Blog #28: Son of Man

Blog #28: Son of Man


…okay, well, I guess I don’t know exactly what that means. It’s, like, a Jesus thing, right?…



Interesting. (I looked it up; thank you Wikipedia!) I suppose it’s apropos enough—though I do not mean it in the religious way. (Arguably, neither did Jesus, but let’s not get into theological semantics just now…) I am currently the ‘son of man’ in that my life force currently resides in human corporeity. One might, should they must, instead call this blog ‘hirsute sociopath’ and ‘twould be as apt. (Or—er… just skip that last bit!)


I just spent a couple of hours doing some on-line genealogical research. A few years ago I compiled a book with my research to that point, and I haven’t done much since—but occasionally I delve back in to see if anything new has appeared… So, obviously, I do find family history interesting. Although it really means very little. (Unless you’re a Mormon; then, I guess, it’s pretty important.) A list of the dead and dying. When I did my book it bothered me that there was a lot of interest in it, and I sold quite a few copies—of a list of dead, potential ancestors?! Whereas my books of poetry and prose, my creative writing inspired from heart and soul and imagination—


Well. Enough about that. To each their own, mesupposes…




So I was doing some research this morning, and I hit upon a minor mystery for which a clear solution was not evident. My great-great grandfather Kristof had two wives—though not in a polygamous kind of a way—which I already knew, but I did not know when his first wife, Anna, died. Today I discovered it was in 1852. They were married in 1849, so I thought, mayhap, she died in childbirth? But I don’t know. I dug a bit deeper and discovered a child attributed to her—but with her maiden name, not as a Zakharin, and born in 1843. Without further evidence of anything about anything, I have to assume (given the times) she died of consumption or syphilis or the plague—but such is both sheer conjecture and neither here nor there. Incidentally, the child (Ivan) also died in 1843.


The minor mystery then (though I’m sure it would not be deemed minor to the participants 170 years ago—nor, on the other hand, was it probably a mystery to them) is whether or not Ivan was the son of my great-great grandfather Kristof. From one perspective, the official record, such as it is, means nothing given there was no way to test paternity in the 19th Century. Was Ivan my however-many-greats uncle, but Kristof and Anna simply didn’t get married until six years after he was born/died? Or did Anna have a child out of wedlock before meeting Kristof?


Kristof was remarried, to my great-great grandmother Varvara, in October of 1860, and my great grandfather Mikhail was born in November 1860. This could seem to indicate that marriage in an official capacity was not a priority to Kristof, marrying his first wife six years after their first (and only?) child and his second wife the month before the birth of their first child. Or was the scenario such that he married Anna in spite of the ‘illicit shame’ of having had a child before marriage—and when he married Varvara, he was perhaps (I don’t know) doing a favor by giving her child, whomever its actual parentage, a father? In other words, I have no idea whether Kristof is my great-great grandfather—or my step great-great grandfather…


It’s like the Romanov Dynasty—purportedly spanning three centuries… except Peter I (so just three—or, anyway, three and a half—tsars in) apparently looked a heck of lot more like—was a giant of a man like—the Patriarch Nikon (who had been a good, good friend of his mother’s), as opposed to his official father Alexis. It’s also possible Paul, the son of Peter III and Catherine II, was not actually the son of Peter—if only because they absolutely hated one another, and there is no proof their marriage was ever consummated. In both cases, the bloodline is no longer Romanov—and, taking into account when the line of succession passed through an empress (such as Anna Petrovna or Anna Ivanna), even the name itself is carried along by choice rather than ‘surname tradition’. When all was said and done, the Romanov dynasty, at its twilight, was far more German than Russian… which is perhaps somehow apropos—in that, in its beginnings, the Russian nobility was Scandinavian. (I don’t know what any of that means…)


It doesn’t mean anything! (Ah-ha!) For such was my point…


Throughout the history of our unfortunate species, there is no way to confirm one’s family pedigree. At least not for the vast majority of us—though, I suppose, they could dig up nobles and do DNA testing on all of them and at least get a few centuries of a reasonably accurate descent… And does it matter? No. It seems to me who a person is spiritually moving forward should be of greater significance than who a person is biologically looking backward. But if you enjoy it and don’t care that you don’t really know—despite whatever the ‘official record’ is telling you… hob nob—carry on!


Just for shits and giggles, try this one:

Mikhail (‘Mishka’) Feodorovich Zakharin [b.1970];

son of Feodor Vendeslavovich [b.1943] (& Karina Yurovna Vronsky [b.1943]);

son of Vendeslav Mikhailovich [1890-1963] (& Magda Semyonovna [1902-1993]);

son of Mikhail Kristofovich [1860-1938] (& Katarina Vendeslavna [1853-1926]);

son of Kristof Kalgarovich [1823-1892] (& Varvara Ivanovna [1826-1907]);

son of Kalgar Mikhailovich [1781-1833] (& Maria [1784-1841]);

son of Mikhail Rodianovich [1754-1805] (& Katya);

son of Rodian Ivanovich [1729-1756] (& Anna);

son of Ivan Mikhailovich [1688-1730] (& Darya);

son of Mikhail Nikitovich [1659-1693] (& Elena);

son of Nikita Ignatovich [1622-1684] (& Svetlana);

son of Ignat Mikhailovich [1600-1647] (& Betty?… Elizaveta!);

son of Mikhail Ivanovich [1587-1623] (& ‘Girl’);

son of Ivan Ivanovich Rurik / Zakharin [1554-1612] (& Yelena Sheremeteva [1560-1587]);

son of Ivan IV Vasilyevich Grozni (i.e. ‘the Terrible’) [1530-1584] (& Anna Romanovna Zakharina [1530-1560]);



I just made most of that up. Oh, Well! Turns out ol’ Ivan the Terrible only thought he killed his son and heir by bashing his skull in with a scepter—but really Ivan Ivanovich recovered and went into hiding. And the rest is… history?


(Mayhap I’ll continue it back to Ptolemy Caesar, the son of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra—and, from there, it’s a straight shot back to Zeus himself… Huzzah!~)



# # # #


—Mishka Zakharin © 2015



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *