The listowner - me - is fascinated by this train of thought so, if everyone else is happy with it, I would love to see other people's thoughts on the topic. I, for one, have a long time interest in one small village in Cambridgeshire - Little Shelford - and am attempting to link as many families as I can using all the usual sources. Anyone else playing this game? > > > So as not to clog the airways, please respond to me direct if you wish to > carry the discussion on. Although this is a legitmate line of enquiry, I do > not wish to incurr the wrath of the listowners. Or, if they give the OK, > please carry it on in the public domain. I think, and hope that it will > respond to further deliberation. > > Cheers Robyn Smith Listowner - ENGLISH-FENS, ENG-CAMBRIDHESHIRE

Dear Robyn, please do not take that train of thought to its "logical" conclusion - this has been discussed long ago in both mathematical and genealogical magazines and the argument put forward there is that whilst for a few generations you get more and more antecedents per generation, eventually, due to intermarriage between distant relatives [especially in the days when i) travel was all but forbidden for the working class, ii) nobles would only marry nobles] things begin to settle down numerically - just as well as, if each generation really increased pro rata you would soon get to the stage where you needed the entire population of the world - and then what? Furthermore, since science has shown we are all descended from a small group of east Africans (including at most 6 women) who emigrated to the Middle East about 80,000 years ago, a tree based on any person would 'fan out' for a while, settle down, then contract as it went backwards in time. Regards, David. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robyn Smith" <rlsmith@robalsmith.id.au> To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 5:37 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II

Hi, Just suppose that there were 200 billion people in the world and that nature had been kind to us and done a 50:50 split; that would mean 100 billion men and 100 billion women. Men. remove 25% as being too young and a further 25% as being too old, or not interested. That leaves you with 50 billion men. Theoretically, any one of whom could be your father. Women. Remove 25% as being too young and a further 50% as being too old, or not interested. (They can not reproduce for as long as men can.) That leaves 25 billion women. Answer. You have 50 billion possible fathers, but only one possible mother: the woman born with your egg inside her. Well, it must mean something. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robyn Smith" <rlsmith@robalsmith.id.au> To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 5:37 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II > The listowner - me - is fascinated by this train of thought so, if everyone > else > is happy with it, I would love to see other people's thoughts on the topic. I, > for one, have a long time interest in one small village in Cambridgeshire - > Little Shelford - and am attempting to link as many families as I can using all > the usual sources. Anyone else playing this game? > > > > > > So as not to clog the airways, please respond to me direct if you wish to > > carry the discussion on. Although this is a legitmate line of enquiry, I do > > not wish to incurr the wrath of the listowners. Or, if they give the OK, > > please carry it on in the public domain. I think, and hope that it will > > respond to further deliberation. > > > > > Cheers > Robyn Smith > Listowner - ENGLISH-FENS, ENG-CAMBRIDHESHIRE > > > > ==== ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE Mailing List ==== > . >

To add further confusion I have a number of cases where siblings in one family marry siblings in another family thus reducing the number of actual ancestors. Somewhere there is a Ph.D. in all this! Chris Powter in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robyn Smith" <rlsmith@robalsmith.id.au> To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 10:37 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II > The listowner - me - is fascinated by this train of thought so, if everyone > else > is happy with it, I would love to see other people's thoughts on the topic. I, > for one, have a long time interest in one small village in Cambridgeshire - > Little Shelford - and am attempting to link as many families as I can using all > the usual sources. Anyone else playing this game? > > > > > > So as not to clog the airways, please respond to me direct if you wish to > > carry the discussion on. Although this is a legitmate line of enquiry, I do > > not wish to incurr the wrath of the listowners. Or, if they give the OK, > > please carry it on in the public domain. I think, and hope that it will > > respond to further deliberation. > > > > > Cheers > Robyn Smith > Listowner - ENGLISH-FENS, ENG-CAMBRIDHESHIRE > > > > ==== ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE Mailing List ==== > . >

I have 2 sisters [1 my mum] who married 2 cousins [1 my dad] - always found it interesting as a child that the lady I called Great Aunt Fanny was called Grandma by my cousins. I guess this means I don't need to look for the full complement of ancestors ???? Carole ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Powter" <cretwop@shaw.ca> To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 1:13 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II > To add further confusion I have a number of cases where siblings in one > family marry siblings in another family thus reducing the number of actual > ancestors. > > Somewhere there is a Ph.D. in all this! > > Chris Powter in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robyn Smith" <rlsmith@robalsmith.id.au> > To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 10:37 PM > Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II > > > > The listowner - me - is fascinated by this train of thought so, if > everyone > > else > > is happy with it, I would love to see other people's thoughts on the > topic. I, > > for one, have a long time interest in one small village in > Cambridgeshire - > > Little Shelford - and am attempting to link as many families as I can > using all > > the usual sources. Anyone else playing this game? > > > > > > > > > So as not to clog the airways, please respond to me direct if you wish > to > > > carry the discussion on. Although this is a legitmate line of enquiry, I > do > > > not wish to incurr the wrath of the listowners. Or, if they give the OK, > > > please carry it on in the public domain. I think, and hope that it will > > > respond to further deliberation. > > > > > > > > Cheers > > Robyn Smith > > Listowner - ENGLISH-FENS, ENG-CAMBRIDHESHIRE > > > > > > > > ==== ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE Mailing List ==== > > . > > > > > ==== ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE Mailing List ==== > . >

