RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: bugbear on Monday 30 July 18 15:35 BST (UK)
-
Does anyone else get annoyed at the way this is told in "story order" >:(
Sometimes one of the late-in-the-program emotional "big reveals" is from one of the documents we all know would have been found early in the research, like a later census.
Annoying.
It's been a long time since I learnt anything about genealogical research from this prog. :'(
BugBear
-
But, it's an Entertainment Programme, aimed at the masses ;D
It isn't a Genealogy program showing hints and tips on how to do a Family Tree!
-
It's even more annoying when you've done lots of the background research for an episode and facts are totally ignored. Last time I ended up shouting "look in the big metal strongbox' over to the right" to the telly but nobody listened then either ::)
-
But, it's an Entertainment Programme, aimed at the masses ;D
It isn't a Genealogy program showing hints and tips on how to do a Family Tree!
The early series were pretty instructive, IMHO.
BugBear
-
The early series were pretty instructive, IMHO.
BugBear
These days the 'celebrity' just goes somewhere and is handed an envelope by an 'expert'.
To me half the fun is doing the research.
I still smile remembering Barbara Windsor puzzling over why her ancestors were called 'Do' in the census then realising it meant ditto.
You make mistakes and learn as you go. The thrill of the search is still strong even after 20years.
-
I think the celebs get their tree handed to them on a silver platter with bells on as they have a team of dedicated researchers rifling through looking for the famous ancestor, the entrepreneur, and the tear jerker that makes Bambi's mum dying look cheerful.
-
The early series were pretty instructive, IMHO.
BugBear
These days the 'celebrity' just goes somewhere and is handed an envelope by an 'expert'.
To me half the fun is doing the research.
I still smile remembering Barbara Windsor puzzling over why her ancestors were called 'Do' in the census then realising it meant ditto.
You make mistakes and learn as you go. The thrill of the search is still strong even after 20years.
In the early days of census transcriptions when a lot were done overseas, it was not uncommon to find people indexed with the name DITTO, it would have been funny if it was not so frustrating.
-
Someone remarked to me last year that " it`s easy to do " , based on what they`d seen on the programme.
I`m sure we`ve all had times when the research just flows, equally there`s times when you seem as if it`s hard going, especially with brick walls.
-
I love playing 'what will they say next'. For example - celebrity says 'So, I wonder what happened to Great Grandma when her husband left her with six children and went off to war'. Cue - 'well, we have this document that shows she became a prostitute which would have enabled her to feed her children'.
If only the questions we have could be answered so easily.
Rishile
-
Many, many people migrated to London from other parts of Britain in the 1800s, and before and after. Yet when Barbara Windsor found a Suffolk ancestor, she acted like it was the most unusual thing ever. I suppose her immediate roots are in East London and she just was unaware that many Londoners do not come from a long line of them. I guess by 1900, about a third of London born people had at least 1 grandparent who was not born there.
-
That`s very true.
I`ve 2gt gt grandparents both born Lincolnshire as far as I can tell (it`s 2 lines I haven`t fully investigated yet). They moved from Lincolnshire upto Yorkshire and then to the East End, this line has been easier to follow ,mainly because it`s late 1880s onwards.
-
Rishile,
Your comment made me smile and reminded me of this Armstrong & Miller spoof https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c65QRaR16io
Brie
-
That`s very true.
I`ve 2gt gt grandparents both born Lincolnshire as far as I can tell (it`s 2 lines I haven`t fully investigated yet). They moved from Lincolnshire upto Yorkshire and then to the East End, this line has been easier to follow ,mainly because it`s late 1880s onwards.
My great, great grandmother was born in Sussex but her parents moved to London in 1864 when she was a baby. She grew up in the East End. Her husband was a born and bred Londoner as was his parents but further back is French Huguenot, Norfolk and Dorset lines.
-
Many, many people migrated to London from other parts of Britain in the 1800s, and before and after. Yet when Barbara Windsor found a Suffolk ancestor, she acted like it was the most unusual thing ever. I suppose her immediate roots are in East London and she just was unaware that many Londoners do not come from a long line of them. I guess by 1900, about a third of London born people had at least 1 grandparent who was not born there.
Aw! Leave Babs alone :D We are related in some long-winded fashion ;D
I also have links to Bures St Mary and John Constable (RA).
JC's grandmother is also my 6xgreat-grandmother ;)
-
For me this was the worst programme I've seen where assumptions were made with no documentation for evidence. There was no evidence that 4x great grandma (Caroline) had come from Madagascar as a slave, or that she was a wet nurse or that Isaac was her owner who had become so grateful to her that he left her property in his will. Yet Shirley jumped on all these things as being true. And did I miss something but were we ever told who had fathered her children?
