of Iberia

Stephen of Kakheti

Mirian of Kakheti

[Female Name Unknown-Wife of Prince Nerse I Nersiani]

Adarnase III of Iberia

Nerse of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown-Wife of Adarnase I of Tao-Klarjeti]

Ashot I the Great

Zariadres

Artaxias I of Armenia

Tigranes I

Tigranes the Great

Artavasdes II of Armenia

Tigranes III

Tigranes IV and Erato

[Female Name Unknown wife of Pharasmanes I of Iberia]

Mihrdat I of Iberia

Amazasp I of Iberia

Pharasmanes II of Iberia

Ghadam of Iberia

Pharasmanes III of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown wife of Vologases II]

Khosrov I of Armenia

Tiridates II of Armenia

Khosrov II of Armenia

Tiridates III of Armenia

Salome of Ujarma

Trdat of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown-Wife of Varaz-Bakur II]

Pharasmanes IV of Iberia

Mihrdat IV of Iberia

Archil of Iberia

Mihrdat V of Iberia

Vakhtang I Gorgasali

Dachi of Iberia

Bacurius II of Iberia

[Name Unkown]

Pharasmanes VI of Iberia

Bacurius III of Iberia

Adarnase I of Iberia

Stephen II of Iberia

Adarnase II of Iberia

Stephen of Kakheti

Mirian of Kakheti

[Female Name Unknown-Wife of Prince Nerse I Nersiani]

Adarnase III of Iberia

Nerse of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown-Wife of Adarnase I of Tao-Klarjeti]

Ashot I the Great

Zariadres

Artaxias I of Armenia

Tigranes I

Tigranes the Great

Artavasdes II of Armenia

Tigranes III

Tigranes IV and Erato

[Female Name Unknown wife of Pharasmanes I of Iberia]

Mihrdat I of Iberia

Amazasp I of Iberia

Pharasmanes II of Iberia

Ghadam of Iberia

Pharasmanes III of Iberia

[Female Name Unkown wife of Vologases II]

Khosrov I of Armenia

Tiridates II of Armenia

Khosrov II of Armenia

Tiridates III of Armenia

Khosrov III the Small

Bambishn

Nerses I the Great 

Isaac of Armenia

Sahakanoush

Hmayeak

Vasak

[Female Name Unkown]

Mushegh II 

Kahan Gail

Mushegh III

Hrahat

Dawith

Samuel II of Armenia

Dzoyk

Ashot Msaker

Kurds descend from The Northern Kingdom

I used to flirt with more epic and sexy theories about the "Lost Tribes", but now I focus on who makes the most sense based on the DNA evidence.

The Kurds are among a few middle eastern Ethnic Groups who DNA has shown to be even closer related to The Jews then the Arabs.  And since I view even the Edomites as having been absorbed into the Arab population that means they must be among those who descend from Deported Northern Israelites. 

1 Chronicles 5:26 refers to the Trans-Jordan Tribes being carried away by Assyria to Halah, Habor and Hara by the River Gozan.  2 Kings 17:6 and 18:11 also refer to those locations minus Hara but adds "Cities of the Medes" (some have argued it originally read "Mountains of Media", still implies the same general area) as being where the Captives of Samaria under King Hosea were taken.  Then 2 Kings 19:12 and Isaiah 37:12 mentions Gozan and Haran as among nations Assyria had destroyed previously.  From studying similar words in the Hebrew texts I think Hara is a shortened form of Haran, so it's like they're going full circle and being taken back to where Abraham was before he was called.

The River called Gozan in those verses is most likely the Khabur a significant tributary of the Euphrates that has tributaries of it's own, Guzana/Gozan is the name of an ancient city on that river whose remains are now called Tell Halaf, it may be a translation or scribal issue that switched the name of the river and city, or maybe they just were more interchangeable in Antiquity, what Senecharib said clearly uses Gozan as a City name rather then River name.  Edessa and Nisibis are both cities on rivers that are tributaries of this river as are many other important cities of Syrian and Turkish Kurdistan.  Antiochus Epiphanes renamed Edessa/Urfa as Callirrhoe or Antiochia on the Callirhoe, I'm not sure what exactly Callirhoe refers to here, but it could come from Halah given how Harran is similarly called Carrhae in Greek. 

Ancient Media meanwhile overlaps with modern Iranian Kurdistan, and the Kurdish Language is classified as a Northwestern Iranian language closely related to the Median Language (as are the Zaza-Gorani Languages spoken by some Kurds).  During classical Greco-Roman times this region included Corduene/Gordyene, Media Atropatene and Osroene, it's complicated however because multiple ethnic groups existed in those regions.

These were all territories at least partly under Assyrian control in 740-720 BC, the more fanciful identifications for these places like Velikvosky's theories and those of British Israelism have Assyria somehow deporting Israelites to places Assyria never controlled.

The passages including Naphtali in the Captivity don't specifically refer to these locations,  But the Deuterocanonical book of Tobit gives us good reason to believe Naphtalite clans were actually living in the heart of Assyria itself (I know that the main protagonists of Tobit are in Media, but it established Ahkir an important Vizer of Assyria as their cousin), and 2 Kings 17:23 also refers to captives being taken to Assyria.  So I think they are the ancestors of first century Adiabene who's capital was Arbela and through them the Kurds of Iraqi Kurdistan who's chief city is Irbil.  

Corduene/Gordyene was inhabited by a people called the Carduchoi/Carduchi who are also popularly proposed to be ancestors of the Kurds and possibly their namesake.  There is a medieval Jewish legend that the Corduene were the result of Solomon marring some of his Jinn to 500 Jewish Women.  That is a weird legend which is certainly not correct, but it does show that ancient Jews thought of these people as in some way related to them.  It could partly have it's roots in 1 Kings 4's account of Solomon marrying two of his daughters to Northern Governors, one of them being governor of Naphtali.

A region in Media Atropatene called Cadusia may have also been named after Gad.  A city in northwestern Iran is called Zabad, possibly related to the Zabad of 1 Chronicles 7:'s Ephraimite Genealogy in verse 21.  There is also a city in Iranian Kurdistan called Salmas who's name could be related to the Biblical name Salma or to Shillem a clan of Naphtali from Number 26:49 and Genesis 46:24.  Salmas first appears in the historical record right at the same time the Parthian Empire was conquered by the Sassanids.

The proper Kingdom of Media of classical antiquity didn't actually begin till just after when the Northern Kingdom of Israel was conquered.  Deioces is the name given in Classical sources for it's first King, the dates work for this being a Median name given to King Hosea reigning in the region after his deportation.  

Historian	Herodotus	George Cameron	Edvin Grantovsky	Igor Diakonoff
Era	700-647 BC	728-675 BC[8]	672-640 BC	700-678 BC[5]

Deioces is also speculated to be the same person as Hushung in the Sahanameh, Hushung is a name that both phonetically and in meaning could be a poetic adaptation of the name of Hosea.  So Media Atropatene could be the Arsareth that II Esdras says King Hosea lead some of the exiles to.

Dejoces is a direct Paternal-ancestor of Astyages who's daughter was the mother of Cyrus.  Media Atropatene was the one former Persian territory not fully conquered by the Greeks under Alexander, it remained Semii-Independent till the 1st century when their Royal Family became the main Parthian Royal Family and through them of Armenia as well.

Of course contrary to Herodotus the Medes never had a centralized State, they were a decentralized confederations of tribes and cities of mostly local autonomy who only ever seemed to have a single King when they needed to unify for war.  But that kind of fits how I think of the Northern Israelites too.

Saladin was of Kurdish ancestry.

One controversial point of contention in Lost Tribes speculation in whether or not we should expect them to have been absorbed into other population so thoroughly they forget their Israelite Identity.  And I feel like maybe it depends which Tribe you're talking about.  Because it might be worth noting that the name Manasseh means "forget" as explained in Genesis 41:51.

The Captivity recorded in 1 Kings 17 is of principally the City of Samaria.  But even that was only part of Western Manasseh.

The reason why many even who agree with me that not actually everyone was deported still assume this deportation probably includes some of Ephraim too or even was primarily of Ephraim is because people get confused about which tribal allotment Samaria was apart of.  Shechem was on the border of Ephraim and Manasseh, so cities north of Shechem like Samaria and Tirzah are Manasseh.   However because the mountain range both Shechem and Samaria are apart of gets called "Mount Ephraim" or "Mountains of Ephraim" people get confused.  It also doesn't help how both Samaria and Ephraim are used as poetically synymous with the entire Northern Kingdom.  

I suspect that after the fall of the House of Omri the Northern Kingdom was dominated by Manasseh.  Jeroboam and Baasha were the only Northern Royal Families who's Tribal affiliations were explicitly identified, my hunch about Omri is that he was a Danite.  Jehu rose to power in Gilead, Eastern Manasseh, and Menahem was from Tirzah, Hosea rebelling against the house that overthrew Menahem's house I see as circumstantial evidence he was related.  Menahem being called Son of Gadi in 2 Kings 15 could be because he descends from Gaddi the spy representing Manasseh in Numbers 13:10-11.

I think even some of the Manassites who never left the Land eventually forget who they were.  I think some of them became absorbed in the population of the Northern West Bank Palestinians, (like those of Jezreel aka Zir'in).  

That's not to say I don't think any Ephraimites could have been among the deported.  Samaria's status as the capital probably caused it have a diverse population. 

