RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: Bilge on Tuesday 21 October 08 14:54 BST (UK)
-
This is meant to be light hearted and is no way a suggestion of foul play!
I really am frustrated and bemused :-\
A number of tree's that I have perused in the last few days that have originated in the U.S. tracing their roots in the U.K. ;) Two went back to the 1100's one to the 1300's and the other to the 1500's. ::)
I must say that I have had great difficulty tracing my ancestors back further than about the 1850's. ;D
How do they do it and where do they dig up the resources? :-\
If you want to see what I mean, find one then try and locate a single person on the tree from say 1500's. ???
-
If you go on to RootsWeb & put in the search box first name Jesus, surname Christ, you will see people who seem to be able to prove they are descended from Jesus & Mary Magdalene. It seems to be mainly Americans who can do this, & like you I'm bemused as to how they can prove it.
There are trees on Ancestry that go back even further!
I wish these tree owners would come on here & give us some tips ;D
Betty
-
To answer your question, I suspect they do it by importing other people's trees. Whether the other people's tree are correct or even in the slightest believable is a different matter!
Claiming descent from Jesus and Mary Magdalene is obviously (pace Dan Brown) plain daft, regardless of whether or not you believe they had issue (anyone see that programme on Channel 5 about Mary Magdalene a few weeks ago, by the way? Pretty good I thought, and not just because it featured a colleague from just down the corridor at work.)
1500s is entirely plausible - I've done it through parish registers for one of my lines. It's quite possible if I could hone my palaeographical and medieval/renaissance Latin skills I could get further back by looking for wills and other documents.
Obviously you're only going to get back beyond whenever it was in the 16th century that parish registers were introduced if your ancestors were "someone" - not many ag labs are going to have left a trace in the registers.
So - if you're very, very lucky - it's going to be possible. There's a book by Paul Chambers on Medieval Geneaology. Not read it, so no recommendation.
-
By the way, if you're stuck at the 1850s, you'd better start posting some of the details on the relevant county forums here on rootschat and get some help demolishing the brickwalls!
Unless, of course, all your great-great grandfathers were called John Smith and the later censuses don't say where they were born ...
-
Thanks for that even if it were John Smith :o
I suspect that going on US trees his blood would be more blue that our current Royals. ???
;D ;D ;D
-
Obviously you're only going to get back beyond whenever it was in the 16th century that parish registers were introduced if your ancestors were "someone" -
My ancestors on one line were "someone" from 1360 (my 16 x g.grandfather) to 1586 (my 8 x g.grandfather), so all their history is written up and available to all, then from 1586, I become descended from the 6th son of the family instead of the 1st and although my 8 x g.grandfather was left a house in his mother's will, it was his 9th son that continues my line - so guess what - they ended up as ag labs after all. ::)
Lizzie
-
I think that because most royals thought that they were naturally descended from Jesus Christ (although there was no proof that they ever were, either then or now), then any American (or anyone else) managing to find a connection between their family and someone from a royal family could jump on the "holy bandwagon". However, it only takes one slip for the whole pack of cards to come tumbling down, which I found out a few weeks ago, when I got two couples living 25 miles apart muddled up, and suddenly I thought I had blue blood ! Sadly, one or two Roots Chatters brought me back down to earth with a thud, fortunately just before I placed the order for the ermine smoking jacket :o
The moral of the story is....... if you are looking for something you desire in your family tree, you will find it. I think I was convinced I had blue blood because I've always had expensive tastes 8) ;D
-
To be fair to the Americans the practice really has no national boundaries and pro rata there are as many in other countries (including this one).
I have seen one compiled by someone who was potentially a distant cousin which claimed to go back through to the Viking period and a certain Mr & Mrs Odin. (Fortunately I was able to confirm he was not related - and I don't mean Odin).
-
I am quite happy that the line I have traced back to the 1560s is accurate and true - thats based on BMDs backed up with a very large helping of wills.