As for the other side of the family didn't the researcher say that the will had probably been written after his wife had left him and the children, and that was why money had been left to his mother but then we're told G grandma was struggling to bring up the children so that was why she'd left them with her mother in law.
I'm not sure these women were as strong and moral as Shirley thinks they are!
-
But don't forget, these are celebrities who mostly just want to know about their roots, not go trawling the internet or through old documents to find the information. As has been mentioned, this is to appeal to the masses, not necessarily to genealogists. Of course there are many of us but not as many as there are of the rest of the population! The programme proved so popular that they changed it to appeal to more viewers. I must admit that if I don't know who the celebrity is or don't particularly like them, I don't watch the programme!
-
But don't forget, these are celebrities who mostly just want to know about their roots, not go trawling the internet or through old documents to find the information. As has been mentioned, this is to appeal to the masses, not necessarily to genealogists. Of course there are many of us but not as many as there are of the rest of the population! The programme proved so popular that they changed it to appeal to more viewers. I must admit that if I don't know who the celebrity is or don't particularly like them, I don't watch the programme!
Interestingly, I think you get a glimpse into the personality of the subject.
On occasion, I have found the subject more appealing than I expected and have then followed him/her more closely in their career.
Or, I've quite liked someone ahead of the programme and then been less than impressed with their reactions to the discoveries.
On occasion - like, I recall, with Ruby Wax - the programme was really illuminating and shed a light on the difficulties that some people have to struggle with.
So it does have its interesting points even if you don't like/know the person being investigated - as well, of course, as the opportunity to yell at the screen at
the unwarranted assumptions,
the details on the certificates the person's missed,
the opportunities for further research not taken up by the programme,
the loose ends left irritatingly dangling,
as well as unbelievable envy at the documentation available to some lucky, lucky, lucky people.
;D
-
Some are very interesting. Cindy Crawford (US WDYTYA), a very intelligent woman. Her family emigrated to American Colonies in 1633. In 1644, her ? times grandfather came back to England as a Captain in the Parliamentary Army and took part in a siege in the West Country. Then traced back to the Emperor Charlemagne, although not described in detail.
-
I don't tend to get too worried about the evidence in the programme, it is only intended as entertainment after all.
What does interest me is when they start talking about the social, cultural and political background to their ancestors lives. Social history is one of the reasons I do this stuff. Much more interesting to me than which King married which Princess!
As to being descended from nobility - I'm not too worried about that either. I'm sure anyone with European ancestry has a good chance of being descended from one noble or another - they had so many mistresses between them! (Official or otherwise).
-
For me this was the worst programme I've seen where assumptions were made with no documentation for evidence.
Have you seen ALL the documentation unearthed by the various researchers?
They do say that for every 1 hour programme, 10 hours of filming end up on the cutting room floor ;D
And we have no idea how many hours of combined research goes into each programme.
-
Many, many people migrated to London from other parts of Britain in the 1800s, and before and after. Yet when Barbara Windsor found a Suffolk ancestor, she acted like it was the most unusual thing ever. I suppose her immediate roots are in East London and she just was unaware that many Londoners do not come from a long line of them. I guess by 1900, about a third of London born people had at least 1 grandparent who was not born there.
Aw! Leave Babs alone :D We are related in some long-winded fashion ;D
I also have links to Bures St Mary and John Constable (RA).
JC's grandmother is also my 6xgreat-grandmother ;)
I never said anything about Babs that was critical. ??? I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.
-
The only thing that surprised me that there wasn't a trawl for a dancer in the family so we could get an Oooh! that must be who I get it from as we've seen in the past.....perhaps they did but couldn't find one.
I agree too many assumptions.
-
For me this was the worst programme I've seen where assumptions were made with no documentation for evidence. There was no evidence that 4x great grandma (Caroline) had come from Madagascar as a slave, or that she was a wet nurse or that Isaac was her owner who had become so grateful to her that he left her property in his will. Yet Shirley jumped on all these things as being true. And did I miss something but were we ever told who had fathered her children?
I'm not sure these women were as strong and moral as Shirley thinks they are!
A television reviewer (D.Telegraph) was also curious about the reason why Isaac left Caroline so much in his Will............
-
I wondered if Isaac was the children’s father but I would imagine that this was researched and not confirmed and those explanations offered.
An interesting article about the Otto family with a slavery connection here
https://www.stamouers.com/stamouers/surnames-n-to-q/381-otto
-
I think I found this one the most irritating of all I have seen. 'What does 'patient' mean? Can you explain that?'. And 'what does 'mixed race' mean'. As she was trying to prove she was from mixed race I thought this a stupid comment. She didn't seem to care at all that Caroline may have been a slave and made up the story as she wanted to hear it. I hope the rest of the series is better.
Rishile
-
I missed this episode, glad I did by the sound of it!
-
Have you seen ALL the documentation unearthed by the various researchers?