Smyrna and The White Horseman

The idea that the Rider on the White Horse in Revelation 6 isn’t “The Antichrist” or some other Villain but something more positive is almost unheard of among Futurists and thus something I was long hostile to when I was a Futurist.  But now that my Eschatology is a mixture of Historicism and Post-Millennialism it’s one I need to reconsider.  The idea I shall propose here is kind of mutually exclusive with some readings of Revelation 6 I’ve proposed before and that’s fine, I’m currently being Dogmatic about very little.

I’m not in favor of interpreting him as an individual, as some secondary Messiah like a Christianized Messiah Ben-Joseph or the Last Roman Emperor or The Mahdi.  I don’t like The Great Man Theory of History, so my Historicism prefers to focus on Collectives and Systems.

In Halley’s Bible Handbook it seems the standard Historicist take is that it’s The Church conquering the world not militarily but by spreading The Gospel.  My take here shall be like that but a bit more specific.

The word translated “conquering” and “conquer” is Nikao (in different forms) and it’s translated that way in The KJV only in this verse, everywhere else in the New Testament including elsewhere in Revelation it appears it is some form of “Overcome” or "Overcomer".  

Each of the messages to the Seven Churches has near the end a promise to the Overcomer.  However it is only Smyrna that Jesus promises to give a Crown (Philadelphia already has one).  So I do think when simply reading through Revelation that Chapter 6 verse 2 is supposed to remind the reader of Chapter 2 verses 10-11.

Smyrna in Revelation is most well known for being directly and explicitly associated with Martyrdom.  As the birthplace of the Roma Cult the pressure to conform to Imperial worship was the most pressing there.  Persecution of Christians in the province of Asia began in the Reign of Hadrian during the Governorships of Granianus and Fundanus.  So this message reflects that, being reassurance to Christians having a very difficult time and promising a reward to those who die for their Faith.  That theme shall recur in the history I shall discuss even though the contemporary descendants of Smyrna are currently pretty safe.  

Polycarp was an important second century leader of the Church in Smyrna, I sometimes speculate that him being called a "hearer of John" originally meant he was contemporary with the initial publication of The Book of Revelation, maybe even the "Angel" of Smyrna if you think the Angels of the Churches were Human messengers.  He identified himself in his letter as merely one among a group of Elders/Bishops showing that Smyrna didn't have Episcopal Polity yet. He was Martyred in probably AD 155 during the reign of Antonius Pius.  

The text known as the Martyrdom of Polycarp is a later text probably not an accurate account of exactly what happened.  But even if Polycarp did say he'd served Christ 86 years that doesn't prove Infant Baptism.  It's an assumption that the 86 years was his entire lifespan, and it's an assumption that how long one serves Christ can only begin with Baptism.  But more importantly I don't even think this was meant to be taken literally, that he may be equating his entire lifespan with how long he served Christ even if that isn't chronologically true, he's speaking poetically.

Saying “went forth conquering and to conquer” suggests that this Rider will not stay in a single location.  The first Christian Community to pop up in what we today call France was based in Lyon and founded by immigrants from Smyrna, its two most well known early leaders were Pothinus and Irenaeus both said to be students of Polycarp.  

Irenaeus has been falsely accused of supporting Infant Baptism, however it is only false beliefs about what happens Metaphysically at Baptism tied to Infant Baptism that makes what Ireneaus said in Against Heresies II.22.4 sound like it’s relevant to Baptism at all, it in fact is not.

Vienne is a French city just a little south of Lyon, and as far as I can tell it’s the only significant French city with even a claim that its Christian presence might predate even Lyon's.  But its earliest Traditional Bishops are not as historically well attested as Pothinus and Irenaeus.  My hunch is that it first emerged as a Daughter Church of Lyon, or that both were together Sister products of the missionary work of Pothinus and Irenaeus.  We know a Christian Community existed there in 177 closely associated with Lyon because of a letter preserved by Eusebius.  Vienne was another center of the Imperial Cult as home to the Temple of Augustus and Livia built by Claudius.

The city of Augustodunum aka Autun seems likely to have also had an early Christian Congregation derived form these Smyrnaeans of Lyon though the traditional origin story is Chronologically confused having Polycarp seemingly still alive in the time of Septimius Severus. 

Other Smyrnaeans said to have been sent by Polycarp to Evangelize in Gaul were Andelolus of Vivarais and Benignus of Djon, and then Ferrelous and Ferrutio of Besançon.

Like many Asian Churches in the second century they followed the Quatrodeciman tradition of observing Pascha on the 14th of Nisan rather than the following Sunday.  While most Churches disagreed with this position it was only Victor the Bishop of Rome who wanted to excommunicate people over this and Irenaeus was one of those who wrote to Victor in defense of Quartodecimanism.

This Lyon community suffered Persecution in 177 when Pothinus was Martyred as did nearby Vienne,  then again in 202 when Irenaeus was Martyred, and again in 208 when Andelolus was Martyred, finally Ferrelous and Ferrutio were Martyred in 212.

Hippolytus of Rome was not a student of Irenaeus, that claim first pops up with Photios of Constantinople in the 9th Century.  Hippolytus taught some similar ideas to Irenaeus especially on Eschatology, but he could have come to them independently or just read Irenaeus.  The clerical heirs of Irenaeus, if he had any at all, (I don't think he supported Episcopal understandings of Apostolic Succession), were those who followed him as "Bishop" of Lyon, Zechariah, Helios and Faustinius.

Fabian who was Bishop of Rome from 236-250 AD sent missions to found Churches in other Parts of France resulting in the first Bishops of Paris, Arles, Narbone, Clermont, Limoges, Toulouse and Tours.  Later the Churches of Reims and Soissons were founded by Sixtus and Sinicius sent by Sixtus II of Rome.  The Gallican Church, the French Branch of the Roman Catholic Church, I believe descends clerically from these Churches.  In time they consecrated their own Bishops of Lyon and Vienne who would claim succession from the original Bishops of Lyon and Vienne but in my view the true Heirs of the Smyrneans of Lyon were eventually Congregations that operated more underground.

The singular Bishops canonized on these later Episcopal Bishop Lists were probably just Preachers who happened to stand out.

When this shift in the official list of Bishops of Lyon and Vienne happened is hard to tell for certain however.  The Bishops of Lyon who would have been contemporary with the Council of Nicaea (Vocius, Maximus or Tetrad) did not attended that Council, it’s well known that only five Bishops from the West attended Nicaea and only one of those was from France, Nicasius of Die, himself the first known Bishop of Die.  Likewise neither Justus or Alpinus seem to have attended the Second Ecumenical Council.  Sicarius, Eucherius and Patiens aren’t documented as attending the Councils of Ephesus or Chalcedon either.  Reticius of Autun also didn't attend Nicaea.

Make no mistake I do believe these Christians were Theologically and Christologically Nicene, Trinitarian and probably also Chalcedonian on the core issues those councils were held over.  Point is they didn’t submit themselves to Episcopal Authority, they operated Congregationally. 

Lyon was part of the Kingdom of the Burgundians when the Western Roman Empire lost control of Gaul, as were Vienne, Autun, Vivarais, Dijon and Besançon.  The Burgundians were Arians but like most other Gothic Arians were tolerant of the other Christians living in their kingdom so the original Christians of Lyon would have been left alone under them.  Their Kingdom however was Conquered by the Merovingians by 534 AD.  Clovis was Baptized by Remigius of Reims making him a clerical descendent of Sixtus.  Lupus was the first Bishop of Lyon after that point and some consider him the first Bishop of Lyon to be an Archbishop.  Nicetius was given the title of Patriarch by the Bishop of Rome, Priscus was appointed explicitly by a Merovingian King and Aetherius was a close associate of Pope Gregory I.  

The true Smyrnaeans surviving underground outside the notice of recorded History during the “Dark Ages” would have been fairly plausible.  

In the 12th Century the Waldenses emerged in the region of Lyon.  Their origins are definitely more complicated than just being founded by a guy named Peter Waldo.  Even their enemies referred to them as having existed since the time of Sylvester (in Catholic tradition the "Pope" at the time of Nicaea).  There is strong evidence they were originally both Credo-Baptists and Congregationalists.  

I’m certain they played a role in the origins of various Anabaptist movements of the 16th Century and through them can be connected to the origins of the General Baptists of England, (maybe also the Particular Baptists), the German Baptists (Schwarsenu Brethren) and the Swedish Baptists.  And from them came The Diggers, The Quakers, and many other offshoots.

So yes I just argued for a form of Baptist Successionism, but I don't believe in the Doctrine that it matters if you have an unbroken chain of Believers Baptisms going back to the Apostles.  And I reject the standard Landmarkism history claiming descent from the Montanists, Novatians and Donatists, Faustinius of Lyon was in fact on record as opposing Novatianism.  

But since I’ve broached the subject of secret underground Proto-Protestantism in France I need to remind readers that NO I do not believe Jeanne d’Arc was a Proto-Protestant of any kind, she wanted to lead a Crusade against the Husites.  And one website documenting her Catholic Orthodoxy even has some quotes to show that if anything those who burned her were more Proto-Protestant.  But they would be more like Proto-Anglicans serving the interests of the King of England not Baptists who were originally the strongest defenders of Religious Liberty and Separation of Church and State.

