Re: RSL: New K Surnames, July 2008 Update Open before Sunday Display email <http://re.inbox47.host/viewmessage?id=5c83a1a2b83a8800014b8127&K1oLQQA=Saturday&w6W5OqCxzpI=Rootsweb_XcvXLQ> 06:21:06 (Rootsweb)

On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 1:18:36 AM UTC-8, Bronwen Edwards wrote: > After finally throwing out the pedigrees for Shelton that go back into the Tudor court, I have found a number of ways in which wannabe-Tudors got things mixed up. I say this because that pedigree is by far the most published by amateurs and websites. Sir Rauffe Shelton of Beoley was not born in 1560 but c. 1537. He did not die in 1628 on the Isle of Rhe, but on 31 Mar 1611. His 1st wife had been Anne Throckmorton. His 2nd wife was Jane West, whose 1st husband was Thomas Wenman (she had, in all, 4 husbands). This info came from Genealogics. Although others had given her the b/d dates of 1558-bef 1606, Leo did not provide dates. Here is where so many wishful thinkers got it wrong. They show Jane West as daughter of Thomas West, 2nd Baron Delaware (1555-1602), even though she is also shown being born when he was about 3 years old. He is likely her brother and it was he who married Anne Knollys, dau. of Sir Francis Knollys and Catherine Carey, daughter of "the Other Boleyn Girl" Mary and, possibly, Henry VIII. Speculation about Catherine's father is rampant and has been made into a movie. HOWEVER Leo shows Jane West who married Rauffe Shelton as daughter of William West, 1st Baron Delaware (1520-1595) and Elizabeth Strange of Chesterton. They married in 1555, giving Jane the 1558 birth date, but not the possible link to Tudor. Leo does not follow the children of Rauffe and Jane West, but only the children of Rauffe and Anne Throckmorton. I don't know if this represents childlessness or if it is simply a line he chose not to follow. So far I have found no reason to connect any of these people to the Sarah Shelton who married Richard Gissage in Virginia at the beginning of the 18th c.

On 09/12/2017 01:18, Joe Roberts wrote: > "Steve Hayes" wrote: >> Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: >> >>> On 09/11/2017 4:13 am, Steve Hayes wrote: >>>> The last couple of times I've been to the Find-a-Grave site I've been >>>> taken to the new one, and have pretty quickly switched back to the >>>> old, because the new one is so difficult to use, mainly because it's >>>> much harder to read on screen. >>>> >>>> My review here: >>>> >>>> https://t.co/KVyo9ZxFIq >>>> >>>> It's fine for people to update web sites, provided the new one is >>>> better than the old, but in this case they should have heeded the old >>>> motto: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. >>> >>> The new search facilities are fine except for one tiny problem: they >>> are, for me anyhow, restricted to the USA and Canada, nothing in the >>> British Isles. >> >> I haven't tried searching with the new one, because I find it too >> difficult to read what's on the screen to even find out how to do it. >> >> -- >> Steve Hayes >> http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm >> http://khanya.wordpress.com > > > Regarding the new Find-a-Grave site: > > I'll be brief. It's awful. > > On the old site, each person's Memorial page was concise and complete. It > offered clear links to more information and sources if desired. > > The new site shows less, and now requires more clicks to go hunting for > anything else that "might" be there. > > It appears to be a way for displaying advertising. > > Do they care? > They certainly care for the advertising. -- Graeme Wall This account not read.

On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 18:44:47 +0000, Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> wrote: >On 09/11/2017 4:13 am, Steve Hayes wrote: >> The last couple of times I've been to the Find-a-Grave site I've been >> taken to the new one, and have pretty quickly switched back to the >> old, because the new one is so difficult to use, mainly because it's >> much harder to read on screen. >> >> My review here: >> >> https://t.co/KVyo9ZxFIq >> >> It's fine for people to update web sites, provided the new one is >> better than the old, but in this case they should have heeded the old >> motto: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. > >The new search facilities are fine except for one tiny problem: they >are, for me anyhow, restricted to the USA and Canada, nothing in the >British Isles. I haven't tried searching with the new one, because I find it too difficult to read what's on the screen to even find out how to do it. -- Steve Hayes http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm http://khanya.wordpress.com