They do say that for every 1 hour programme, 10 hours of filming end up on the cutting room floor ;D
And we have no idea how many hours of combined research goes into each programme.
In the episode I refereed to earlier I know exactly what research was done and what was filmed locally. The program makers chose to ignore vital information (they were sent copies of original records, copied some of it when filming but completely left it out of the story). One bit they were given was ignored in the interest of making the ancestor appear to be dishonest rather than adventuresome.
-
I never said anything about Babs that was critical. ??? I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.
Sorry but I think you'll find there is little or no evidence that the Bures Deeks line have any connection to those in Glemsford. No factual evidence anyway, just wishful thinking by some researchers wanting a famous relative. There are Deeks families in parishes surrounding Bures, and the Bures PRs are pretty unreadable in places as it is, so more likely to be related to that family than those in Glemsford. Also there are claims that the family weren't in Bures that far back but my evidence from the PRs suggests otherwise. Deeks is a very common surname in that part of Suffolk and north Essex and highly unlikely all are related.
-
I quite enjoyed it. The first story showed that you shouldn't always take family stories as true and it was very sad.
I liked the South African story too. It was quite a revelation.
The link to the Da Costa family couldn’t be found or wasn’t revealed. The man at the end who put forward the possibilities e.g wet nurse did say that any connection was ‘supposition’.
I also found her a bit irritating with her responses at times. I wonder if she was just surprised to see him as a patient when she questioned that but the mixed race part did seem a bit odd as, as Rishile mentions, that was the purpose.
-
I wanted to know what happened to poor Dorothy, the adopted orphaned little girl in Boston.
Also, one of the Otto children was called Clara, like Shirley Ballas's great grandmother, but she didn't react at all to that - or at least it wasn't shown if she did.
Melbell
-
I felt it was a real 'FAKE' WDYTYA I felt it was a new programme called INABIMTR or I need a boost in my tv ratings..
She made or it seemed ... cos I think it was extremely scripted....... (whoops dots again :) ) she made, too many assumptions - so little evidence or fact.
I could run through what lead me to think this, but those who watched it will know. A WASHER WOMAN was a NEEDED TRADE did she go to Uni to acquire those skills.
Nope not a favourite.
I appreciated the mix of races and the evidence of slavery but ...
no more to say
xin
-
I never said anything about Babs that was critical. ??? I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.
Sorry but I think you'll find there is little or no evidence that the Bures Deeks line have any connection to those in Glemsford. No factual evidence anyway, just wishful thinking by some researchers wanting a famous relative. There are Deeks families in parishes surrounding Bures, and the Bures PRs are pretty unreadable in places as it is, so more likely to be related to that family than those in Glemsford. Also there are claims that the family weren't in Bures that far back but my evidence from the PRs suggests otherwise. Deeks is a very common surname in that part of Suffolk and north Essex and highly unlikely all are related.
I can assure you that I am not one of those wishful thinking types. I have a few other verified famous relatives anyway through London lines. I do not go out looking for famous relatives or royalty.
-
I'm not finding the current series anywhere near as good as the last one but, to my surprise, I found this episode quite interesting and informative. Shirley, who I'd never heard of before, asked some intelligent questions as you'd expect from someone with no experience of genealogy trying to understand the old terms, etc. and there was some interesting social history along the way. Of course she made a few huge assumptions about her ancestors based on little evidence, as most of them do . . . I may even have been guilty of a little of that myself in the early days :-[ ::)
Mike.
-
For me this was the worst programme I've seen where assumptions were made with no documentation for evidence.
Have you seen ALL the documentation unearthed by the various researchers?
They do say that for every 1 hour programme, 10 hours of filming end up on the cutting room floor ;D
And we have no idea how many hours of combined research goes into each programme.
A few years ago I went to a talk given by Nick Barrett, who was involved in the early series of WDYTYA: he said that they usually ended up with 100 hours of filiming, which was cut down to the most interesting 10 hours: then they cut that down to a one hour programme.
Cati
-
I never said anything about Babs that was critical. ??? I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.
Sorry but I think you'll find there is little or no evidence that the Bures Deeks line have any connection to those in Glemsford. No factual evidence anyway, just wishful thinking by some researchers wanting a famous relative. There are Deeks families in parishes surrounding Bures, and the Bures PRs are pretty unreadable in places as it is, so more likely to be related to that family than those in Glemsford. Also there are claims that the family weren't in Bures that far back but my evidence from the PRs suggests otherwise. Deeks is a very common surname in that part of Suffolk and north Essex and highly unlikely all are related.
I can assure you that I am not one of those wishful thinking types. I have a few other verified famous relatives anyway through London lines. I do not go out looking for famous relatives or royalty.
Perhaps then you'll not keep repeating the claim of a link between the Bures Deeks and the Glemsford Deeks without any documentary evidence. It isn't the first time you've made the comment and I've responded that there is no evidence to back it.