An attempt to return Lyon to something like the Congregationalist principles of Polycarp was made by Antoine-Adrien Lamourette of the Cercle social appointed Bishop of Lyon under The Civil Constitution of The Clergy during The French Revolution.  He was Guillotined on January 11th 1794, another Christian Martyred by the Hebertists.

That Temple of Augustus and Livia at Vienne became a Church after Christianization and then during this period a Temple of the Cult of Reason.

Rome didn’t End, it simply Changed

Unlike a lot of people who’ll say something like this I’m referring primarily to The Western Roman Empire.

According to Genesis 10 in verses 5, 20 and 31 National identity is defined first and foremost by Tongue or Language, and Genesis 11 then explains the origin story of why that is. Modern Romance Languages descend from the Latin spoken by Ancient Rome same as Modern English and Scots both descend from Old English.  

So I consider every modern Nation-State where the Official or Majority Language is a Romance Language a Roman successor state.  And we could maybe also add any Nation whose State or culturally dominant Religion is Roman Catholicism since Latin is still their Liturgical Language (Vatican II allowed Mass to be held in other Languages but it did not abandon their tether to Latin Liturgy entirely).  Additionally I view any communities in the Southwestern United States or Florida or certain U.S. Territories where most of the people’s native tongue is still a Romance Language to be Rome under American Occupation.  Of course Rome only got there itself by Colonizing, Enslaving and Raping the indigenous populations, but still.

By this logic I of course then do controversially consider the Byzantine Empire to not be as authentically Roman anymore once it’s instead speaking Greek.  Every History YouTuber defending the Byzantines’ status as Roman acts like they’re going against popular opinion when in fact few actually interested in the topic disagree with them, but I do.  Rome isn’t a Gender being Roman requires more than self identification.  

Now the counter argument to denying the Byzantines’ true Roman status based on Language is often that the East spoke Greek more then Latin already well before the permanent split. But to me that just proves my point more, Rome only subjugated the East they never truly assimilated it.  Now I do consider the Eastern Empire still Romans ruling the majority Greek population for awhile after the administrative split and even after the West is popularly considered to have fallen.  Justinian I consider to be a Roman, but Heraclius was Greek.  Phokas's overthrow of Maurice I've come to view as the key turning point.

Western Europe was not as densely populated in antiquity.  But more importantly the people that were already there when the Romans came were people the Romans considered uncivilized Barbarians and so they were much more invested in culturally assimilating them. In the East however they followed the example of Alexander and his Successors of mostly ruling those people how they were used to being ruled.  There are some interesting counter examples, Rome did assimilate the Dacians and thus from them descend modern Romania and Moldova, they are the true remnant of the Eastern Empire.  And they failed to assimilate the Britons of Britannia, yet some Sub-Roman Brythonic Kingdoms saw themselves as Roman successor states just as much as the Byzantines did, especially Gwynedd.

Now you may respond “okay some today descend culturally if not genealogically from Ancient Romans, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a discontinuity between the Ancient Roman State and the States modern Romans live in”.  So now I shall go on to argue for the continuity of the State but it is complicated.

When people ask “When did the Western Roman Empire Fall”, they are usually using the word “Fall” differently than it’s used in almost any other context.  Normally someone's Fall refers to falling from their past height not when they flat out cease to exist.  That’s why I didn’t title the post “Rome didn’t Fall”, I’d argue it fell more than once, the Crisis of the Third Century was a fall that it went on to recover from culminating in the Christian Rome of Late Antiquity.  Now as far as when did the Western Half of that Rome fall, if you use the term properly 476 AD becomes the latest possible candidate not the earliest.  It ceased to be an Empire when Emperor Majorian aka Maiorianus died in 461 AD since from then on the Emperors didn’t control much beyond Italy itself. But perhaps the Vandal sack of 455 was the key unrecoverable wound.  Especially from a Biblical POV as that's when the Temple of Peace was plundered and the Treasures Titus took from Herod's Temple were carried away to Carthage.

But I'd also  argue that the Eastern Empire also had Falls before the 15th Century, and that the Empire of Justinian fell when Maurice was overthrown by Phocas and then almsot completely conquered by Persia.

Let’s step back a century now to discuss why French is a Romance Language named after a Germanic Tribe.  The Franks were not one of the Barbarian Tribes whose settlement on Roman territory mostly began after the freezing of the Rhine in the early 5th Century, under Constantine they were allowed to settle in what is now Northern France, Belgium and the Netherlands as a buffer.  They were heavily Romanized very early on and some Franks were important officials in the 4th Century Empire like Richomeres and Abrogast, and Magnus Magnentus was a half Frankish Usurper Emperor.  So I strongly believe the Merovingian Kingdom can be considered a Roman Rump State as much as the realms of Syagrius of Nepos can.  (There were Franks who kept speaking their Germanic language, the language is now known as Dutch.)

So no Charlemagne being crowned Emperor of The Romans was not the nonsense some History Tubers want to paint it as, it wasn’t the first time a New Emperor was crowned that the already reigning one didn’t necessarily approve of.  Both Imperial Capitals of the Holy Roman Empire, Achen and Vienna were Roman cities, as were other core cities of the HRE like Pavia, Trier and Munich.

But it’s not just the Franks, even the Gothic Barbarians who never became as linguistically Romanized also served as Foderati for the Roman Empire, as did the Vandals and Burgundians and Lombards.  They are all people who should have been recognized as Roman Citizens even though they never were.

When Odovacer overthrew Romulus Augustulus in 476 nothing changed about the day to day administrative governance of Italy anymore than any prior time who was in charge had changed.  Odovacer was called King in terms of leadership of the Gothic Barbarians in Italy but he was also recognized by the still operating Senate of Rome and the Eastern Emperor Zeno as a Roman Governor governing Rome on their behalf. It was actually Romulus Augustulus who was not recognized as legitimate in the East.

When Odovacer and the Eastern Empire fell out, Theodoric King of the Ostrogoths was sent by the Eastern Empire and again he was recognized as ruling Italy for Rome. But when the Ostrogoths and the East fell out Justinian sent Belisarius.  Later the Lombards also first invaded the west as proxies of the East under Walthari and Audion.

Justinian’s Reconquests of Italy, North Africa and other parts of the Western Mediterranean is often looked at as the Eastern Empire expanding its border westward, but from a certain POV it was a war of Liberation.  The same Roman Senate continued to exist until the early 7th Century, and these reclaimed Western Provinces had administrative self governance. It is the Western Empire under an Emperor based in Constantinople ruling both halves just as it was under Constantine, Constantius II and Theodosius I.  But how the Western Province were governed was reorganized creating the Exarchate of Africa and the Exarchate of Ravenna, with the Duchy of Rome then forming within the Exarchate of Ravenna.

In time much of what Justinian reconquered fell to the Arabs or Lombards, but not all of it.  Rome itself, Venice, Genoa, Gaeta, Amalfi, Ancona, Ragusa and San Marino were never conquered, The Papal States were simply the Duchy of Rome becoming independent when Constantinople lost interest in them and turning to the Carolingians to be their new Emperors. The Maritime Republics were also just pieces of the Exarchate of Ravenna becoming Self Governing.  This is mostly true of Naples and Calabria as well even though there were a few hiccups.  When the Normans conquered parts of Southern Italy they made an effort to keep running it in the Byzantine style, very unlike their approach to England.

And I would strongly argue the same applies to the history of the Island of Sardinia. Which is relevant to the fact that due to how 19th Century Italian Unification happened modern standard Italian descends from what was previously the Sardinian Dialect.

In 754 when there is no dispute the County of Rome is still a Roman Rump State in Italy Pope Stephen II Anointed the sons of Pepin The Short Patricians of Rome, one of whom being Charlemagne.

And going back to my point about Language, maybe it's because the Eastern Empire had become so Greek that they ceased caring about the non Greek speaking parts of Italy.  Losing Rome itself didn't bother them, but losing Athens probably would have. 

The Iberian Peninsula became Roman again because of the Centuries of Reconquista carried out by Kingdoms that descended from Charlemagne's Empire.  Britannia was reconquered by Rome in 1066 but after centuries of strife secured independence again in 1604.

I could add arguments about how modern Western legal systems still have their roots in Roman Law filtered through the Justinian Reforms.  Or the fact that various "Feudal" titles came from Roman Offices.  

I’m posting this on my new Prophecy Blog because my current Eschatology is a mix of Partial Preterism, and Historicism and this way of looking at Rome is part of Historicism.  But it’s different from standard Protestant Premillennial Historicism where it’s only Clerically they see eschatologically relevant continuity between the modern world and Ancient Rome.  

The Seventh Day Adventists standard approach to Daniel 7 involves believing modern Italy descends from the Lombard Kingdoms not its Roman remnants, and likewise Spain and Portugal are the Visigoths and Suebi and the Burgundians are Switzerland.  Why that is wrong somewhat naturally flows from what I already explained.  But to fill in some gaps the Goths of Iberia were conquered by the Arabs.  The Lombards were mostly conquered by Charlemagne leaving only a small rump of them left to slowly be absorbed by the Romans around them. And the Burgundians were conquered by the Franks.

The Eastern Germanic Languages spoken by the Goths, Lombards and other Arian Barbarians are dead languages, no one speaks them anymore and the last one to die died in Crimea not in the West.  Genealogical descendants of people who spoke them in the past still exist but they have long been absorbed into other cultures.  