Why stop at Jesus? ;) With a gateway ancestor you are on the fast highway right back to Adam and Eve!
Carole
-
Who was that on WDYTYA who was descended from Jesus Christ because he was connected to royalty? At least they showed the way on there. Anyway I thought we were all descended from Adam and Eve ::)
I researched back to the 1500s with one family but found on Ancestry that one who died in 1851 had risen from the dead a obtained a new wife and family in America.
Bilge After 20 years searching I'm stuck in 1812 with one family. You should be able to get back a bit further than 1850s. Do ask for lookups if you are really stuck.
Sylviaann
-
Who was that on WDYTYA who was descended from Jesus Christ because he was connected to royalty? At least they showed the way on there. Anyway I thought we were all descended from Adam and Eve ::)
Sylviaann
Wasn't it Matthew Pinsent?
-
After exhaustively researching Roger de Busli (A Norman mate of Bill the Conk) and finding not only that his parentage was entirely unknown but also that his one son died very young and childless, I did find an American site claiming Roger as an ancestor. Not only that, but his sister (who didn't have the correct name for Roger's only sister) was born in Tickhill Castle in 1052 - 50 years before Tickhill Castle was built and, obviously, a little before the Norman Conquest.
I'm sure it's not only Americans who have wishful thinking, but in this case a bit of basic historical research would have helped.
-
Sylviaann. Thank You :)
I do intend to ask for help but I am trying to fit it in with other work I am doing. 8)
All this discovery is a little overwelming. :D
TBH I get diverted by other facts in history that are published on this forum. ;D
Oh why? Oh Why? could history at school have been so much fun! ;D ;D ;D
-
Aulus and everone else that has helped me sort this huge jigsaw out thank you. 8)
Also thanks to the Forest of Dean Family History Web page I have a major break through in my link to the past. :D
http://www.coachhouse.free-online.co.uk/famtree/famf258.html
Just check out the ABELL line. ;D ;D
-
I think you have to look at how the information is shared to partly explain the situation.
The US is a big country, the world even bigger and Ancestry gives access to info for anyone with internet access regardless of their location
Most US researchers will use Ancestry as a research tool, Ancestry also happen to have the One World Tree. In theory a fantastic tool, taking thousands of separate gedcom files and combining them together, merging branches from one file into another to make a huge tree from all the submitted data.
The problem is that this is done automatically and the countless occurences of duplicate names and dates (often unsourced and with sketchy or incomplete places of birth) means the accuracy is rather questionable. Anyone can submit a tree and claim X is related to Y, it needn't be a legitimate tree and could even be a complete spoof addition, the danger is that somewhere amongst the millions of entries there will be a potential match to Messrs X and Y and the info is merged together.
Quantity over quality isn't a good basis for many things and particularly when family trees are concerned.
The following is slightly tongue in cheek but many a true word is said in jest.
Just ask yourself one question when viewing a tree online, which of the following is it?
Second Hand Internet Tree or (S)econd (H)and (I)nternet (T)ree
A farmer might argue that plenty of (S) (H) (I) (T) makes for a plentiful crop though ::)
Glen
-
I have seen one compiled by someone who was potentially a distant cousin which claimed to go back through to the Viking period and a certain Mr & Mrs Odin. (Fortunately I was able to confirm he was not related - and I don't mean Odin).
Hi Falkyrn: I once saw at a Family History Center in the time before records were online that someone had traced his/her ancestry back to Asgard, the home of the Norse gods. Falkyrn's post made me curious. I went to satisfy it and found:
The IGI lists Odin, born A.D. 600. There is no pedigree, which I presume confirms that he/she is self-created. The Pedigree Resource file on FamilySearch lists Odin twice. There is a discrepancy in his birth/self-creation year. Here it's 604, close enough that we can consider this the same person/god.
The Pedigree Resource File has several entries for a marriage between Mr. Odin and Mrs. Odin, in Norway, in A.D. 624.