Hi - I am interested too - I am keen to link the GAUGE family form Bourn Cambs with the other families in the village, or immediate area - MILLS SEARLE BAKER WHITTETT PURKIS HOUGHTON CHAMBERLAIN LEADER are names already known to link BAKER has two links at least and is known by living relatives to have been related. Does anyone know whether there are villages who have used cesus info linked to a map to plot where everyone lived and if there is any software which would facilitate this. Pat Gauge ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robyn Smith" <rlsmith@robalsmith.id.au> To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 5:37 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II > The listowner - me - is fascinated by this train of thought so, if everyone > else > is happy with it, I would love to see other people's thoughts on the topic. I, > for one, have a long time interest in one small village in Cambridgeshire - > Little Shelford - and am attempting to link as many families as I can using all > the usual sources. Anyone else playing this game? > > > > > > So as not to clog the airways, please respond to me direct if you wish to > > carry the discussion on. Although this is a legitmate line of enquiry, I do > > not wish to incurr the wrath of the listowners. Or, if they give the OK, > > please carry it on in the public domain. I think, and hope that it will > > respond to further deliberation. > > > > > Cheers > Robyn Smith > Listowner - ENGLISH-FENS, ENG-CAMBRIDHESHIRE > > > > ==== ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE Mailing List ==== > . >

Dear Robyn, Yes, I am trying to link all sorts of families to those I know are mine in the village of Willingham. I thought this might be of interest to people with roots in Willingham. BUT, I did not know whether it is appropriate to post it on the LIST, although I'd love to do so! My great aunt, Rose Greenwood, will be 105 on June 26th. She was born in Willingham as Rose LUCAS. Last year, Rose was photographed and interviewed by the Cambridge News. I'm sure that more will be made of her birthday this year because the Queen sends greeting at 105th birthdays.I have been doing genealogical research on this branch of my family and have found these surnames connected: LUCAS, JEEPS, LACK, ROYSTON, BURKETT, KING, WHITE, PETTIT, INGLE, NEALE, EVERIT, THURLOW, FAIRCHILD. The families of these ancestors all lived in Willingham. I thought that people who were also researching their ancestry in Willingham might be interested, especially if the surnames I have mentioned are ones to which that they are connected. They are very likely related to Rose. Another relative, Willingham born, named Clara BLUNT (nee JEEPS) reached 107 years of age. This lady happened to be Rose's mother's first cousin.(this was likely 20 years ago). Have a good day! Michele Crawford ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robyn Smith" <rlsmith@robalsmith.id.au> To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 1:37 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II > The listowner - me - is fascinated by this train of thought so, if everyone > else > is happy with it, I would love to see other people's thoughts on the topic. I, > for one, have a long time interest in one small village in Cambridgeshire - > Little Shelford - and am attempting to link as many families as I can using all > the usual sources. Anyone else playing this game? > > > > > > So as not to clog the airways, please respond to me direct if you wish to > > carry the discussion on. Although this is a legitmate line of enquiry, I do > > not wish to incurr the wrath of the listowners. Or, if they give the OK, > > please carry it on in the public domain. I think, and hope that it will > > respond to further deliberation. > > > > > Cheers > Robyn Smith > Listowner - ENGLISH-FENS, ENG-CAMBRIDHESHIRE > > > > ==== ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE Mailing List ==== > . > >

----- Original Message ----- From: "Michele Crawford" <michele_crawford@sympatico.ca> To: <ENG-CAMBRIDGESHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2004 5:22 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-CAMB] A QUESTION OF MATHEMATICS II > Dear Robyn, > Yes, I am trying to link all sorts of families to those I know are mine in > the village of Willingham. <SNIP> >.I have been doing genealogical research on this branch of my family and have found these > surnames connected: LUCAS, JEEPS, LACK, ROYSTON, BURKETT, KING, WHITE, > PETTIT, INGLE, NEALE, EVERIT, THURLOW, FAIRCHILD. The families of these > ancestors all lived in Willingham. <SNIP> Michelle, My late wife's tree has connections to the JEEPS and NEALE families of Willingham. She was Sheila PINK, born in Willingham, although the PINK family were long-time residents of Longstanton. The connections are: Tryphena Dorothea PINK (my wife's aunt - sister of her father); born 1893 in Longstanton; married Dec 31 1918 Charles JEEPS; born 1892 in Willingham; son of Richard JEEPS & Elizabeth SAUNDERSON. Charles's occupation at the time of marriage was given as L/Sgt, Cambridgeshire Regt. Tryphena Dorothea in adult life was always known only as Dorothy (for obvious reasons I imagine). Another aunt, elder sister of Tryphena, a Daisy PINK, married a Walter NEAL of Willingham in 1916. No other information currently recorded. I have not researched these twigs so recorded data is limited. However, I have obtained additional sources since making the original records so, if interest is shown, I can probably expand on the above. Cheers, Cliff of Coventry cliffrey@ntlworld.com