-
As with the big paywall genealogy sites, these programme makers are in it for the money and the gongs at the end of the day and the truth is often cast aside to make the story more profitable.
-
Of course she made a few huge assumptions about her ancestors based on little evidence, as most of them do . . . I may even have been guilty of a little of that myself in the early days :-[ ::)
Mike.
I am not sure (but could well be wrong :)) but I don’t think she, herself, made the assumptions. Any conclusions were led by the historians.
Sometimes, the person does go off into a bit of fantasy but I thought she was just told what might have been the case.
There was a good paperwork trail.
-
Of course she made a few huge assumptions about her ancestors based on little evidence, as most of them do . . . I may even have been guilty of a little of that myself in the early days :-[ ::)
Mike.
I am not sure (but could well be wrong :)) but I don’t think she, herself, made the assumptions. Any conclusions were led by the historians.
Sometimes, the person does go off into a bit of fantasy but I thought she was just told what might have been the case.
There was a good paperwork trail.
I am not sure (but could well be wrong :)) but I think she didmake all the assumptions. The historians seemed a bit bored and just kept nodding when she started assuming everything. I felt she went into said fantasy and made the story what she wanted rather than what was documented.
We all see different things even when we are watching the same thing.
Maybe I'm being a bit biased because I didn't like it as much as Boy George last week or Lee Mack the week before.
Also, is it my imagination or are they doing more definite 'walking in their shoes' this series? I've never noticed them do it so much in previous series.
Rishile
-
I much preferred the boy george and lee Mack ones too. I think this one seemed exceptionally scripted, I was shouting at the tele when she said to the one historian what does mixed race mean!
Also, maybe it was just me, but if they are throwing about theories that the lady who "inherited" (or not) the house was wet nurse/friend/former slave to the man whose will it was - why did they not put forward the possibility that he had fathered her children?
-
I watched Boy George again last evening to show a family member - enjoyed very much again.
I agree re the connection between Isaac and Caroline and the possibility of him being the children’s father.
I would have thought that his will would explain his intentions but presumably not.
-
Yep I get that -- they didn't obviously state he was 'DADDY' but I bet most of us --- did ::) ::) ::)
Why not say - the word Maybe.
Never mind, I watched it again last night to check, (well nothing else on) one or two things. Nothing improved, too much luvy duvy kissing -- eek -- but as you say one or two of the Historians, were phazed with her attitude.
Yes there was a good paper trail, shame she didn't digest it. properly --
IMO she set herself a task of SORTING the two points that she had been brought up to believe. One that she was mixed race - and Two granny ran off and left the kids.
so she must be happy that she did sort both these points out - one way or the other.
xin
-
so she must be happy that she did sort both these points out - one way or the other.
xin
It doesn't make for very interesting viewing though IMHO.
Rishile
-
Exactly :) and I am dreading the next episode..
:-[
xin
-
I much preferred the boy george and lee Mack ones too. I think this one seemed exceptionally scripted, I was shouting at the tele when she said to the one historian what does mixed race mean!
Also, maybe it was just me, but if they are throwing about theories that the lady who "inherited" (or not) the house was wet nurse/friend/former slave to the man whose will it was - why did they not put forward the possibility that he had fathered her children?
Probably because this was in South Africa? And attitudes there may well be different to the UK?
-
so she must be happy that she did sort both these points out - one way or the other.
xin
It doesn't make for very interesting viewing though IMHO.
Rishile
Exactly :) and I am dreading the next episode..
:-[
xin
I thought the content for both searches was very interesting. I can’t particularly take to Shirley Ballas and my reasons are probably very superficial but it has made me read about the Malay community in Cape Town of which I knew nothing.
It was different.
-
Now that was something, I meant to do. Learn about the 'Malay' community..
Because it really did sound interesting.
:) will do that...
xin
-
I watched the episode last night and am aware of one of the historians on the South African part who gave their view on how they felt at being part of the programme. It was quite a revelation. I found it quite moving and learnt about areas of research that were really interesting. This is just my view.
-
I've spotted many 'assumptions' in every episode but tbh I've tried to give the benefit of the doubt and think that perhaps the 'assumptions' are based on research we haven't seen due to editing.
-
Deleted. Quoted wrong post.
-
I never said anything about Babs that was critical. ??? I just said she did act surprised that she had Suffolk roots. BTW I think I am distantly related to her through her Deeks line.
Sorry but I think you'll find there is little or no evidence that the Bures Deeks line have any connection to those in Glemsford. No factual evidence anyway, just wishful thinking by some researchers wanting a famous relative. There are Deeks families in parishes surrounding Bures, and the Bures PRs are pretty unreadable in places as it is, so more likely to be related to that family than those in Glemsford. Also there are claims that the family weren't in Bures that far back but my evidence from the PRs suggests otherwise. Deeks is a very common surname in that part of Suffolk and north Essex and highly unlikely all are related.