The Byzantine  Empire does still have Biblical Significance, it’s the restored Third Beast of Daniel 7 specifically The Little Horn.  I argued for that in my Justinian post but it’s also backed up by my Heraclius thesis.

Now you may also ask how do the Romance Languages fit into the Genesis 10 genealogy?  Well I agree with the Italo-Celtic theory among Linguists, that the Italic Languages (including Latin) and Celtic Languages are closely related to each other even more specifically then just both being Indo-European.  And at the end of my 666 post I argued that through Troy the Celts and Romans could share common descent from Ashkenaz son of Gomer.

And hey those who insist on considering the Byzantines Romans in-spite of their Language, you kind of have to do the same for the Brythonic Kingdoms of Sub-Roman Briton which became Medieval Wales, Cornwall, Brittany and Starhclyde, they still used Roman Titles and Roman Laws and lived in Roman cities and defended themselves with Roman Forts.  

This is a good video about Gwnedd as a Roman Rump State.  And Cambrian Chronicles has one on how how the title of Prince of Wales came from the rulers of Gwynedd claiming to be heirs to the Roman Emperors and thus outranking the King of England.

The 70th Week was 30-37 AD

The 70 weeks Prophecy four times refers to an awaited personage at the the end of the 69 weeks and/or the 70th week.

Messiah The Prince in verse 25

The Messiah in verse 26

The Prince that shall come in verse 26

He in verse 27

The standard view among Christians who are Premillennial Futurists (and even some Preterists) has been that the first two are Jesus Christ and the last two the person commonly called "The Antichrist".  Chris White however promotes a theory he didn't invent himself that makes each of the four something different. predicating it largely on how unclear it is which of the earlier personages the He in verse 27 appears to be.

However most people reading this Prophecy without a Christian starting point, as well as many Christians who are Preterist, see the clear grammatical logic as saying all four are the same person.

When verse 25 says to await the coming of a Messiah The Prince and then verse 26 says "The Prince that shall come" logic dictates that it's the same Prince.  And if there aren't two or three different people refereed to earlier, figuring out who "He" is, isn't that complicated.

The word translated "Destroy" in many translations of verse 26 can also mean Pollute or Waste.  The People of The Prince were Polluting their own Sanctuary with Money Changers and that's why the Cleansing of The Temple happened.

It's also pretty much unique to Christians to see a Villain in any of the four references.  Because you see the "he" after "Abominations" in the KJV of verse 27 isn't in the Hebrew.  So the first He is not the one who sets it/them up.

Going back to Daniel 9:24, let's look again at what the purpose for the 70 Weeks are.

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy." 

It is commonly argued that the Second Advent is required for this to be fully fulfilled, that certain aspects of this clearly aren't fulfilled already.   In fact I've even seen some Christians try to remove the First Advent from this altogether, like Chris White.  To me that grossly undervalues what happened in that Aviv in a way no Christian, no matter how Futurist and Premillennial they are, should be willing to do.

If you think "make an end of sins" means no one will be sinning anymore then you have to move the end of the 70 Weeks to after the Millennium, not before it.  (I would be curious to hear someone argue such a theory.)  This is referring to Jesus paying the price for Sin on The Cross, when He said "It Is Finished".

Some take "seal up the vision and prophecy" to mean no more Prophecies left to be fulfilled.  Again you have to move the 70th Week to after the Millennium in that case.

I think that the anointing of the most Holy can be seen as fulfilled at Pentecost.

Every argument that the first advent wasn't enough to fulfill that requires an interpretation that places the fulfillment after not before the Millennium.

I feel there is a perfectly very real sense in which all those details were satisfied in 30-37 AD.

A decade ago when I was a Futurist I justified the gap concept not with the usual Pre-Tirb/Dispensationalist the Gap is the Church Age logic.  But by arguing that since it revolved around The Temple, the Gap was from when the Second Temple lost it's Holy Anointing when the Veil was Torn till when the future Temple will be consecrated. I feel ashamed of that argument now, because it implies what the Veil being Torn achieved is gonna be undone.

I've been putting a lot of thought into specifically Daniel 9:27 and am starting to think it's about The Passion in even more ways.

First of all what is the Abomination?  

This ties in with how I have come to view John 5:43 as fulfilled by John 19:15 when the Chief Priest says "We have no King but Caesar".  I've already talked about how Israel demanding a Human King was them rejecting YHWH as their King, and Caesar was being worshiped as a living God in the Eastern Provinces.  The High Priest committed this idolatrous Abomination the same day he later had to offer the Passover Sacrifice in The Temple.

And as I've pointed out before the "he" associated with the Abomination isn't in the Hebrew, it's not identifying any person as setting it up.

The Hebrew word for "Desolation" or "Desolate" is a word that can also be translated "Abandoned" Jeremiah's Desolation of Jerusalem is about Jerusalem being depopulated after it was conquered by Nebuchadnezzar, but it can also be connected to YHWH's Divine presence leaving The Temple at that same time.  Whatever Divine presence the Second Temple had (in John 4) left it at or before Pentecost to indwell in The Church which is why it's gone in Acts 7.

This word is used twice in Daniel 9:27 however.  In the KJV the verse ends with "upon the desolate" in some translations the last word is "desolator" but in the Young's Literal Translation it's "Desolate one".  On the Cross I think the "abandoned one" is Jesus "my God, my God, why has thou Forsaken me".  

The "Consummation and that which was determined" or "the decreed end" was poured out onto Jesus on The Cross and then He said "it is finished".

As for how 37 AD works as the end of the Week specifically.  March 16th of that year was the day Tiberius Caesar died.  All the people in positions of power referred to in Luke 3:1 seem to have died or been removed form power in 36 or 37 AD.  Pilate was removed while Tiberius was still Emperor but Tiberius was dead by the time he arrived in Rome.

Many have argued the weak temporary Governorship of Marcellus makes most sense for the context of the Martyrdom of Stephen in Acts 6-7.  I think Simon The Magician of Acts 8:9 is the same Samaritan False Prophet who Josephus says in Antiquities Book 18 Chapter 4 started the issues in Samaria that lead to Pilate's removal.  

Maybe even Acts 9-11 are still in March-April of 37 AD given how the end of Acts 11 and beginning of Acts 12 feels like it's being presented as a significant time Jump from well before Claudius was Emperor to when he had been Emperor for some time already.

So if all of Acts 6-11 is the end of the 70th Week that's some pretty Biblically significant events.

There was War going on during this period between Herod Antipas and Nabateans.

Also an Earthquake hit Antioch on April 9th of 37.

The 69th Week ended in 30 AD

 The Passion happened in 30 AD as I've argued independent of any Prophecies.

https://solascripturachristianliberty.blogspot.com/2024/03/the-passion-and-resurrection-happened.html

Daniel 9:24-27

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.  Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.  And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Why the 7 and 62 weeks are distinct I don't know, I'm sure there is a reason, but distinct or not they're consecutive.

Interpreting this as referring to 490 years is NOT the Day=Year theory because neither Day or Year is used. The Hebrew word translated "week" here simply means seven and can refer to seven of anything. Leviticus 25 refers to Sabbaths of years. The context of this prophecy was Daniel praying at the end of the 70 year captivity, so the context is years. 2 Chronicles 36:21 cites one of the reasons for a 70 years captivity is that for 490 years they'd failed to keep the sabbatical year.

The text in Daniel 9 doesn't refer to The Temple's rebuilding or of returning form Captivity, it's about rebuilding the City of Jerusalem with special emphasis on the wall(s).  

The end of 2 Chronicles and start of Ezra record Cyrus's decree, Ezra 6 records Darius's decree and Ezra 7 records the first of the Artaxerxes decrees.  None are about the City or the wall they are all about returning form Captivity and/or rebuilding The Temple. Jerusalem's walls are mentioned in Ezra in chapters 4, 5 and 9, all of them in context about how they are not rebuilt and still in ruins as the first 3 verses of Nehemiah confirm.

Nehemiah 2 records the 20th year of Artaxerxes decree and it's about Rebuilding the City with special Emphasis on the Wall.  So only this decree can be what Daniel 9 was about.  Nehemiah also prayed the same Prayer Daniel prayed in Daniel 9, he's clearly linked to this prophecy.

The decree recorded in Nehemiah 2:1-8 was given in Nisan, the same month as Passover. One argument against the Nehemiah decree is we don't know the exact day, only the month. All the text of Daniel 9 deals with is years however and Nisan is Biblically the first Month of the Year, so I never word my interpretation of Daniel 9 as saying it was fulfilled to the exact day, only the year. The day the Messiah arrives as well as the day he is cut off is determined by understanding the Spring Feasts. 

So the Decree was in fact issued in the Nisan of 454 BC. 483 years latter takes us to the Nisan of 30 AD. Ussher agreed with this date for Artaxerxes 20th year, but still insisted on a 33 A.D. Crucifixion, so he insisted the date pointed to the Baptism.

Those trying to make this point to 32 or 33 AD (starting from the incorrect 444 or 445 B.C. date for the Decree) by talking about "God's calendar is 360 days" are just torturing the data. The Jews always synchronized their Lunar calendar to the Solar cycle.

