U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-12-2014, 10:06 PM
 
2,469 posts, read 2,725,327 times
Reputation: 2563

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur View Post
I can verify definitively that I am William the Conqueror's 30th great granddaughter (through my maternal grandfather). I always figured that if you could establish a definite line back that far, you could go back much, much further without any difficulty. Wrong. I'm definitely not proficient at this genealogy business, but once I go back about five generations before William the Conqueror, it gets really messy. Every source seems to contradict every other source. It's frustrating because you really don't know which sources you can count on and which ones you can't. When there's a 150-year gap between a father and his son or when they were supposedly born the same year, you've got to wonder how much stock some people put into maintaining accuracy of any kind.
Katzpur, who did your research and how long? Curious here.

I don't know how often people can genuinely document their ancestry for 1000 years or more and cover each generation, but I would say it is relatively uncommon and nearly impossible but I don't personally know as I am an amateur at genealogy. For many of us who are interested, we probably could find shared DNA from some of these famous people from the long past who have the most descendants.

I found this 2012 Daily Mail article of someone in the UK who claims to have been able to go back 27 generations to William the Conqueror. Take it for what it is, a tabloid but sometimes the articles there are fun to read for me, anyway. Some of the comments for that article are interesting in of themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-12-2014, 10:27 PM
 
Location: Montana
1,718 posts, read 1,528,101 times
Reputation: 5664
My wife is the genealogist, but she is in the 1200's on a couple of lines, but most are in the late 1600's and early 1700's. She has a couple lines stymied at the 5th generation (1800's). Everything she does has been verified by census, church records, or government records.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2014, 04:19 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
21,265 posts, read 20,872,370 times
Reputation: 9950
Quote:
Originally Posted by maus View Post
Katzpur, who did your research and how long? Curious here.
My direct descendancy to William the Conqueror is not something that just one individual researched, and I personally cannot claim credit for any of the research. I received the information from my sister, who is much more into genealogy than I am. My family has been into genealogy for several generations, and once the more recent relationships can be verified, many people of European descent will find that they're one of his direct descendants. As this quote from your link states:

"Today every single family member of a European monarch, and everyone who can claim ancestry to even a minor royal, is descended from William. This includes tens of millions of Europeans, over 1.5 million Americans, and every single U.S. President who ever lived, from Washington to Obama."

Once you go only a few generations back and hit "even a minor royal," (of which there are thousands) you can get back to William the Conquerer pretty easily. His direct descendants have been identified for many years now. I was pretty excited when I learned of my relationship to him -- until I learned that it's really not all that uncommon. Also, many of these people had illegitimate children. Some claimed all of their children; some didn't. In my case, I am descended from Robert Gloucester deCaen, who was one of Henry I illegitimate sons.

Last edited by Katzpur; 09-13-2014 at 04:54 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2014, 08:08 AM
 
2,469 posts, read 2,725,327 times
Reputation: 2563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur View Post
My direct descendancy to William the Conqueror is not something that just one individual researched, and I personally cannot claim credit for any of the research. I received the information from my sister, who is much more into genealogy than I am. My family has been into genealogy for several generations, and once the more recent relationships can be verified, many people of European descent will find that they're one of his direct descendants. As this quote from your link states:

"Today every single family member of a European monarch, and everyone who can claim ancestry to even a minor royal, is descended from William. This includes tens of millions of Europeans, over 1.5 million Americans, and every single U.S. President who ever lived, from Washington to Obama."

Once you go only a few generations back and hit "even a minor royal," (of which there are thousands) you can get back to William the Conquerer pretty easily. His direct descendants have been identified for many years now. I was pretty excited when I learned of my relationship to him -- until I learned that it's really not all that uncommon. Also, many of these people had illegitimate children. Some claimed all of their children; some didn't. In my case, I am descended from Robert Gloucester deCaen, who was one of Henry I illegitimate sons.
Interesting, Katzpur, I'd imagine that going back 30 generations would have involved multiple researchers over a long period of time and some of the documentation is definitely long-standing and preserved in multiple locations in the UK over time. It makes sense mathematically that if you go back about 4 or 5 generations, then someone else distantly related to you has probably completed a lot of legwork somewhere in your family tree. This is why I add as many siblings to my ancestors online public trees as I can document and/or confirm, because some of their descendants have had some good sources I did not find on my own.

I don't think I will get beyond the 1500s for any of my researches, however, it would be fascinating if some of my trees are well documented in prior centuries and if I stumble across a well documented tree going back longer than that, it would be great.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2014, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Northern Ireland
3,402 posts, read 2,441,172 times
Reputation: 521
1700 in fathers side and 1800 mothers side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2014, 12:52 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
2,833 posts, read 4,024,186 times
Reputation: 2997
On my dads side I go back to the 1520's Lancashire, England then to Barbados in the early 1600's and then in to Connecticut in the 1630's.

On my mothers side it goes back to 1300's in England, my Grandmother, I can only go back to her, she was born on the Klamath Indian Reservation in the late 1800's, no birth records.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2014, 04:20 PM
 
506 posts, read 414,262 times
Reputation: 1365
My direct family tree from my mother's side goes as far back as the 500's ... my dad's family goes as far back as the 600's. We probably go further back but this is what shows up directly on our family tree (passed on from generation to generation).

I got to hold one not long ago and it was pretty cool.

There were also a lot of papers from the 1200's, to 1400's which were just about lands, such as deeds and so on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2014, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Texas
1,139 posts, read 1,010,168 times
Reputation: 1462
I look like a common, boring "white girl" but all my family came to the US after 1920 from other countries on all 4 sides.

In the south I was seen as normal, just like the others who did not know their ethnicity. Meanwhile because we came here so recently I knew we were recent immigrants. In the north of the US where I was born, ethnicity was something known and spoken of. I have half that came thru Ellis Island confirmed. 1/4 assumed thru there and one stowaway on a boat from Sicily-illegal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2014, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
21,265 posts, read 20,872,370 times
Reputation: 9950
Quote:
Originally Posted by creepy View Post
I look like a common, boring "white girl" but all my family came to the US after 1920 from other countries on all 4 sides.
I remember when I was just a kid and first learning about the idea of having ancstory from various countries. I asked my Mom, "What am I?" expecting to hear her tell me I was 1/4 this and 1/8 that. I hoped for some exotic ancestory. She said, "You're an American. Your ancestors have been in this country for six generations." I was so bummed out. Of course, she ultimately gave me a much more precise answer and I found out I wasn't quite as much a "boring white girl" as her initial answer led me to believe. Still, I'm fully half English, so I guess that's kind of boring after all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2014, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
8,220 posts, read 12,809,728 times
Reputation: 10451
I think it's such a shame that people feel white/Anglo-Saxon heritage is "boring" - it seems like just another form of white guilt. If you actually dig into the stories behind these people, I'll bet you find something really interesting. No ancestry is boring, especially when it comes to immigrant ancestors - no matter where they came from, they ALL have an interesting story to tell.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top