"Steve Hayes" wrote: > Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: > >>On 09/11/2017 4:13 am, Steve Hayes wrote: >>> The last couple of times I've been to the Find-a-Grave site I've been >>> taken to the new one, and have pretty quickly switched back to the >>> old, because the new one is so difficult to use, mainly because it's >>> much harder to read on screen. >>> >>> My review here: >>> >>> https://t.co/KVyo9ZxFIq >>> >>> It's fine for people to update web sites, provided the new one is >>> better than the old, but in this case they should have heeded the old >>> motto: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. >> >>The new search facilities are fine except for one tiny problem: they >>are, for me anyhow, restricted to the USA and Canada, nothing in the >>British Isles. > > I haven't tried searching with the new one, because I find it too > difficult to read what's on the screen to even find out how to do it. > > -- > Steve Hayes > http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm > http://khanya.wordpress.com Regarding the new Find-a-Grave site: I'll be brief. It's awful. On the old site, each person's Memorial page was concise and complete. It offered clear links to more information and sources if desired. The new site shows less, and now requires more clicks to go hunting for anything else that "might" be there. It appears to be a way for displaying advertising. Do they care? Joe

On 09/11/2017 4:13 am, Steve Hayes wrote: > The last couple of times I've been to the Find-a-Grave site I've been > taken to the new one, and have pretty quickly switched back to the > old, because the new one is so difficult to use, mainly because it's > much harder to read on screen. > > My review here: > > https://t.co/KVyo9ZxFIq > > It's fine for people to update web sites, provided the new one is > better than the old, but in this case they should have heeded the old > motto: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. The new search facilities are fine except for one tiny problem: they are, for me anyhow, restricted to the USA and Canada, nothing in the British Isles. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