I can assure you that I am not one of those wishful thinking types. I have a few other verified famous relatives anyway through London lines. I do not go out looking for famous relatives or royalty.
Perhaps then you'll not keep repeating the claim of a link between the Bures Deeks and the Glemsford Deeks without any documentary evidence. It isn't the first time you've made the comment and I've responded that there is no evidence to back it.
Excuse me, I never have repeated it, all I have said a couple of time is it there many be an alleged link. In the past I have not seen your responses that there is no evidence of a link and quite frankly I could not care less if I was related to her or not. I would not lose any sleep over no connection to Bures and Glemsford.
Anyway I have not come on here for a slanging match.
-
Probably because this was in South Africa? And attitudes there may well be different to the UK?
I did think that actually...or maybe the (legitimate) descendants of the man who made the will are prominent in South Africa nowadays and would have been a bit of a "scandal" ???
-
I do love the first 2 series of WDYTYA, especially Julia Sawhala, as I have Huguenot ancestors who settled in the East End. No definite proof of a connection but her ancestors came from the same village in France as mine did, and the same surname. DuBosc.
There are many people who I would love to see on WDYTYA. John Nettles, David Jason etc. Poor old Parky though, has gained a bit of a following for having "boring ancestors".
-
I do love the first 2 series of WDYTYA, especially Julia Sawhala, as I have Huguenot ancestors who settled in the East End. No definite proof of a connection but her ancestors came from the same village in France as mine did, and the same surname. DuBosc.
Julia Sawalha's Huguenot ancestor's surname was Dubock - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/whodoyouthinkyouare/past-stories/julia-sawalha.shtml. One of her relatives married into a sideline on one side of my tree.
Edit - while I suspect Coombs thinks I'm deliberately trying to pick an argument with him, I'm not sure whether DuBosc would be considered a variation of Dubock but any expert French speakers may be able to shed light on this.
-
I heard Stephen Mangan on the radio a few days ago. He said "WDYTYA came knocking, but all they could find was Irish farmers, Irish farmers, Irish farmers. So they gave up"
-
A few months ago I was contacted by a WDYTYA researcher, who had found me via RootsChat. She wouldn't say who she was researching, but I gave her the records I had and she kindly informed me later that they appeared to be correct! I'm now waiting to see if I am connected to some "celebrity" in the next series. Trouble is, I shall have to record the whole series, as I don't know who to look out for.
-
talking of gripes, it gets on my wick when they always say 'she was a strong woman' or that they have come from a line of 'strong women' or 'thats why I'm a strong women'
no they were normal people that do what normal people do, suffer hardships, have kids, get married, divorced, bereaved etc and live through it otherwise none of us would be here.
-
talking of gripes, it gets on my wick when they always say 'she was a strong woman' or that they have come from a line of 'strong women' or 'thats why I'm a strong women'
no they were normal people that do what normal people do, suffer hardships, have kids, get married, divorced, bereaved etc and live through it otherwise none of us would be here.
I agree. I also find the expression uncomfortable as it implies that other people are so-called 'weak', and that so-called 'weak' is somehow negative. I thought we were beginning to get away from that idea with attitudes changing about mental health issues etc. etc. Besides which, some people would equate 'kind' with 'weak'.
What we can never know is what support mechanisms people had around them. Yes, we can see if they lived with a number of people, but not everyone gets on with their families, and someone apparently on their own might have a multitude of friends providing support in a hundred different ways.
Documents can only tell us so much, and we find out through social history about the background in which they lived, but we absolutely cannot tell what their personalities were really like, or their relationships with people around them.
-
talking of gripes, it gets on my wick when they always say 'she was a strong woman' or that they have come from a line of 'strong women' or 'thats why I'm a strong women'
no they were normal people that do what normal people do, suffer hardships, have kids, get married, divorced, bereaved etc and live through it otherwise none of us would be here.
I also greatly dislike that term (it seems to be used a lot these days). I always wonder if by 'strong' people mean 'tough' or 'hard' ...
No one would ever refer to a male and say "he was a strong man" (unless they meant it in the physical sense). :)
-
I didn't like the Shirley Ballas episode at all, and it was all because of her manner. Her family history was very interesting and varied, however, it was herself that made it boring for me. She was very bland and unwatchable in that setting for me.
-
A few months ago I was contacted by a WDYTYA researcher, who had found me via RootsChat. She wouldn't say who she was researching, but I gave her the records I had and she kindly informed me later that they appeared to be correct! I'm now waiting to see if I am connected to some "celebrity" in the next series. Trouble is, I shall have to record the whole series, as I don't know who to look out for.