There is a trend of even some Christians, even Futurist/Premillennial ones, arguing that "Messiah the Prince" does not refer to Jesus, or The Messiah at all. First they argue that the definite article "ha" isn't used before Messiah here. The text does use in place of the usual definite article the Hebrew letters Ayin and Res, this is usually left untranslated. Ayin-Resh is the Hebrew word for city. It's foretelling the arrival in Jerusalem of that City's Anointed One and Prince.

The word Messiah is used of individuals who aren't Jesus often. But this is actually the most unique of ALL uses of the word Messiah, only here is it so uniquely paired with the word Nagiyd, not the more common and mundane Sar.   I've seen it erroneously claimed Nagyid is a Persian word not Hebrew. If it were Persian in origin the only Biblical texts it could appear in are Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther and perhaps the very end of II Chronicles. But it's used by Ezekiel in 28:2 (the "Prince" of Tyre here is distinct from The King), many times in Samuel, Kings and Chronicles, in Jeremiah and in the Psalms, and Proverbs. And even in Job, which is possibly older then the completion of the Pentateuch in the days of Moses.

It's a far more important and precise occurrence then just using an equivalent of "The". To me No usage of the word is more indisputably about The Messiah Ben-David promised in II Samuel 7. The Triumphal entry wasn't the only time Jesus entered Jerusalem, but it is the only time he did so in a way that matched Zachariah 9:9's prophecy of the coming of the Messiah, with the people singing Psalm 118.

A claim exists that in verse 25 a period should be after the Seven Weeks and before the 62, and that it's only after the 7 weeks that "Messiah the Prince" appears. This is not justified by the Greens inter-lineal Bible I have at all.  Messiah is "cut off" AFTER the 62 weeks have ended.

I've seen some argue the translation "Messiah" as "Anointed One" in verse 26 is inaccurate. This shows complete ignorance of Hebrew, the letter Yot being used in the word the way it is here makes it always a noun, a separate word, messah, is used to simply mean anointing or to anoint. This argument uses the Septuagint version to back itself up. The Septuagint is very problematic for many reasons and in my view Christians need to stop using it like they do.

This interpretation tries to get the 62 weeks to end in 70 AD by citing the same nonsense about the Persian Empire's history being wrong to support the Sedar Olam's dating system on which the modern Jewish calendar is based. This won't hold up under scrutiny because it is well known the Sedar Olam's dates were deliberately fudged to try and make the 70 weeks prophecy point to Bar Kochba, who lived roughly a century too late.  We also have Greek kings-lists backing up the Length of this period, due to Alexander I of Macedon being involved in the first two Persian wars.

The core of this argument is that the focus of the 70 weeks prophecy is about The Temple and Jerusalem, and nothing significant happened there when Jesus died. Their forgetting something important. Matthew 27:51, Mark 15:38 and Luke 23:45 all record then when Jesus died on The Cross "And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom;". The Temple physically stood for another 40 years, but it's Mosaic anointing ended when Jesus finally became the true Sacrificial offering all the others were only rehearsals for.  I'll again quote the Talmud Yoma 39b

Our Rabbis taught: During the last forty years before the destruction of the Temple the lot [‘For the Lord’] did not come up in the right hand; nor did the crimson-coloured strap become white; nor did the westernmost light shine; and the doors of the Hekal would open by themselves, until R. Johanan b. Zakkai rebuked them, saying: Hekal, Hekal, why wilt thou be the alarmer thyself? I know about thee that thou wilt be destroyed, for Zechariah ben Ido has already prophesied concerning thee: Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars.

So actually even what this wrong interpretation says the 62 weeks points to happened in 30 AD. So I've come to interpret "Messiah be cut off" as having a double meaning, both referring to Jesus' death on the Cross, and the removing of divine presence from The Temple when the veil was torn.

Jerome records in his Letter to Hedibia 120.8 that some early altered versions of Matthew's Gospels added to Matthew 27:51 that the lintel of the Temple collapsed.

After the Triumphal Entry Luke 19:41 records that Jesus.

And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.

And goes on to foretell Jerusalem's coming destruction. The people were judged for failing to recognize prophecy had been fulfilled. And not just because what he did matched what Zachariah 9:9 described, a false Messiah could attempt such a thing. The phrase "in this thy day", clearly tells us timing was the key. The context of the coming destruction of Jerusalem clearly tells us to look to Daniel 9, no where else does the Hebrew Bible speak of Jerusalem being destroyed again in addition to the destruction in 588 BC. And then in verse 44 the matter is made more clear "because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation."

So using Scripture to interpret Scripture, that settles the matter for me.

P.S. A huge section of the original version of this I posted on the retired prophecy blog in 2014 was copy/pasted from some older website I no longer remember what it was.  I'm sorry for that, it's agaisnt my current policy. 

Genealogy of Charlemagne

Ancestry of Charlemagne 

Charlemagne's Descent from Seleucid Dynasty

Seleucus I Nicator + Apama

Antiochus I Soter & Achaeus

Antiochus II Theos = Laodice I

Seleucus II Callinicus & Laodice wife of Mithridates II of Pontus

Antiochus III the Great + Laodice III

Seleucus IV Philopator = Laodice IV

Demetrius I Soter

Demetrius II Nicator + Cleopatra Thea

Antiochus VIII Grypus + Tryphaena

Laodice VII Thea, wife of Mithridates I Callinicus

Antiochus I Theos of Commagene

Mithridates II of Commagene & Athenais of Media Atropatene

Mithridates III of Commagene + Iotapa

Antiochus III of Commagene = Iotapa

Antiochus IV Epiphanes of Commagene = Julia Iotapa

Julia Iotapa, wife of Gaius Julius Alexander

Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus

Julia Cassia Alexandra wife of Gaius Avidius Heliodorus

Gaius Avidius Cassius, Usurper Emperor in 175 AD

Avidia Cassia Alexandra

Claudia Vettia Agrippina

Claudia wife of Claudius Capitolinus Bassus, proconsul of Asia

Claudia Capitolina

Amnia Demetrias wife of Anicius Faustus, Consul in 298

Amnius Anicius Julianus, Consul in 322

Amnius Anicius Paulinus, Consul in 334

Anicius Auchenius Bassus (prefect)

Tirrania Anicia Juliana, wife of Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius

Anicia

Adelphius of Limoges

[Female Name Unknown]

Ruricius Bishop of Limoges

Hiberie de Limoges, wife of Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Descent through Antiochus Epiphanes himself (A bit less solid)

Antiochus IV Epiphanes = Laodice IV

Laodice, wife of Mithridates V of Pontus

Mithridates VI of Pontus

Cleopatra of Pontus, wife of Tigranes The Great

[Name Unkown], wife of Mithridates of Media Atropatene

Ariobarzanes I of Media Atropatene

Artavasdes I of Media Atropatene

Iotapa + Mithridates III of Commagene

Antiochus III of Commagene = Iotapa

Antiochus IV Epiphanes of Commagene = Julia Iotapa

Julia Iotapa, wife of Gaius Julius Alexander

Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus

Julia Cassia Alexandra wife of Gaius Avidius Heliodorus

Gaius Avidius Cassius, Usurper Emperor in 175 AD

Avidia Cassia Alexandra

Claudia Vettia Agrippina

Claudia wife of Claudius Capitolinus Bassus, proconsul of Asia

Claudia Capitolina

Amnia Demetrias wife of Anicius Faustus, Consul in 298

Amnius Anicius Julianus, Consul in 322

Amnius Anicius Paulinus, Consul in 334

Anicius Auchenius Bassus (prefect)

Tirrania Anicia Juliana, wife of Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius

Anicia

Adelphius of Limoges

[Female Name Unknown]

Ruricius Bishop of Limoges

Hiberie de Limoges, wife of Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Charlamagne's descent from Caesar Augustus

Octavius Caesar Augustus

Julia The Elder

Julia The Younger

Aemilia Lepida

Junia Lepida

Cassius Lepidus

Cassia Lepida

Julia Cassia Alexandra wife of Gaius Avidius Heliodorus

Gaius Avidius Cassius, Usurper Emperor in 175 AD

Avidia Cassia Alexandra

Claudia Vettia Agrippina

Claudia wife of Claudius Capitolinus Bassus, proconsul of Asia

Claudia Capitolina

Amnia Demetrias wife of Anicius Faustus, Consul in 298

Amnius Anicius Julianus, Consul in 322

Amnius Anicius Paulinus, Consul in 334

Anicius Auchenius Bassus (prefect)

Tirrania Anicia Juliana, wife of Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius

Anicia

Adelphius of Limoges

[Female Name Unknown]

Ruricius Bishop of Limoges

Hiberie de Limoges, wife of Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Charlemagne's descent from Longinus

Gaius Cassius Longinus, Governor of Syria and Assassin of Caesar

Gaius Cassius Longinus

Gaius Cassius Longinus

Gaius Cassius Longinus, Suffectus Consul in 30 AD

Cassius Lepidus

Cassia Lepida

Julia Cassia Alexandra wife of Gaius Avidius Heliodorus

Gaius Avidius Cassius, Usurper Emperor in 175 AD

Avidia Cassia Alexandra

Claudia Vettia Agrippina

Claudia wife of Claudius Capitolinus Bassus, proconsul of Asia

Claudia Capitolina

Amnia Demetrias wife of Anicius Faustus, Consul in 298

Amnius Anicius Julianus, Consul in 322

Amnius Anicius Paulinus, Consul in 334

Anicius Auchenius Bassus (prefect)