ADDENDUM: Gilgamesh, is listed by definition, in the Ancient History Encyclopedia, as being "the oldest piece of epic Western literature", which is totally false, as it was composed from Hebrew Biblical Literature, going back to 4000 BC. For example, an item taken from The Epic of Gilgamesh, in Tablet VI.  . . . "Anu addressed princess Ishtar, saying: "If you demand the Bull of Heaven from me, there will be seven years of empty husks for the land of Uruk. Have you collected grain for the people! Have you made grasses grow for the animals?" Ishtar addressed Anu, her father, saying: "I have heaped grain in the granaries for the people, I made grasses grow for the animals, in order that they might eat in the seven years of empty husks. I have collected grain for the people, I have made grasses grow for the animals." When Anu heard her words, he placed the noserope of the Bull of Heaven in her hand. Ishtar led the Bull of Heaven down to the earth." Biblical remake by Mesopotamians, of the Joseph in Egypt and Seven Years of Famine. "The interpretation of dreams in ancient Mesopotamia can be found in its literature, such as the famous Epic of Gilgamesh and the Atrahasis." It is immediately obvious, from a professional genealogical research standpoint, that the Gilgamesh legend was compiled by a group of magicians, like those in the court of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, who severely resisted the ancient prophet Moses. I note that Joseph was thirty years old when he married Asenath, the daughter of Potipherah, Prince and Priest of On, ca 1781/1721 B.C.; the Gilgamesh writing was concocted after this period. Indeed, that: "Gilgmesh was buried at the bottom of the Euphrates when the waters parted upon his death." This was taken from actual history of Moses dividing the sea for the Israelite nation to pass through on dry land, time wise to have been undertaken before Joshua died. Truth, as in records research, testifies of itself. Or, to put it in other words, professional genealogical research expertise comes by evaluating current alleged statements of fact, past alleged statements of fact, and that the fact projections of these evidences will be repeated again, for alleged future generations. Intelligent observation is independent of the dimension of time. Contradictory evidence derived from non-believers, is found in the beginning of record keeping, and exists so today. Faith based records note contradictions. Skeptics delete the full exposition of their opposites, for fear of exposure by comparison, as in all parts of society today. Scripture Biography Comprehending All The Names Mentioned In The Old and New Testaments notes estate dispositions. "The right of eminent domain is the claim of sovereignty by the state over all property within the state. "In the beginning, the "State" was Patriarchal; biblical record grantees Adam and Eve, were given co-equal, legal and lawful, exclusive dominion rights. It is tremendously obvious: records were handed down entitlement records, to the valid heirs of property rights, from the very first entries in the records themselves, just like today's business or real estate records, according to kept covenants of proper social - civil discourse. For established genealogically recognized kinship links, see subset reference from Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics - Kinship Terms. https://www.ancient.eu/gilgamesh/ http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/gilgamesh/tab6.htm https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/gen/41 http://www.ancient-origins.net/myths-legends/egyptian-dream-book-001621 http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-ancient-traditions/oneiromancy-and-dream-predictions-ancient-mesopotamia-005726 http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/ascension-gilgamesh-did-epic-hero-actually-exist-008782?nopaging=1 https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/93 https://books.google.com/books?id=wfhYmehZtHwC&pg=PA27&lpg=PA27&dq=testamentary+covenant+posterity+records&source=bl&ots=kE-E9z7ZaN&sig=ATKdXW5K2IZ7aCOrFD2_0Sdd1D4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjXopSUzd_XAhUOwmMKHfSNDFMQ6AEIKzAB#v=onepage&q=testamentary%20covenant%20posterity%20records&f=false http://www.rodneychrisman.com/2011/02/03/biblical-examples-of-property-transactions/ http://jewishstudies.rutgers.edu/docman/rendsburg/592-ehll-kinship-terms/file . . . The most explicit description of the various kinship units in ancient Israel is found in Joshua 7: 16-18. Joshua first begins his identity search, by calling out the "tribe"; next the "clan" within the "tribe"; next the "house" within the "clan" within the "tribe"; next the "male individuals" within the "house" within the "clan" within the "tribe". The record indicates therefore the hierarchy of kinship and the relationship between kinship units, going back to the time of Moses; which descends from the time of Joseph in Egypt, going back to Abraham and his fathers, back to the time of Shem, son of Noah, and backwards in time, up and until the time of Adam and Eve. Jeff A. Benner states: "When we look at all the names of Adam's descendent we find that all the names from Adam to Noah and his children are Hebrew names, meaning that their name has a meaning in Hebrew. For instance, Methuselah (Genesis 5:21) is Hebrew for "his death brings" (The flood occurred the year that he died)." I state contextually, that the Biblical records indicate pre-flood name identities followed a similar pattern of patriarchal name meanings, later found in ancient Hebrew usage, and along with similar kinship patterns found in the genealogies, validates that these records are historical renditions, in their general substance and outlines, as handed down, contemporaneously written records. The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus, further confirm record continuity; namely: "But I shall endeavor, hereafter, to delineate the chronology running back from myself to the beginning of the creation, for the records have come into my hands, which I hold unto this present time." Point in fact: "Within the domestic setting, there are two types of 'male servant', the one purchased with silver . . . and the one born in the household . . ." When Jesus Christ was betrayed by one of His own apostles, for thirty pieces of silver, it was the exact price paid anciently to a master of a slave who was killed (Exodus 21:32), indicating total High Priest contempt of Jesus Christ, as someone foreign born, outside the House of Israel. The payment was made to the traitorous apostle, as if he was the master of Jesus Christ. Jehovah was turned over to the authority of Rome, as a total outcast; a firstborn male goat sin offering, murdered, His innocent blood first dripping from every pore of His body, because of His extreme anguish for the wickedness of all mankind, in the garden of Gethsemane, and then spilt when gored upon the cross, by a Roman spear, at the hill of Golgotha, just outside the city wall of Jerusalem. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/josh/7?lang=eng http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/language_history.html https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/1.28 The balance needed in doing family genealogy and history research, takes additionally into account, all forms of romance literature and hagiography; or, the biography of individuals mentioned in any of the world's spiritual traditions, such as Gilgamesh, or even Adam, as pure love (charity) is core to marriage ties, and the central bonding of all real pedigrees. The point is this: {Adam and Eve} is in fact real romantic, emotional in its presentation; namely: Eve became fallen and begged her husband Adam to partake also, so that they could continue to be together, even in death. Adam sacrificed eternal blissful existence, so that he could cleave to (remain with) his wife. This was an intellectual decision, not one generated from physical desires, as Adam was still in an innocent state, as a little boy or an infant, before he partook of the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. Gilgamesh, on the other hand, is total, kingdom centered fabrications of origin, based on force. Eve voluntarily sustained Adam as her head (her desire), the patriarchal order, because he died with her, and for her and their future posterity. "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." Any valiant man or woman, following in the footsteps of Adam and Eve, would sacrifice in an instant, their own lives, to save the lives of their own children, or each other. Cuneiform references to Gilgamesh are a cycle of Sumerian murder mystery novels. The most comprehensive telling of the Gilgamesh legend, (twelve-tablet Standard Babylonian Version); it is presented as being compiled by exorcist-priest (mašmaššu) Sîn-lēqi-unninni. http://www.worldcat.org/title/communicating-across-time-female-genealogies-in-the-medieval-literary-imagination/oclc/1004780204&referer=brief_results https://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/1-cor/11.3,11 https://www.lds.org/manual/the-pearl-of-great-price-student-manual/the-book-of-moses?lang=eng https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%AEn-l%C4%93qi-unninni