How did you know she was genuine Gillg? Not doubting you, I'm just curious. Must admit I'm suspicious of everyone. ;) ;D
-
You are kidding us Gillg
it is YOU they were after
wow -- now you must tell us all :) 'Who are you????'''
:) :) xin
-
Isn't it time they introduced some DNA evidence into WDYTYA ? We could probably learn a lot/have a good gripe about the way they interpret it. It should certainly help unlock Shirley Ballas's past and give a clue to the father of the Otto children.
Phil Goater
(who isn't quite so sure about his Goater and Langdale ancestry anymore ....)
-
As I said before:
The day they introduce DNA Testing into WDYTYA is the day I stop watching the programme. :(
-
As I said before:
The day they introduce DNA Testing into WDYTYA is the day I stop watching the programme. :(
Me too :-X
Carol
-
As I said before:
The day they introduce DNA Testing into WDYTYA is the day I stop watching the programme. :(
DNA testing was used in the most recent Australian series:
https://www.sbs.com.au/programs/who-do-you-think-you-are
(my memory of the details is vague but I remember thinking it was not much use) :)
-
I read a tiny piece in a newspaper recently by an eminent research geneticist who said that DNA testing to 'prove' anything about ancestry was a complete waste of time. (No, sorry, I can't remember the name of the authority). All the DNA companies must be laughing all the way to the bank, I suspect.
Melbell
-
I read on internet whoever did (cant remember their name )the DNA Testing on Cheddar Man it is a waste of money to have DNA test done regarding family research
-
A few months ago I was contacted by a WDYTYA researcher, who had found me via RootsChat. She wouldn't say who she was researching, but I gave her the records I had and she kindly informed me later that they appeared to be correct! I'm now waiting to see if I am connected to some "celebrity" in the next series. Trouble is, I shall have to record the whole series, as I don't know who to look out for.
How did you know she was genuine Gillg? Not doubting you, I'm just curious. Must admit I'm suspicious of everyone. ;) ;D
Roobarb - I looked her up on the net and found her to be a bone fide researcher and historian! We also had a long telephone conversation where we shared information and we also shared several emails, particularly after she had been to the appropriate Record Office to check stuff.
Xinia, I'm afraid I have to disappoint you. I'm certainly not a celebrity and haven't a clue which present day figure she was researching, though I do know which branch of my ancestors she was interested in. Maybe she will decide that we, like Parkinson, are too boring!
-
I read a tiny piece in a newspaper recently by an eminent research geneticist who said that DNA testing to 'prove' anything about ancestry was a complete waste of time. (No, sorry, I can't remember the name of the authority). All the DNA companies must be laughing all the way to the bank, I suspect.
Melbell
I think DNA testing was used in a couple of instances in the last Australian series. It didn't reveal much but I think one celeb was trying to prove a family story about having an ancestor from a different ethnicity (which was true). In this case the ancestor's name gave a pretty good clue where he came from.
(I might be getting my celeb's stories mixed up though because I did binge watch a few episodes at a time). :)
-
I am actually enjoying the current series. I found the Shirley Ballas episode very interesting and did not have a problem that not all the mysteries were resolved; that's the nature of genealogy. The subject is rarely a researcher and they are expected to comment on their findings and make a summary so I guess they will inevitably tend to bestow positive attributes on their ancestors. I take that part with a pinch of salt. The best episode this series so far for me was without a doubt the Olivia Coleman one. I would really be interested to see a programme on "The Making of WDYTYA" and would also enjoy seeing a scientist subject - Steve Jones would be a good choice being a geneticist.
-
Thanks fro clarifying Gillg, sounds very interesting. :)
-
Re the Shirley Ballas episode I was looking around Prince Albert and Queen Victoria’s residence on the Isle of Wight - Osborne House - today and was intrigued to find a portrait of a young lady described as ‘A Malay from the Cape’ hanging in the corridor just before the magnificent Durbar room.
Phil
-
This one? https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/403751/georgina-manan
-
Yes! Wow, that was quick!
Phil
-
I think our modern generations are too quick to jump to conclusions when a family story is handed down that "he left his family" - What a selfish cad. There's no thought given to the circumstances of why that might have happened, even though we can see on TV that thousands of men have left their families to seek work. I've come across several centuries old parish registers that have recorded an unknown stranger was found dead and had been buried at Parish expense - poor fellow must have starved to death after trudging miles looking for work.
We hear stories of strict workhouse rules and look at photos of the uniformed, neatly dressed residents and think "What an awful place". Yes the adults had to work if they were able but the children had free medical aid, free basic education and often were taught a trade - both the latter skills had to be paid for outside of those places. Yet, because the whole family is "together", we don't mind if theyre living in a home where the floor may well be cold quarried flagstones laid on soil and when it rained the room became extremely damp; fetching water from a nearby community water pump and sharing a dry lavatory with several families living in the same terrace block of houses. When a family doesn't have much food to eat then there's bound to be cases of diarrhea that somebody in the community has to clean up.