Tirrania Anicia Juliana, wife of Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius

Anicia

Adelphius of Limoges

[Female Name Unknown]

Ruricius Bishop of Limoges

Hiberie de Limoges, wife of Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Charlemagne's descent from Late Roman Aristocracy of Gaul

Ferreolus, a Roman Senator

Tonantius Ferreolus (prefect)

Tonantius Ferreolus II

Tonantius Ferreolus III

Ansbert

Arnoald

Itta, wife of Pepin of Landen

Begga, wife of Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Charlemagne's descent from the Merovingians

Childeric I

Clovis I

Chlothar I

Charibert I

Blithilde, wife of Ansbert

Arnoald

Itta, wife of Pepin of Landen

Begga, wife of Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Childeric I

Clovis I

Chlothar I

Charibert I

Chrodobertus (d. 595)

Charibert of Hesbaye

Robert I Bishop of Tours

Lambert I of Hesbaye

Robert II Lord Chanceler of France

Lambert II of Hesbaye

Rotrude of Hesbaye wife of Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Charlemagne's descent from Bishops of Lyon

Eucherius Bishop of Lyon + Galla

Tullia

Aquilinus

Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Maternal Ancestry of Charlemagne's mother's father

Irmina of Oeren

Bertrada of Prüm

Charibert of Laon

Bertrada of Laon

Charlemagne

Charlemagne's descent from the Herodian Dynasty

Antipater the Idumaean

Herod the Great

Alexander

Gaius Julius Alexander

Tigranes VI of Armenia

Gaius Julius Alexander, Ruler of Cetis in Cilicia

Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus

Julia Cassia Alexandra wife of Gaius Avidius Heliodorus

Gaius Avidius Cassius, Usurper Emperor in 175 AD

Avidia Cassia Alexandra

Claudia Vettia Agrippina

Claudia wife of Claudius Capitolinus Bassus, proconsul of Asia

Claudia Capitolina

Amnia Demetrias wife of Anicius Faustus, Consul in 298

Amnius Anicius Julianus, Consul in 322

Amnius Anicius Paulinus, Consul in 334

Anicius Auchenius Bassus (prefect)

Tirrania Anicia Juliana, wife of Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius

Anicia

Adelphius of Limoges

[Female Name Unknown]

Ruricius Bishop of Limoges

Hiberie de Limoges, wife of Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

Hasmoneans descent of Charles Martel (The Hammer)

The Priestly Order of Joarib

Asamoneus

Simeon

John

Mattathias

Simon Thassi

John Hyrcanus

Alexander Jannaeus + Salome Alexandra

Aristobulus II  & Hyrcanus II

Alexander + Alexandra

Mariamne the Hasmonean, wife of Herod The Great

Alexander

Gaius Julius Alexander

Tigranes VI of Armenia

Gaius Julius Alexander, Ruler of Cetis in Cilicia

Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus

Julia Cassia Alexandra wife of Gaius Avidius Heliodorus

Gaius Avidius Cassius, Usurper Emperor in 175 AD

Avidia Cassia Alexandra

Claudia Vettia Agrippina

Claudia wife of Claudius Capitolinus Bassus, proconsul of Asia

Claudia Capitolina

Amnia Demetrias wife of Anicius Faustus, Consul in 298

Amnius Anicius Julianus, Consul in 322

Amnius Anicius Paulinus, Consul in 334

Anicius Auchenius Bassus (prefect)

Tirrania Anicia Juliana, wife of Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius

Anicia

Adelphius of Limoges

[Female Name Unknown]

Ruricius Bishop of Limoges

Hiberie de Limoges, wife of Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Armenian Royal Descent of Charlemagne

Zariadres

Artaxias I of Armenia

Tigranes I

Tigranes the Great

Artavasdes II of Armenia

[Name Unknown] Wife of Archelaus

Glaphyra

Gaius Julius Alexander

Tigranes VI of Armenia

Gaius Julius Alexander, Ruler of Cetis in Cilicia

Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus

Julia Cassia Alexandra wife of Gaius Avidius Heliodorus

Gaius Avidius Cassius, Usurper Emperor in 175 AD

Avidia Cassia Alexandra

Claudia Vettia Agrippina

Claudia wife of Claudius Capitolinus Bassus, proconsul of Asia

Claudia Capitolina

Amnia Demetrias wife of Anicius Faustus, Consul in 298

Amnius Anicius Julianus, Consul in 322

Amnius Anicius Paulinus, Consul in 334

Anicius Auchenius Bassus (prefect)

Tirrania Anicia Juliana, wife of Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus Olybrius

Anicia

Adelphius of Limoges

[Female Name Unknown]

Ruricius Bishop of Limoges

Hiberie de Limoges, wife of Rusticus Archbishop of Lyon

Artemia, wife Roman Senator Florentinus

Arthemia, wife of Munderic 

Mummolin

Bodegisel, Based on the Vita Gundolphi

Arnulf of Metz

Ansegisel

Pepin of Herstal

Charles Martel

Pepin The Short

Charlemagne

It's also my hypothesis that after the death of Tigranes V his widow Erato daughter of Tigranes III married his brother Gaius Julius Alexander and was the mothers of Tigranes VI.  But I can't definitively prove that.

Descent from Charlemagne.

Male Preference Primogeniture Descent from Charlemagne

If you don't count Bernard of Italy

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Lothair I

Louis II of Italy

Ermengard of Italy

Louis the Blind

Charles-Constantine

Constance of Vienne

Rotbold I, Count of Provence

Rotbold II, Count of Provence

Emma of Provence

Pons, Count of Toulouse

William IV, Count of Toulouse

Philippa, Countess of Toulouse

William X, Duke of Aquitaine

Eleanor of Aquitaine

King John

If you do count Bernard of Italy

Charlemagne

Pepin of Italy

Bernard of Italy

Pepin, Count of Vermandois

Herbert I, Count of Vermandois

Herbert II, Count of Vermandois

Robert of Vermandois

Adele of Meaux

Fulk III, Count of Anjou

Ermengarde of Anjou, Duchess of Burgundy

Fulk IV, Count of Anjou

Fulk V, Count of Anjou and King of Jerusalem

Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou

Henry II of England

King John

Male Preference Primogeniture Descent from Pepin of Aquitaine the original intended Heir of West Francia.

Pepin I of Aquitaine

daughter

Ranulf I of Poitiers, Duke of Aquitaine

Ranulf II of Aquitaine

Ebalus, Duke of Aquitaine

William III, Duke of Aquitaine

William IV, Duke of Aquitaine

William V, Duke of Aquitaine

William VIII, Duke of Aquitaine

William IX, Duke of Aquitaine

William X, Duke of Aquitaine

Eleanor of Aquitaine

King John

Male Preference Primogeniture Descent from King John

King John

Joan, Lady of Wales

Gwladus ferch Llywelyn

Roger Mortimer, 1st Baron Mortimer of Wigmore

Edmund Mortimer, 2nd Baron Mortimer of Wigmore

Roger Mortimer, 1st Earl of March

Edmund Mortimer (died 1331)

Roger Mortimer, 2nd Earl of March

Edmund Mortimer, 3rd Earl of March

Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March

Anne de Mortimer

Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York

Edward IV of England

Elizabeth of York

Margaret Tudor, Queen Consort of Scotland

James V of Scotland

Mary, Queen of Scots

King James VI of Scotland and I of England

Jacobite Succession to the present day

Gender Neutral Primogeniture Succession from Charlemagne

If you count Bernard of Italy

Charlemagne

Pepin of Italy

Bernard of Italy

Pepin, Count of Vermandois

Herbert I, Count of Vermandois

Beatrice of Vermandois

Hugh the Great

Beatrice of France

Theodoric I, Duke of Upper Lorraine

Frederick II, Duke of Upper Lorraine

Sophie, Countess of Bar

Theodoric I, Count of Montbéliard

Sophie († 1148), married in 1128 to Richard II, Count of Montfaucon

Amadeus II of Montfaucon

Walter of Montbéliard

Eschiva de Montfaucon

John II, Lord of Beirut

Eschive d'Ibelin

Rupen of Montfort

Jeanne of Montfort

Maria of Ibelin

Guy

Hugh

Charlemagne

Pepin of Italy

Bernard of Italy

Pepin, Count of Vermandois

Herbert I, Count of Vermandois

Beatrice of Vermandois

Hugh the Great

Beatrice of France

Theodoric I, Duke of Upper Lorraine

Frederick II, Duke of Upper Lorraine

Sophie, Countess of Bar

Theodoric I, Count of Montbéliard

Sophie († 1148), married in 1128 to Richard II, Count of Montfaucon

Amadeus II of Montfaucon

Walter of Montbéliard

Eschiva de Montfaucon

John II, Lord of Beirut

Eschive d'Ibelin

Hugh IV of Cyprus

James I of Cyprus

Janus, King of Cyprus

Anne de Lusignan

Amadeus IX, Duke of Savoy

Anne of Savoy

Charlotte of Naples

Anne de Laval, Viscountess of Thouars

Louis III de La Trémoille

Claude de La Trémoille

Henri de La Trémoille

Henri Charles de La Trémoille

Charles Belgique Hollande de La Trémoille

Marie Armande de La Trémoille

Marie Hortense Victoire de La Tour d'Auvergne

Jean Bretagne Charles de La Trémoille

Charles Bretagne Marie de La Trémoille

As far as Wikipedia allows me to trace it

If you don't count Bernard of Italy

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Lothair I

Louis II of Italy

Ermengard of Italy

Louis the Blind

Charles-Constantine

Constance of Vienne

Rotbold I, Count of Provence

Rotbold II, Count of Provence

Emma of Provence

Pons, Count of Toulouse

William IV, Count of Toulouse

Philippa, Countess of Toulouse

William X, Duke of Aquitaine

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Henry II, Count of Champagne

