Sorry for mess in Exilarchs

OK, re: mess in Exilarchs/Davidic line, I will list the problems I found and inconsistencies. Please let me know if you have an opinion or sources for these so I can fix them. Thanks!
-Shiri

-------------

Zerubabel appears once with Shaltiel and once with Pedaiah (ben Shaltiel) as his father. Which is the correct one?
more question to come...

More:
Elioenai ben Neariah, 20th Exilarch has two fathers.
Shealtiel ., 2nd Exilarch has two fathers.

thanks,
-Shiri

Zerubavel was the son of Shealtiel (Haggai 1:1) and various other references in Sefer Haggai and other books in Nevi'im.

Elyoeinei was the son of Nearyiah (I Chronicles 3:23)

I have undone an incorrect merge of Elioenai ben Neariah, 20th Exilarch and Unknown Profile

They are clearly not the same person - different parents and 500 years apart

Oops!!! I guess my eyes are getting foggy from too many Davidic folks!
Thanks David.

David,
Can you take a look at Hizkiyahu II ibn Nearya 21st Exilarch ? I fear I messed things up there with those Exilarchs but I can't find a merge to undo.
Thanks,
-Shiri

Though Haggai and other Neviim have Zerbuval the son of Shaltiel, I Chronicles 3:19 has Zerubavel the son of Pedaiah. Given that Pedaiah was the son of Shealtiel, and I Chronicles is giving the full genealogy, I would suggest that when the prophets refer to Zerbuval the son of Shaltiel they mean grandson.

What about Hizkiyahu II ibn Nearya 21st Exilarch?
Thanks a bunch for your timely help,
-Shiri

Sorry, I meant to say, what about Amay (Arnan ben Rafaya Exilarch)?

I undoed the Amay of Exoilarch <--> Amay "Ha David" merge which was clearly incorrect. I'm gonna try catch all these Exilarches that somehow "smuggled" into this Davidic line.

The commentary Metsudat David on Haggai 1:1 where Zerubavel is referred to as the son of Shaltiel says (my translation from Hebrew):

"He was the son of Pedaiah the son of Shealtiel, as it says in I Chronicles Ch 3; and the sons of sons are considered like sons."

So my suggestion has backing.

I suggest you go with that and put a note to that effect in the profile.

Generally the genealogy in Chronicles is the more precise.

What about Hezekaiah / Hizkiah were you referring to?

Yes clearly for example

Unknown Profile

is not the son of

Hizkiyahu II ibn Nearya 21st Exilarch

who was born 500 years earlier. Maybe some people don't get minus signs?

I did my best to outline the various branches and competing theories in my website at http://www.loebtree.com/early
Read in particular the top of http://www.loebtree.com/yoseph.html

Please do NOT change the connections of Zerubavel re: Pedaiah and Shealtiel.

It is RATHER difficult keeping that part of the tree straight because so many wrong versions exist. David, I can't check your specific cases just now, but:
1) most of the years in this part of biblical tree are JUNK. With SO many continuous merges going on, it is impossible to stick to one consistent set of years.
2) Regarding the lineage of the Exilarchs. There are at least FOUR documented versions (that sometimes match, sometimes don't). I'll try and post it ASAP, but you can find a document discussing exactly this problem on a Jewish web-page regarding the House of David. I have the link and document at home, but temporarily NO internet.

Shiri!!
I thought you said you were leaving these merges to me?? :-D When you have four lines not yet connected to each other, it is often best to merge them with each other BEFORE you connect them all into the main line.

Hmmm, Shmuel, sorry for the mess. You're right, it does seem better to merge them to each other and I'll do that in the future.

Shmuel, David, Daniel,
Can you please look at the children of Hizkiyahu II ibn Nearya 21st Exilarch - clearly his listed children are now WRONG, but where should they be?
Oy vey, I fear I made a real mess here.
-Shiri

This is Hezekaiah / Hizkiah ben Neariah (as against any other Hezekaiah).

He is not the same person as Hezekaiah king of Judah.

The only biblical source to this Hezekaiah of which I am aware is I Ch 3:23 which says that Neariah had 3 sons Elioenai, Hezekiah and Azrikam. The next verse lists the seven sons of Elioenai, but does not list children of the other two sons of Neariah. So no children of this Hezekiah are listed in this primary source. That is not to say that there aren't other sources.

Yes, so the children listed "should not be there", but where is the correct place for them?
Unknown Profile which is just a placeholder, but is he a placeholder in the right place?
Salma bat Hizkiya ibn Nearya seems to be in the right place
Akkub ben Elioenai, Exilarch seems to be in the wrong place but where is right?
Azrikam I ., 23rd Exilarch seems to be in the wrong place but where is right?
Unknown Profile seems to be in the wrong place but where is right?
Nachum ., I might be in the right place...

Any assistance is much appreciated.
-Shiri

Hopefully the managers of those profiles know who they intended. e.g. Shmuel is main profile owner of Nachum.

It would be good if people put notes in their profiles from this era to indicate who they have in mind, and sources.

David,
1) The vast majority of people who enter these trees (pretty much ANY historical tree), have NO IDEA, regarding their own profiles. In many/most cases they just did a copy-paste from some file they found on the internet. I have seen and fixed the same mistakes over and over again, very obviously from the same bad source.
2) I try to add Hebrew names, biblical sources and links to them, for all profiles I can find. I have not yet done this for all 2500+ profiles, and sometimes this information is lost or gets removed in merges. Regarding the Exilarchs (or the bridge between them and the middle ages), there are NO authoritative sources. As I said, there are at least four "official" versions. Many authorities consider this bridge to be more fantasy than fact. We more or less know the ORDER of the Exilarchs. We also know that not all were direct descendants of the one before them. Some are nephews, some are more distant cousins who married the daughter of previous Exilarch.
3) The fact that I am primary manager indicates nothing. Most of these profiles were transferred to me, in the process of merging these trees over and over again. I probably added less than 200 of them, and even those mostly for non-primary people.
4) As soon as my home internet connection is restored, I will post the two primary documents I have. One is the table I mentioned above. The other is the Enc. Judaica entry on Exilarch. An expert on this period, told me this entry was very authoritative, with one minor caveat for us - it is NOT concerned with Genealogy at all...
5) If you, or anyone else, would like to take over the job of maintaining the tree for the Exilarchs, I'll be more than happy to pass it on. As I stated on the Biblical Tree Project page ( http://wiki.geni.com/index.php/Biblical_Tree_Merge ), the Exilarchs is really NOT my primary interest. I HAVE been merging identical (or almost identical) versions of this tree that came my way, if only to keep this part of the tree in minimal order. BUT there are differences in versions already there that I can't resolve.

Thanks שמואל for those explanations, and references to sources. Please can I clarify that I have no desire to take over the job of maintaining this section of the tree. I came into this discussion simply to try to be helpful to answer questions posed by Shiri, and that is the extent of my desire for involvement here. I wish your home internet connection רפואה שלמה.

Thanks Shmuel (and David). I also have no desire to take over the Exilarch portion but rather am trying to instill some order in it and get rid of the multitudes of copies that exist on Geni. *My* primary interest is those portions of the tree which can be reliably linked back to living human beings nowadays.

I'll patiently await the document you mention, Shmuel, and will do my best to fix the mess I've made in accidentally merging the early Davidic line with the later Exilarchs. Right now there's an awful mishmash of the two and I can't tell where the fix needs to come. Dang my impatience!