Back in the early 1970s I watched a TV series entitled "Sam", which portrayed the slump between the wars and more or less mirrored the dire straights described in many WDYTYA programmes. When times were hard they had to pawn a few possessions, buying them back if they found work. Then when there was nothing left to pawn the family had to approach the Dole Office for funds. Did you know that if the inspecting officer discovered you had even so much as a mattress you wouldn't receive a penny before you sold it. In the TV series, Sam's family did have a mattress which they had to hide before the official visited - but where could they hide it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_(1973_TV_series)
-
Thanks for that Rena, It does need mentioning.. So many came down to the midlands for work. Whilst the family stayed up North.. Railway building.
Is that the 'Sam' series that was the chap who was 'Taggart'----- I loved that series.
GOSH that is an extremely badly written sentence...
but after yesterday - my mind is blown.
xin
just re read this ... keyboard making mischief again as well as my brain
-
Thanks for that Rena, It does need mentioning.. So many came down to the midlsterands for work. Whilst the family stayed up North.. Railway building.
Is that the 'Sam' series that was the chap who was 'Taggart'----- I loved that series.
GOSH that is an extremely badly written sentence...
but after yesterday - my mind is blown.
xin
Love your strapline Xinia! :)
-
Thanks for that Rena, It does need mentioning.. So many came down to the midlsterands for work. Whilst the family stayed up North.. Railway building.
Is that the 'Sam' series that was the chap who was 'Taggart'----- I loved that series.
GOSH that is an extremely badly written sentence...
but after yesterday - my mind is blown.
xin
Great minds think alike xin - Yes, it was the Taggart man, actor Mark McManus who played "Sam" as an adult - unfortunately I can't recall the name of the excellent child actor who played young Sam.
My maternal grandfather born mid 1880s in Wisbech, Cambridgeshire was one of those who left their family home and travelled nearly 100 miles to Hull, East Yokshire to find work as a labourer on the docks. It's a good job he did, because he met and married my grandmother in Hull, otherwise I wouldn't be here :-) (she's my avatar with their 2 oldest children)-
Coincidentally, today I had a builder repairing my roof and he found an abandoned bird's nest under the slates with a dead fledgling in it. This prompted me to describe how my maternal grandparents sometimes had to provide food to feed the family. g/f would make a noose on the end of a piece of string and lay it on the ground. A tug on the string would tighten the noose around the bird's legs. My grandmother would pluck the feathers off the tiny birds, clean the innards and bake them in a pie. I never thought to ask her if she put four and twenty blackbirds in each of her pies.
-
Thanks for that Rena, It does need mentioning.. So many came down to the midlsterands for work. Whilst the family stayed up North.. Railway building.
Is that the 'Sam' series that was the chap who was 'Taggart'----- I loved that series.
GOSH that is an extremely badly written sentence...
but after yesterday - my mind is blown.
xin
Love your strapline Xinia! :)
I have had to go and recover it... :) I let the Yorkes have a rest and put away the Wrights and their endless 'bush' family habits to try and gather myself. Impossible
;D ;)
I am having bother with the keyboard again, it wipes what I type.. and inserts in the wrong places... so cannot answer today ... sorry need to get it fixed.. so hard to type arrgh
-
I do love the first 2 series of WDYTYA, especially Julia Sawhala, as I have Huguenot ancestors who settled in the East End. No definite proof of a connection but her ancestors came from the same village in France as mine did, and the same surname. DuBosc.
Julia Sawalha's Huguenot ancestor's surname was Dubock - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/whodoyouthinkyouare/past-stories/julia-sawalha.shtml. One of her relatives married into a sideline on one side of my tree.
Edit - while I suspect Coombs thinks I'm deliberately trying to pick an argument with him, I'm not sure whether DuBosc would be considered a variation of Dubock but any expert French speakers may be able to shed light on this.
I am also a descendant of the Dubocks (and various spelling variants!) - my 6x gt grandmother was Ann Dubock, daughter of Isaac Dubock (b c. 1721), who was the son of Isaac Dubock (b c. 1696) who was the son of Charles Dubock (b c. 1657 - think this was the chap who came over from Normandy to England). I think Charles Dubock's parents might have been Abraham Dubock and Jeanne Martin.
Not sure that this gives me huge amounts of kinship with Julia Sawalha though! (I must check again where her Dubocks link in)
-
I am also a descendant of the Dubocks (and various spelling variants!) - my 6x gt grandmother was Ann Dubock, daughter of Isaac Dubock (b c. 1721), who was the son of Isaac Dubock (b c. 1696) who was the son of Charles Dubock (b c. 1657 - think this was the chap who came over from Normandy to England). I think Charles Dubock's parents might have been Abraham Dubock and Jeanne Martin.