Alice of Champagne

Mary of Lusignan, Countess of Brienne

Hugh, Count of Brienne

Walter V, Count of Brienne

Isabella, Countess of Brienne

Louis, Count of Enghien

Margaret, Countess of Brienne

Peter of Luxembourg

Louis, Count of Saint-Pol

Peter II, Count of Saint-Pol

Marie I, Countess of Saint-Pol and Soissons

Charles de Bourbon, Duke of Vendome

Marguerite of Bourbon-La Marche

Catherine de Nevers

Henri II d'Orléans, Duke of Longueville

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Lothair I

Louis II of Italy

Ermengard of Italy

Louis the Blind

Charles-Constantine

Constance of Vienne

Rotbold I, Count of Provence

Rotbold II, Count of Provence

Emma of Provence

Pons, Count of Toulouse

William IV, Count of Toulouse

Philippa, Countess of Toulouse

William X, Duke of Aquitaine

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Henry II, Count of Champagne

Alice of Champagne

Mary of Lusignan, Countess of Brienne

Hugh, Count of Brienne

Walter V, Count of Brienne

Isabella, Countess of Brienne

Louis, Count of Enghien

Margaret, Countess of Brienne

Peter of Luxembourg

Louis, Count of Saint-Pol

Peter II, Count of Saint-Pol

Marie I, Countess of Saint-Pol and Soissons

Charles de Bourbon, Duke of Vendome

Antoine of Navarre

Henry IV of France

Louis XIII the Just

Louis XIV the Great The Sun King

Louis, Grand Dauphin

Louis, Duke of Burgundy

Louis XV King of France

Louise-Élisabeth of France

Ferdinand I, Duke of Parma

Princess Carolina of Parma

Princess Maria Anna of Saxony

Archduchess Auguste Ferdinande of Austria

Ludwig III of Bavaria

Rupprecht, Crown Prince of Bavaria

Albrecht, Duke of Bavaria

Princess Marie Gabrielle

Gender Neutral Primogeniture Succession from Eleanor of Aquitaine's Marriage to Henry II of England.

Eleanor of Aquitaine + Henry II

Matilda of England, Duchess of Saxony

Henry V, Count Palatine of the Rhine

Irmengard of Baden

Herman VI, Margrave of Baden

Agnes of Baden, Duchess of Carinthia

Catherine of Heunburg

Frederick I, Count of Celje

Ulrich I, Count of Celje

William, Count of Celje

Anna of Cilli

Hedwig Jagiellon

As far as I could trace it on Wikipedia.

Gender Neutral Primogeniture Succession from Charles The Bald who inherited France

Charles The Bald

Judith of Flanders

Baldwin II of Flanders

Adalulf Count of Boulogne

Arnulf II of Boulogne

Baldwin II of Boulogne

Eustace I of Boulogne

Eustace II of Boulogne

Eustace III of Boulogne

Matilda of Boulogne

Marie I Countess of Boulogne

Mathilde of Flanders

Margaret of Brabant

Otto II Count of Guelders

Reginald I of Guelders

Reginald II of Guelders

Marie of Guelders

Joanna of Jülich

Maria van Arkel

Arnold of Egmond

Mary of Guelders

James III of Scotland

James IV of Scotland

James V of Scotland

Mary Queen of Scots

James VI of Scotland and I of England

Elizabeth Stuart Queen of Bohemia

Charles I Louis Elector Palatine

Princess Elisabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate

Philippe II Duke of Orléans

Charlotte Aglaé d'Orléans

Maria Teresa Felicitas d'Este

Louise Marie Adélaïde de Bourbon Duchess of Orléans

Louis Philippe I King of The French

Ferdinand Philippe Duke of Orléans

Prince Philippe of Orléans Count of Paris

Princess Hélène of Orléans

Prince Amedeo Duke of Aosta

Princess Margherita of Savoy-Aosta

Archduchess Maria Beatrice Anna Felicitas Zita Charlotte Adelheid Christina Elisabeth Gennara

The above is based on my admittedly controversial belief that Adelulf was the elder of the sons of Baldwin II of Flanders. Which is tied to me theory that Adelulf's wife was Adele of Vermandois and she only married his younger brother Arnulf after Adelulf died. Below of what that would be if that theory is wrong. 

Charles The Bald

Judith of Flanders

Baldwin II of Flanders

Arnulf I, Count of Flanders

Hildegarde

Arnulf, Count of Holland

Dirk III, Count of Holland

Floris I, Count of Holland

Bertha of Holland

Constance of France, Princess of Antioch

Bohemond II of Antioch

Constance of Antioch

Maria of Antioch

Alexios II Komnenos

Charles The Bald

Judith of Flanders

Baldwin II of Flanders

Arnulf I, Count of Flanders

Hildegarde

Arnulf, Count of Holland

Dirk III, Count of Holland

Floris I, Count of Holland

Bertha of Holland

Constance of France, Princess of Antioch

Bohemond II of Antioch

Constance of Antioch

Bohemond III of Antioch

Raymond IV, Count of Tripoli

Raymond-Roupen

Maria of Antioch-Armenia

Humphrey of Montfort

Rupen of Montfort

Jeanne of Montfort

Eventually this too arguably converges on Hugh IV of Cyprus

Female Preference Primogeniture Succession from Charlemagne just for the fun of it

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Judith of Friuli

Gisela (mother of Regelinda)

Regelinda of Zürich

Bertha of Swabia

Adelaide of Italy

Emma of Italy

Louis V of France

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Judith of Friuli

Gisela (mother of Regelinda)

Regelinda of Zürich

Bertha of Swabia

Adelaide of Italy

Matilda, Abbess of Quedlinburg

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Judith of Friuli

Gisela (mother of Regelinda)

Regelinda of Zürich

Bertha of Swabia

Adelaide of Italy

Otto II, Holy Roman Emperor

Adelaide I, Abbess of Quedlinburg & Sophia I, Abbess of Gandersheim

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Judith of Friuli

Gisela (mother of Regelinda)

Regelinda of Zürich

Bertha of Swabia

Adelaide of Italy

Otto II, Holy Roman Emperor

Matilda of Germany, Countess Palatine of Lotharingia

Richeza of Lotharingia

Richeza of Poland, Queen of Hungary

Sophia of Hungary

Richardis of Carniola

Otto III (d. after 15 December 1130), Eckhard III (d. after 11 July 1183), Bernard II (d. c. 1135), unnamed son

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Judith of Friuli

Gisela (mother of Regelinda)

Regelinda of Zürich

Bertha of Swabia

Adelaide of Italy

Otto II, Holy Roman Emperor

Matilda of Germany, Countess Palatine of Lotharingia

Richeza of Lotharingia

Richeza of Poland, Queen of Hungary

Sophia of Hungary

Wulfhilde of Saxony

Sophia of Bavaria

Ottokar III of Styria

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Judith of Friuli

Gisela (mother of Regelinda)

Regelinda of Zürich

Bertha of Swabia

Adelaide of Italy

Otto II, Holy Roman Emperor

Matilda of Germany, Countess Palatine of Lotharingia

Richeza of Lotharingia

Richeza of Poland, Queen of Hungary

Sophia of Hungary

Wulfhilde of Saxony

Judith of Bavaria, Duchess of Swabia

Bertha, Duchess of Lorraine

Alice of Lorraine

Odo III, Duke of Burgundy

Hugh IV, Duke of Burgundy

Margaret, Lady of Molinot

Marie, Viscountess of Limoges

Guy de Penthièvre

Joan, Duchess of Brittany

Marie of Blois, Duchess of Anjou

Louis II of Anjou

Marie of Anjou

Magdalena of Valois

Catherine of Navarre

Isabel d'Albret of Navarre

René II, Viscount of Rohan

Catherine de Rohan

Countess Palatine Magdalene Catherine of Zweibrücken

Countess Palatine Dorothea Catherine of Birkenfeld-Bischweiler

Countess Anna Catherine of Nassau-Ottweiler

From this point Wikipedia doesn't say one way or the other if any daughters had children

This line is disputed actually but if true it's more senior then the Judith of Friuli lines.