The Pedigree Resource File on FamilySearch lists J. Christ 33 times, all apparently the same person, born 001 in Bethlehem, though one entry lists place of birth as Nazareth.
There is also a Jesus Christ listed in the U.S. Social Security Death Index, the closest there is to a national death index in the U.S.
Jesus CHRIST
Birth Date: 17 Jul 1941
Death 3 Mar 2007
Social Security Number: 487-46-6914
State where number was issued: Missouri
Death Residence Localities
ZIP Code: 48224
Localities: Detroit, Wayne, Michigan
Regards,
John :o :o :o
-
I'm sure Odin's birth dates/self creation dates must be wrong - surely he must have been born long before that? Ah! those transcription errors are creeping into the IGI again ;)
Carole
-
Ah! those transcription errors are creeping into the IGI again
It's hard enough reading some handwriting just think what those early transcribers had to cope with - Runes, Hieroglyphics etc etc.
In all seriousness though, histories like those mentioned bring medieval genealogy and by association all genealogy into disrepute. Some people are only interested in how far back they can get and tend to forget the odd thing or two like facts or evidence.
-
As an American I can tell you how I do it in the US. I read books. I visit libraries. I search for facts. I document sources. I do NOT research *exclusively* on Ancestry.com. I *do* utilize the internet and search abroad for much the same - books, vital statistics, parish libraries, universities etc. I post querys to message boards, mailing lists and search for contacts who may have the information I'm looking for outside of the US and inside of the US. It's fun. I can appreciate those on-line family trees that are extensively sourced and cited. One day maybe I will have a tree that is just blooming fantastic. (I don't hold out and hope for blue blood though.)
The question was a fair one. I hope that my American "root digging techniques" have helped.
-
Tracing back your family tree can only go so far. Quite frankly, anyone who claims to have traced back to Adam and Eve or Jesus has been using inaccurate/incorrect information. This thread just shows why information submitted to the LDS should be taken with a handful of salt.
Andrew
-
As an American I can tell you how I do it in the US. I read books. I visit libraries. I search for facts. I document sources. I do NOT research *exclusively* on Ancestry.com. I *do* utilize the internet and search abroad for much the same - books, vital statistics, parish libraries, universities etc. I post querys to message boards, mailing lists and search for contacts who may have the information I'm looking for outside of the US and inside of the US. It's fun. I can appreciate those on-line family trees that are extensively sourced and cited. One day maybe I will have a tree that is just blooming fantastic. (I don't hold out and hope for blue blood though.)
The question was a fair one. I hope that my American "root digging techniques" have helped.
Hello and welcome :)
I'm sure the subject of this thread isn't in any way a dig at at Americans any more than any other nationality - more a reflection of the huge amount of rubbish and disinformation there is on the web - and not only genealogical rubbish!
Carole
-
Ummm! ???
Some fall on stoney ground! ::)
-
Ummm! ???
Some fall on stoney ground! ::)
Threads on RC often get sidetracked ;)
To get back to your original point - pre 1837 it's (in England & Wales) very much a matter of checking and rechecking the Parish registers, Grave references etc and often following a side branch just to provide that piece of confirmation needed.
If you are really lucky you may find a link to what is known as a "Gateway Ancestor" - generally from one of the Nobility Houses whose genealogical lines have been preserved - although again the watchword is , as always, caution. Some medieval histories are honest endeavours while others may make wild and unsubstantiated claims.
The references regarding Mathew Pinsent on the TV show referred to a gateway ancestor of his whose lineage was traced back through several high ranking families to the Royal Family. The original medieval researcher to show that the king was governing by divine right somehow managed to trace a link to Christ.
-
Tracing back your family tree can only go so far. Quite frankly, anyone who claims to have traced back to Adam and Eve or Jesus has been using inaccurate/incorrect information. This thread just shows why information submitted to the LDS should be taken with a handful of salt.
Andrew
Make that two handfulls, please.