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 08:24:50 -0500, Gary <gary_w1@hotmail.com> wrote: >I'd like to create a series of index cards, one per family group, in >order to make my research more thorough. I seem to remember older apps >that allowed you to do this automatically for all families. Now I >cannot find anytrhing that permits it. > >Does anybody klnow of a program that will generate all family groups >and created a printed report I can edit and print out on cards? Unfortunately the only way I know of doing that is to go into software archaeology. I had (still have) two apps that will print out 3x5" or 6x4" cards from a PAF 2.x database, though I think both of them only did it one family at a time. And unfortunately the PAF 2.x database is not Y2K compatible, so any dates after 1999 will produce errors. I'll crosspost this to soc.genealogy.computing in case anyone there has had any news of more recent software that can do this. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:04:03 +0000, Charles Ellson <ce11son@yahoo.ca> wrote: >On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:49:01 +0200, Steve Hayes ><hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote: > >>On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:15:28 +0000, Ian Goddard >><goddai01@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >> >>>> My question is: >>>> >>>> Which denomination, operating in Wingate in County Durham in 1869, >>>> recorded the race of people being baptised, but not the name of the >>>> mother? >>>> >>>> Or is this not actually a transcription at all, but just some clown >>>> entering stuff that isn't there, and leaving out stuff that is there? >>>> >>>> An image of the register was not available when I looked, but I wonder >>>> if anyone who has access to that particular record can confirm that it >>>> mentioned the race, but not the name of the mother. >>>> >>>> I accept that transcroptions can be inaccurate, but transcribers >>>> making stuff up is somwething else. >>> >>>I think what happens is that a transcriber has an input screen which >>>doesn't clear between entries; they just overtype the names & dates and, >>>supposedly the parish when they start on a new parish or church. The >>>reason I think this happens is that I've seen transcriptions where they >>>appear to have switched from one church to another and end up with a >>>field like Residence Place displaying contents from another parish - >>>they've just not noticed that they've run onto a new batch of data. >>> >>>It looks as if, in this case, they've strayed onto Wingate from some >>>other place where race would be a field to capture. >> >>That's quite possible, I suppose. >> >>Another question related to this is that they quite often put in a >>"Residence" field, but After looking at a number of them I am quite >>sceptical about this, because I don't think it is transcribed from the >>"Abode" field of CofE registers, but rather taken from the location of >>the parish church itself. >> >>This can be misleading, as people sometimes lived some distance from >>the parish church. Where FamilySearch make an image available (which >>they sometimes do), I try to check the Abode and Occupation fields, >>but this is not always possible. >> >The current qualification for local residence in England WRT marriage >is only seven days so that detail has to be taken with a pinch of >salt. >[http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00644/SN00644.pdf] >Lower mobility in the past might have >might ^H^H^H^H^H made >that detail resemble the >facts somewhat better but IME it still often has to be interpreted as >e.g. "he/she would be resident here if he/she wasn't permanently(-ish) >employed in <another place>".