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Ingeltrude

Hedwig of Babenberg

Below is a line I first documented from Berengar I of Italy because Gisela's own page didn't mention her daughters

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Berengar I of Italy

Gisela of Friuli

Berengar II of Italy

Rozala of Italy

Baldwin IV, Count of Flanders

Judith of Flanders

Henry IX, Duke of Bavaria

Judith of Bavaria, Duchess of Swabia

Bertha, Duchess of Lorraine

Alice of Lorraine

Odo III, Duke of Burgundy

Hugh IV, Duke of Burgundy

Margaret, Lady of Molinot

Marie, Viscountess of Limoges

Guy de Penthièvre

Joan, Duchess of Brittany

Marie of Blois, Duchess of Anjou

Louis II of Anjou

Marie of Anjou

Magdalena of Valois

Catherine of Navarre

Isabel d'Albret of Navarre

René II, Viscount of Rohan

Catherine de Rohan

Countess Palatine Magdalene Catherine of Zweibrücken

Countess Palatine Dorothea Catherine of Birkenfeld-Bischweiler

Countess Anna Catherine of Nassau-Ottweiler

From this point Wikipedia doesn't say one way or the other if any daughters had children

Female Only Primogeniture succession from Gisela

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Judith of Friuli

Gisela (mother of Regelinda)

Regelinda of Zürich

Ida of Swabia

Mathilde, Abbess of Essen

Charlemagne

Louis the Pious

Gisela

Ingeltrude

Hedwig of Babenberg

Oda of Saxony

Oda of Metz

Female Preference Primogeniture descent from Eleanor of Aquitaine

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Marie of Champagne, Latin Empress of Constantinople

Margaret II, Countess of Flanders

John I, Count of Hainaut

John II, Count of Holland

Mary of Avesnes

Marie de Bourbon, Princess of Achaea

Hugh of Lusignan

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Marie of Champagne, Latin Empress of Constantinople

Margaret II, Countess of Flanders

John I, Count of Hainaut

John II, Count of Holland

Mary of Avesnes

Beatrice of Bourbon, Queen of Bohemia

Wenceslaus I, Duke of Luxembourg

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Marie of Champagne, Latin Empress of Constantinople

Margaret II, Countess of Flanders

John I, Count of Hainaut

John II, Count of Holland

Mary of Avesnes

Peter I, Duke of Bourbon

Joanna of Bourbon

Charles VI of France

Isabella of Valois

Joan of Valois, Duchess of Alençon

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Marie of Champagne, Latin Empress of Constantinople

Margaret II, Countess of Flanders

John I, Count of Hainaut

John II, Count of Holland

Mary of Avesnes

Peter I, Duke of Bourbon

Joanna of Bourbon

Charles VI of France

Joan of France, Duchess of Brittany

Isabella of Brittany

Jeanne de Laval

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Marie of Champagne, Latin Empress of Constantinople

Margaret II, Countess of Flanders

John I, Count of Hainaut

John II, Count of Holland

Mary of Avesnes

Peter I, Duke of Bourbon

Joanna of Bourbon

Charles VI of France

Joan of France, Duchess of Brittany

Francis I, Duke of Brittany

Margaret of Brittany

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Marie of Champagne, Latin Empress of Constantinople

Margaret II, Countess of Flanders

John I, Count of Hainaut

John II, Count of Holland

Mary of Avesnes

Peter I, Duke of Bourbon

Joanna of Bourbon

Charles VI of France

Joan of France, Duchess of Brittany

Francis I, Duke of Brittany

Marie of Brittany, Viscountess of Rohan

Anne, Viscountess of Rohan

René I, Viscount of Rohan

René II, Viscount of Rohan

Catherine de Rohan

Magdalena Catherine, Countess Palatine of Zweibrücken

Dorothea Catherine of Birkenfeld-Bischweiler

Anna Catherine of Nassau-Ottweiler

Charles, Wild- and Rhinegrave of Salm-Dhaun

John Philip III, Wild- and Rhinegrave of Salm-Dhaun

Update March 11th:

Male preference primogeniture descent from Charles Martel

Charles Martel

Carloman

Rotrude, Countess of Paris

Leuthard I of Paris

Adalard the Seneschal

Adalhard of Metz

Gerhard I of Metz

Oda of Metz

Godfrey I, Count of Verdun

Gothelo I, Duke of Lorraine

Godfrey the Bearded

Ida of Lorraine

Eustace III, Count of Boulogne

Matilda I, Countess of Boulogne

Marie I, Countess of Boulogne

Matilda of Boulogne, Duchess of Brabant

Henry II, Duke of Brabant

Henry III, Duke of Brabant

John I, Duke of Brabant

John II, Duke of Brabant

John III, Duke of Brabant

Margaret of Brabant, Countess of Flanders

Margaret III, Countess of Flanders

John the Fearless

Philip the Good

Charles the Bold

Mary the Rich

Philip the Handsome

Charles V Holy Roman Emperor

Philip II King of Spain

Philip III King of Spain

Philip IV King of Spain

Maria Theresa of Spain

Louis, Grand Dauphin

Louis, Duke of Burgundy

Louis XV King of France

Louis, Dauphin of France

Charles X King of France

Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry

Princess Louise d'Artois

Robert I, Duke of Parma

Elias, Duke of Parma

Infantia Alicia, Duchess of Calabria 

Infante Carlos, Duke of Calabria

Prince Pedro, Duke of Calabria

This line would be more senior but it's based on a disputed connection proposed by by Eduard Hlawitschka.

Charles Martel

Carloman

Rotrude, Countess of Paris

Leuthard I of Paris

Adalard the Seneschal

Adalhard of Metz

Gerhard I of Metz

Godfrey of Jülich

Gerhard II Count of Metz

Richard Count of Metz

Adalbert Count in Saargau

Gerhard IV Count of Metz

Gerard the Wonderful

Theodoric II, Duke of Lorraine

Simon I, Duke of Lorraine

Matthias I, Duke of Lorraine

Frederick I, Duke of Lorraine

Frederick II, Duke of Lorraine

Matthias II, Duke of Lorraine

Frederick III, Duke of Lorraine

Theobald II, Duke of Lorraine

Frederick IV, Duke of Lorraine

Rudolph, Duke of Lorraine

John I, Duke of Lorraine

Charles II, Duke of Lorraine

Isabella, Duchess of Lorraine

Yolande, Duchess of Lorraine

René II, Duke of Lorraine

Antoine, Duke of Lorraine

Francis I, Duke of Lorraine

Charles III, Duke of Lorraine

Henry II, Duke of Lorraine

Nicole, Duchess of Lorraine

Claude-Françoise of Lorraine

Charles V, Duke of Lorraine

Leopold, Duke of Lorraine

Francis I, Holy Roman Emperor

Leopold II, Holy Roman Emperor

Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor

Archduke Franz Karl of Austria

Franz Joseph I of Austria

Rudolf, Crown Prince of Austria

Archduchess Elisabeth Marie of Austria

Franz Joseph (b. 1904 – d. 1981)

Princess Stéphanie Windisch-Graetz 

Henry Victor William Blundell-Hollinshead-Blundell (born 1967)

:Bryan Vahram John Blundell-Hollinshead-Blundell 2005 

:Eleonore Mélinée Blundell-Hollinshead-Blundell 2002

Absolute primogeniture descent from Charles Martel

Charles Martel

Carloman

Rotrude, Countess of Paris

Leuthard I of Paris

Engeltrude de Fézensac

Ermentrude of Orléans

Same as succession from Charles The Bald

Update September 10th 2024: I found this hypothetical Line interesting.

Male Preference Primogeniture Succession from Eleanor of Aquitaine if we only consider her first Marriage Legitimate

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Marie of France, Countess of Champagne

Henry II, Count of Champagne

Alice of Champagne

Mary of Lusignan, Countess of Brienne

Hugh, Count of Brienne

Walter V, Count of Brienne

Isabella, Countess of Brienne

Louis, Count of Enghien

Margaret, Countess of Brienne

Peter of Luxembourg

Louis, Count of Saint-Pol

Peter II, Count of Saint-Pol

Marie I, Countess of Saint-Pol and Soissons

Charles de Bourbon, Duke of Vendome

Antoine of Navarre

Henry IV of France

Louis XIII the Just

Louis XIV the Great The Sun King

Louis, Grand Dauphin

Louis, Duke of Burgundy

Louis XV King of France

Louis, Dauphin of France

Charles X King of France

Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry

Princess Louise d'Artois

Robert I, Duke of Parma

Elias, Duke of Parma

Infantia Alicia, Duchess of Calabria 

Infante Carlos, Duke of Calabria

Prince Pedro, Duke of Calabria

Update February 2026: A controversial rightful line of succession from Charles The Bald.

Charles The Bald

Louis The Stammerer

Ermentrude of France

Cunigunda of France

Gozlin, Count of Bidgau and Methingau

Godfrey I, Count of Verdun

Gothelo I, Duke of Lorraine

Godfrey the Bearded

Ida of Lorraine

Eustace III, Count of Boulogne

Matilda I, Countess of Boulogne

Marie I, Countess of Boulogne

Matilda of Boulogne, Duchess of Brabant

Henry II, Duke of Brabant

Henry III, Duke of Brabant

John I, Duke of Brabant

John II, Duke of Brabant

John III, Duke of Brabant

Margaret of Brabant, Countess of Flanders

Margaret III, Countess of Flanders

John the Fearless

Philip the Good

Charles the Bold

Mary the Rich

Philip the Handsome

Charles V Holy Roman Emperor

Philip II King of Spain

Philip III King of Spain

Philip IV King of Spain

Maria Theresa of Spain

Louis, Grand Dauphin

Louis, Duke of Burgundy

Louis XV King of France

Louis, Dauphin of France

Charles X King of France

Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Berry

Princess Louise d'Artois

Robert I, Duke of Parma

Elias, Duke of Parma

Infantia Alicia, Duchess of Calabria 

Infante Carlos, Duke of Calabria

Prince Pedro, Duke of Calabria