Not sure that this gives me huge amounts of kinship with Julia Sawalha though! (I must check again where her Dubocks link in)
My interest in Dubock relates to the descendants of Edward Dubock and Susannah Briggs who married 20 Feb 1792 at St Botolph Bishopsgate. Susannah's father Thomas was the half brother of one of my ancestors (although a number of online trees list her with different parents, her father's Will confirms her identity). According to the records of the French Hospital Edward was the son of George Dubock and grandson of an Isaac Dubock born in France. Where or which Isaac that is I don't know as its not my directline so haven't followed it backwards.
-
A few months ago I was contacted by a WDYTYA researcher, who had found me via RootsChat. She wouldn't say who she was researching, but I gave her the records I had and she kindly informed me later that they appeared to be correct! I'm now waiting to see if I am connected to some "celebrity" in the next series. Trouble is, I shall have to record the whole series, as I don't know who to look out for.
Could it have been last night's episode, since there was mention of a Feary from Huntingdonshire?
-
I read a tiny piece in a newspaper recently by an eminent research geneticist who said that DNA testing to 'prove' anything about ancestry was a complete waste of time. (No, sorry, I can't remember the name of the authority). All the DNA companies must be laughing all the way to the bank, I suspect.
Melbell
I imagine that researcher had their words misrepresented or was speaking very broadly. One of the first things I did after getting my DNA results was connect one woman's ancestor as a previously undiscovered brother of one of my own Irish ancestors.
Perhaps they were referring to ethnicity estimates which are indeed mostly fluff.
-
Could it have been last night's episode, since there was mention of a Feary from Huntingdonshire?
It was.
Gillg was after Thomasina of Warboys - Thomasina was the first-born illegitimate child of Elizabeth, who was the mother of the Louise Voss in last night's episode. Elizabeth had her child, then married Richard. Elizabeth & Richard had a few children, one of whom was the Louise, the main focus of last night's episode.
-
Oh, no! And I missed it! And I did ask the researcher to let me know when it was coming on, too! Must try and find it on iPlayer/Catchup or whatever. Thomasin (Lawson) wasn't actually from Warboys, but from Eynesbury and she was married to John Fairey/Fairy/Feary/Farey, etc. of Easton, Hunts., so her mother was Elizabeth Lawson, who later married Richard Voss. Elizabeth became the mother of naughty Louisa Voss - it will be interesting to see how much of her naughtiness was revealed in the programme. I suspect that the father of her illegitimate child was also a Farey, but from a different Warboys family and as far as I know not related to my Faireys.
-
Oh, no! And I missed it! And I did ask the researcher to let me know when it was coming on, too! Must try and find it on iPlayer/Catchup or whatever. Thomasin (Lawson) wasn't actually from Warboys, but from Eynesbury and she was married to John Fairey/Fairy/Feary/Farey, etc. of Easton, Hunts., so her mother was Elizabeth Lawson, who later married Richard Voss. Elizabeth became the mother of naughty Louisa Voss - it will be interesting to see how much of her naughtiness was revealed in the programme. I suspect that the father of her illegitimate child was also a Farey, but from a different Warboys family and as far as I know not related to my Faireys.
The show is repeated tonight at 11.45pm on BBC 1
-
They did seem to reveal quite a lot of her naughtiness, whether you know more though you can let us know when you've recorded/watched the programme that's on late tonight, or on iplayer.
I enjoyed last night's programme, Johnny Peacock appeared very interested and didn't blub once, until the very end, even then it wasn't really blubbing. I think he was hoping Louisa Voss would have died of old age after her hard life and when he found out she hadn't, his eyes started watering.
-
Finally managed to watch the programme and was a little disappointed to see that my Thomasin, half-sister of Louisa, wasn't mentioned. I had supplied a lot of information to the researcher, taking Louisa's family back another two or three generations, but that wasn't used, and I guess Louisa was more interesting, especially as there was a good trail of records for her and her children.
-
They used to show the parts of the recordings that they didn't have time to fit into the main programme on the WDYTYA magazine website, but I can't see anything for this series. Perhaps they don't do it for a couple or so weeks after the final programme - which was this one.
-
I'll keep my open for that. Thanks, Lizzie. :)
-
WDYTYA researchers take a good deal of care in following up records, so it was a pity that Jane Rackham of the Radio Times in her Pick of the Day piece on 20th August wasn't so careful. She managed to confuse two of Jonnie Peacock's ancestors, both named Louisa and wrote that Louisa Pope b 1885 and not her grandmother Louisa Voss b c1831 was the mother of 4 illegitimate children. Louisa Voss is the one we call "naughty Louisa" for obvious reasons and was the half-sister of my 4xgt-grandmother.