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:49:01 +0200, Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote: >On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:15:28 +0000, Ian Goddard ><goddai01@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > >>> My question is: >>> >>> Which denomination, operating in Wingate in County Durham in 1869, >>> recorded the race of people being baptised, but not the name of the >>> mother? >>> >>> Or is this not actually a transcription at all, but just some clown >>> entering stuff that isn't there, and leaving out stuff that is there? >>> >>> An image of the register was not available when I looked, but I wonder >>> if anyone who has access to that particular record can confirm that it >>> mentioned the race, but not the name of the mother. >>> >>> I accept that transcroptions can be inaccurate, but transcribers >>> making stuff up is somwething else. >> >>I think what happens is that a transcriber has an input screen which >>doesn't clear between entries; they just overtype the names & dates and, >>supposedly the parish when they start on a new parish or church. The >>reason I think this happens is that I've seen transcriptions where they >>appear to have switched from one church to another and end up with a >>field like Residence Place displaying contents from another parish - >>they've just not noticed that they've run onto a new batch of data. >> >>It looks as if, in this case, they've strayed onto Wingate from some >>other place where race would be a field to capture. > >That's quite possible, I suppose. > >Another question related to this is that they quite often put in a >"Residence" field, but After looking at a number of them I am quite >sceptical about this, because I don't think it is transcribed from the >"Abode" field of CofE registers, but rather taken from the location of >the parish church itself. > >This can be misleading, as people sometimes lived some distance from >the parish church. Where FamilySearch make an image available (which >they sometimes do), I try to check the Abode and Occupation fields, >but this is not always possible. > The current qualification for local residence in England WRT marriage is only seven days so that detail has to be taken with a pinch of salt. [http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00644/SN00644.pdf] Lower mobility in the past might have might that detail resemble the facts somewhat better but IME it still often has to be interpreted as e.g. "he/she would be resident here if he/she wasn't permanently(-ish) employed in <another place>".

I'd like to create a series of index cards, one per family group, in order to make my research more thorough. I seem to remember older apps that allowed you to do this automatically for all families. Now I cannot find anytrhing that permits it. Does anybody klnow of a program that will generate all family groups and created a printed report I can edit and print out on cards? --

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:53:45 -0500, "catalpa" <catalpa@entertab.org> wrote: > >"Steve Hayes" <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote in message >news:51tp1dhm3v78sbn4vfv3997tne2v4gj1is@4ax.com... >> Is ruling in the genes? All presidents bar one are directly descended >> from a medieval English king >> >> 12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. >> presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215 >> Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John >> >> <SNIP> >> > > >This is a huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge heap of nonsense. > >How do you trace all those ancestors in the 1300s, 1400s, 1500s and 1600s ? > >Most people can't even name or track down their great-grandparents. > >All my ancestors were dirt poor starving peasants. As Denis Beauregard says, it is enough to know that the researcher is 12 years old. I've been researching my children's ancestry for over 40 years, and have not got further back than the 16th century on any line, and on most of those there are some dubious links. How can a 12-year-old have done the same for so many people in such a short time? Admittedly US presidents are celebs of a sort, and so more people may have already have done some research on their ancestry, and she was probably piggy-backing on that. But still, how accurate is such research? -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

"Steve Hayes" <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote in message news:51tp1dhm3v78sbn4vfv3997tne2v4gj1is@4ax.com... > Is ruling in the genes? All presidents bar one are directly descended > from a medieval English king > > 12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. > presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215 > Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John > > <SNIP> > > This is a huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge heap of nonsense. How do you trace all those ancestors in the 1300s, 1400s, 1500s and 1600s ? Most people can't even name or track down their great-grandparents. All my ancestors were dirt poor starving peasants. If it turns out I have any royal blood I'll abdicate !

