Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ethnicities and Family Genealogy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by MrFun


    Wow, that's awesome.
    I've been to a cemetary in Devonshire that has an entire row of my family from the 16th-19th centuries...

    "So-and-so, lost at sea"
    "So-and-so, lost at sea"
    "So-and-so, lost at sea"
    "So-and-so, lost at sea"
    "So-and-so, lost at sea"
    "So-and-so, lost at sea"
    "So-and-so, lost at sea"

    Come to think of it, it was only the men. I wonder where our women were buried.

    -Arrian
    Last edited by Arrian; July 6, 2006, 11:28.
    grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

    The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

    Comment


    • #47
      All those men who got lost at sea simply because they did not want to ask for directions . . . . . .
      A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

      Comment


      • #48
        The French part, despite being rather small part of me, is the ony I can trace back the farthest, to the 13 Century.

        JM
        Jon Miller-
        I AM.CANADIAN
        GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

        Comment


        • #49
          No offense or anything. But I have to say I'm skeptical about all those claims of tracing back to the 12th-13th century. There's more to establishing a link to ancestry than just the similarity of names, or hailing from a certain region. If you want to be taken serious, there has to be a positive, verifiable linkage between "offspring" and "parent" ancestors for each step you move back in time, something which is not easily accomplished for most families.

          My deceased father spent years and years tracing our family roots, and only ever got to 1657 (year of death) - for one single ancestor, and he was not able to establish any linkage further back. Despite having access to all available publicly archived records in the relevant area. All other "traces" ended several generations "before" (that is, more recently than) 1657. And again this is not at all unusual, or exceptional. It's the way it goes for most families outside nobility and the like.

          Comment


          • #50
            I should add that getting as far back in time as possible was not the purpose of my father's study - that was to extensively document the history of each individual ancestor and their families - but he did try, until all sources were exhausted in the mid-17th century.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Winston
              No offense or anything. But I have to say I'm skeptical about all those claims of tracing back to the 12th-13th century. There's more to establishing a link to ancestry than just the similarity of names, or hailing from a certain region. If you want to be taken serious, there has to be a positive, verifiable linkage between "offspring" and "parent" ancestors for each step you move back in time, something which is not easily accomplished for most families.

              My deceased father spent years and years tracing our family roots, and only ever got to 1657 (year of death) - for one single ancestor, and he was not able to establish any linkage further back. Despite having access to all available publicly archived records in the relevant area. All other "traces" ended several generations "before" (that is, more recently than) 1657. And again this is not at all unusual, or exceptional. It's the way it goes for most families outside nobility and the like.
              All it takes is to be related to nobility.

              JM
              Jon Miller-
              I AM.CANADIAN
              GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

              Comment


              • #52
                Which I included as the exception to the rule.

                However, it does not negate the need for establishing verifiable linkage.

                Comment


                • #53
                  So, how well do you know your own family's genealogy?
                  Don't know it well at all.

                  How much of an interest do you have in your family's genealogy, if at all?
                  None whatsoever.

                  Any interesting facts/stories related to your family's history that your family has passed down?
                  Not especially.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Well, I might be able to go as far back as that (13th century) if I count the Dutch (?) (nobility) person who I am probably related to, but that wasn't verified.

                    And I will admit that (one of) the native americans isn't verified.. as they weren't married and the native american was the guy.

                    (She ran off with him, and came back with a kid, who was my ancestor, or something like that)

                    Jon Miller
                    Jon Miller-
                    I AM.CANADIAN
                    GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      What service did your sister use, Mr. Fun?
                      I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by MrFun



                        She shelled out some money and did the test through a company, using her saliva from inside her cheeks.
                        I could kinda guess that already based on my own experience, I meant which company?
                        "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
                        -Joan Robinson

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          All of my known ancestors (going to the late 19th cent, and one line with some strong indications, back to the early 19th c) were Ashkenazic Jews (Jews who were from eastern/central europe, and from a Yiddish cultural background)

                          Im 50% galitzianer/50% litvak (IE half of my ancesters came from the culture zone SOUTH of the Pripet Marshes which includes southern Poland and Ukraine and half from North, the area that today is divided among Lithuania, Belarus, etc but is historically the territorty of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - the Jewish cultures are divided by differences in Yiddish dialect, in cuisine, and in their historic approaches to traditional Judaism - the Litvak more legalistic-rational, the Galitizianer more mystical)

                          Ive never had genetic testing. I have reason to believe I have cohen ancestry (the priestly class) but dont know i have the cohen haplotype. I presume like most Jews i have european gentile ancestry as well, but its probably way back. Like most ashkenazic Jews, im probably descended from therelatively small group of Jews who came up from the western Med lands during the dark ages to France/western Germany, and later migrated east to Poland.


                          For those focusing more on geographic origins in modern nations - 50% Poland, 25% Belarus, 25% Republic of Lithuania.


                          QOTMs family has a tradition that they are descended from the medieval torah scholar Rashi. As Rashi had numerous grandchildren, and they were prominent (which in the circumstances of the time means they probably had plenty of descendants) its not at all improbable - ive never asked them how they trace it - I presume they trace directly to some relatively prominent 19th c rabbi, who in turn has an "accepted" geneology back to Rashi. Its my understanding thats its traditional that Rashi had descent from the line of King David, (though i havent found details on this).
                          "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Winston
                            No offense or anything. But I have to say I'm skeptical about all those claims of tracing back to the 12th-13th century.
                            Depends on the culture and history of a country.

                            In China, there is a tradition of maintaining a family tree listing names of men in the clan, their birthdates, and occupations. I'm 23rd generation in the clan.
                            Golfing since 67

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by DanS
                              What service did your sister use, Mr. Fun?

                              She told me which company it was, but right now, I can't recall. I will get back to you and Victor on this after I talk with her again.
                              A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by lord of the mark
                                All of my known ancestors (going to the late 19th cent, and one line with some strong indications, back to the early 19th c) were Ashkenazic Jews (Jews who were from eastern/central europe, and from a Yiddish cultural background)

                                Im 50% galitzianer/50% litvak (IE half of my ancesters came from the culture zone SOUTH of the Pripet Marshes which includes southern Poland and Ukraine and half from North, the area that today is divided among Lithuania, Belarus, etc but is historically the territorty of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - the Jewish cultures are divided by differences in Yiddish dialect, in cuisine, and in their historic approaches to traditional Judaism - the Litvak more legalistic-rational, the Galitizianer more mystical)

                                Ive never had genetic testing. I have reason to believe I have cohen ancestry (the priestly class) but dont know i have the cohen haplotype. I presume like most Jews i have european gentile ancestry as well, but its probably way back. Like most ashkenazic Jews, im probably descended from therelatively small group of Jews who came up from the western Med lands during the dark ages to France/western Germany, and later migrated east to Poland.


                                For those focusing more on geographic origins in modern nations - 50% Poland, 25% Belarus, 25% Republic of Lithuania.


                                QOTMs family has a tradition that they are descended from the medieval torah scholar Rashi. As Rashi had numerous grandchildren, and they were prominent (which in the circumstances of the time means they probably had plenty of descendants) its not at all improbable - ive never asked them how they trace it - I presume they trace directly to some relatively prominent 19th c rabbi, who in turn has an "accepted" geneology back to Rashi. Its my understanding thats its traditional that Rashi had descent from the line of King David, (though i havent found details on this).

                                Sounds like you have in-depth knowledge of your family's genealogy.
                                A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X