In a message dated 9/23/01 1:39:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sjmasonjr@worldnet.att.net writes: > . Open to discussion about this verbal history. > Hello, I don't think many of our ancestors knew their own lineage beyond about two generations. There was a WILKINSON man held prisoner in Beirut about 20 years ago and my Dad always said he was probably a distant cousin. He assumed all WILKINSONs had a common ancestor, which is not true. I think statements like, "He's probably a cousin" are remembered as "We are cousins" a generation or two down the line. Also, in the 1800s some newly wealthy American's hired genealogist to trace their family roots. These paid genealogist made mistakes, stretched the truth, or even forged documents to earn their pay. At that time many people believed that Darwin's theory could also be applied to cultural, social, and lifestyle status. Poor people were believed to be poor because their ancestors didn't have the qualities it took to better themselves and their off spring also lacked those traits. They thought a person who acquired wealth must be descended from the upper class, even if he was born in poverty. With those preconceived ideas in their heads, if there were two possible ancestors the paid genealogist often connected lineage's to the most glamorous one. It was better to descend from disowned royalty than from a shipwrecked Irish sailor. Grant Johnston, Chico, CA Maybe the grass is really greener on the other side of the fence. But it's probably because your neighbor uses more fertilizer and water.