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote on 28 Nov 2017 in soc.genealogy.britain: > As to why van Buren is not descended from John, the clue is in the name. > His ancestry was Dutch. For us genealogist the clue would be in his tree. The "why" is nonsense as long as the fact is not established. How would you know he was not a descendant? You would have to have Martin's complete tree. The North Sea at the timespan in question was not a unsurmountable sperm or egg barrier! -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:35:15 +0200, Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote in soc.genealogy.misc: >Is ruling in the genes? All presidents bar one are directly descended >from a medieval English king > > 12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. >presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215 > Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John The keyword of the article here "12-year-old girl". There is a web site that is already publishing the genealogy of presidents and already linking them to some royalty. Something like warc. As for the main statement, I found that from a study from 100 couples married in Quebec in 1939-1940 that 84% of them have some royal ancestry. And if I keep only those with a French catholic ancestry, i.e. those for which I can easily build a complete tree, this jumps to 96%. Applying the same to USA will give similar results, i.e. most people with old USA roots will have some royal ancestors. That said, you should post your question to s.g.medieval ! Denis -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1785 - On CD-ROM to 1785

On 28/11/17 05:35, Steve Hayes wrote: > Is ruling in the genes? All presidents bar one are directly descended > from a medieval English king > > 12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. > presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215 > Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John > > By Snejana Farberov > > Published: 02:14 GMT, 5 August 2012 | Updated: 05:58 GMT, 5 August > 2012 > > (So not new, but interesting none the less -- I wonder if anyone has > checked her work?) > > <URL:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2183858/All-presidents-bar-directly-descended-medieval-English-king.html> > > What do Barack Obama, Thomas Jefferson, George W. Bush and the other > past U.S. presidents have in common? Besides holding the coveted title > of commander-in-chief, it appears that all of them but one are > cousins. > > The remarkable discovery was made by 12-year-old BridgeAnne d’Avignon, > of Salinas, California, who created a ground-breaking family tree that > connected 42 of 43 U.S. presidents to one common, and rather > unexpected, ancestor: King John of England. > There are a couple of factors to consider. 1. The genealogist's syllogism: we need a name here, this is a name, it must go here (cf. the politician's syllogism). There is a reluctance to say "I don't know" when presented with a choice of alternatives (of which none may be the correct ancestor) and, picking one, there is a tendency to pick a high status name. 2. The founder effect. Early European migrants to N America are likely to have more descendants than later immigrants by virtue of there being more generations between then and now and so are overrepresented in the present population. Such migration required capital and maybe religious/political incentives; these are more likely to have been higher status individuals at home and more likely to have had a royal descent - or at least have ancestors who claimed that, see 1. -- Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng at austonley org uk

On 28/11/2017 05:35, Steve Hayes wrote: > Is ruling in the genes? All presidents bar one are directly descended > from a medieval English king > > 12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. > presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215 > Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John > My wife is descended from King John[1], should she be the next president? Many people are, it's an inevitable consequence of simple arithmetic and the number of generations in between. You probably are and I probably am, though I am unlikely to ever be able to prove it.[2] Absolutely nothing to do with genetic disposition (after 22 generations???) As to why van Buren is not descended from John, the clue is in the name. His ancestry was Dutch. [1] John is her 22-great-grandfather. [2] My family disappear somewhere in Berkshire in the mid 18th century. -- Graeme Wall This account not read.

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 03:06:25 +0000, Charles Ellson <ce11son@yahoo.ca> wrote: >>It looks as if, in this case, they've strayed onto Wingate from some >>other place where race would be a field to capture. >> >That is not a detail that I would be expected to be recorded in a 19th >century English parish register, there is no allocated position for it >in a standard register. Indeed. I think Ian's explanation may be correct, but transcribers need to be more careful that they do not transcribe stuff that is not there, and leave out still that is there. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:15:28 +0000, Ian Goddard <goddai01@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >> My question is: >> >> Which denomination, operating in Wingate in County Durham in 1869, >> recorded the race of people being baptised, but not the name of the >> mother? >> >> Or is this not actually a transcription at all, but just some clown >> entering stuff that isn't there, and leaving out stuff that is there? >> >> An image of the register was not available when I looked, but I wonder >> if anyone who has access to that particular record can confirm that it >> mentioned the race, but not the name of the mother. >> >> I accept that transcroptions can be inaccurate, but transcribers >> making stuff up is somwething else. > >I think what happens is that a transcriber has an input screen which >doesn't clear between entries; they just overtype the names & dates and, >supposedly the parish when they start on a new parish or church. The >reason I think this happens is that I've seen transcriptions where they >appear to have switched from one church to another and end up with a >field like Residence Place displaying contents from another parish - >they've just not noticed that they've run onto a new batch of data. > >It looks as if, in this case, they've strayed onto Wingate from some >other place where race would be a field to capture. That's quite possible, I suppose. Another question related to this is that they quite often put in a "Residence" field, but After looking at a number of them I am quite sceptical about this, because I don't think it is transcribed from the "Abode" field of CofE registers, but rather taken from the location of the parish church itself. This can be misleading, as people sometimes lived some distance from the parish church. Where FamilySearch make an image available (which they sometimes do), I try to check the Abode and Occupation fields, but this is not always possible. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

Is ruling in the genes? All presidents bar one are directly descended from a medieval English king 12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215 Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John By Snejana Farberov Published: 02:14 GMT, 5 August 2012 | Updated: 05:58 GMT, 5 August 2012 (So not new, but interesting none the less -- I wonder if anyone has checked her work?) <URL:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2183858/All-presidents-bar-directly-descended-medieval-English-king.html> What do Barack Obama, Thomas Jefferson, George W. Bush and the other past U.S. presidents have in common? Besides holding the coveted title of commander-in-chief, it appears that all of them but one are cousins. The remarkable discovery was made by 12-year-old BridgeAnne d’Avignon, of Salinas, California, who created a ground-breaking family tree that connected 42 of 43 U.S. presidents to one common, and rather unexpected, ancestor: King John of England. ‘They all have the trait of wanting power,’ d’Avignon told the station WFMY. Budding genealogist: BridgeAnne d'Avignon created a family tree that connected 42 of 43 U.S. presidents to one common ancestor History detective: It took d'Avignon several months to search through more than 500,000 names and trace the male and female lineages of American leaders King John, also known as John ‘Lackland’, is renowned for signing the Magna Carta in 1215, which limited the monarch’s power and helped form the British Parliament. John’s other claim to fame, or infamy, is that he was depicted as the villain in the Robin Hood tales. Common grandfather: The 12-year-old traced the lineages of nearly all of the U.S. presidents to King John, the signer of the Magna Carta D’Avignon, a seventh-grader at Monte Vista Christian School in Watsonville, started the project in hopes of tracing back her own bloodline in France, but somewhere along the way she decided to take her genealogical quest to the highest level. In order to create the family tree, the 12-year-old spent months scouring through over 500,000 names in search of the ‘presidential Adam.’ Her 80-year-old grandfather, who has been tracing roots for nearly six decades, helped her make the presidential links. D’Avignon started with the first U.S. president, George Washington, she traced both the male and female family lines to make the connection. Prior to d’Avignon’s discovery, genealogists were only able to link 22 families of presidents, likely because they only focused on male bloodlines. The only former commander-in-chief not linked to King John is the eighth president, Martin Van Buren, who had Dutch roots. The teen also found out that she is the 18th cousin of President Obama. She even wrote to her new-found relative a letter to share her findings with him. So far, however, d’Avignon said she received only a generic response from the White House. D’Avignon created a poster of the presidential family tree and is selling signed copies of it in hopes of raising enough money to make a trip to Washington DC. The middle-school student says her goal is to hand-deliver a replica of her family tree to the president. 'I think we just all go back somewhere; it’s just a matter of proving it,' she said. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/