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.
It’s not something I’ve gone hunting for, but the possibility is interesting when it comes up. The mystery close cousin I mentioned earlier said her father abandoned her family shortly after she was born and that she never knew him. So, reading the room, it did not seem it would be shocking and unwelcome news when I later shared that due to our shared link to another fairly close cousin, her father actually may have been one of my great-great-uncles (which one, I don’t know). I would have treaded far more lightly and been less bold about speculating (reasonable speculation, but speculation all the same) if her family situation had been different.
Ultimately, she didn’t really understand the strong possibility of the source of our connection. The ball’s in her court, and if she ever cares to reach back out, I’d be happy to explore further. She seems like a perfectly nice lady. She just isn’t all that bright.
I think that you handled the whole thing just fine. I guess my point was, that I can't see myself caring that much about this type of revelation in my own family tree. If I got a call out of the blue from a potential distant relative who wanted to meet me, I would feel sort of on the hook to meet them even though in my own head I would be like..."why???"
Granted, the folks that have submitted their DNA in the database probably also have at least a mild interest in learning more about their family trees.
Ultimately, she didn’t really understand the strong possibility of the source of our connection. The ball’s in her court, and if she ever cares to reach back out, I’d be happy to explore further. She seems like a perfectly nice lady. She just isn’t all that bright.
I've been through this with many DNA connections, and it's not necessarily lack of brain power, but lack of interest or motivation to uncover historical infidelities, if not outright denial or distrust in the science. Genetic genealogy requires certain skills that seem to mystify even highly educated people. I helped an adoptee with a Ph.D. in Physics identify his birth mother when it was clear to me that he had no idea what he was doing with his results. And it was a similar case to what you described in your own family history, with his closest match (2c1r) having Ashkenazi ancestors whose paper trails disappeared in Russia in a very few generations. But I was able to piece it together and find his birth mother.
Another type of revelation that can be uncovered through DNA is a genetic connection through slavery, another controversial outcome that many unfortunately will deny. As I've posted elsewhere, one of my closest DNA matches (at 100 centimorgans) is the grandson of a slave of my white 3rd great-grandfather. Until DNA testing, nobody could know that this slave was the son of the slaveowner. And of course it doesn't stop there, since my 3rd great-grandfather has thousands of descendants, and his slave had ten children who also populated much of southeast Georgia. So the white descendants in these various databases find themselves matched to African-American descendants, if they even notice it. Most do not have the curiosity to notice or look into these connections. When I approached one of my white distant cousins from this family, an educated woman and experienced genealogist, and told her what I discovered along with my African-American relative, she said, dismissively, "That kind of thing didn't happen as often as you think." But it is exactly the kind of thing I take particular relish in uncovering.
I've been through this with many DNA connections, and it's not necessarily lack of brain power, but lack of interest or motivation to uncover historical infidelities, if not outright denial or distrust in the science. Genetic genealogy requires certain skills that seem to mystify even highly educated people. I helped an adoptee with a Ph.D. in Physics identify his birth mother when it was clear to me that he had no idea what he was doing with his results. And it was a similar case to what you described in your own family history, with his closest match (2c1r) having Ashkenazi ancestors whose paper trails disappeared in Russia in a very few generations. But I was able to piece it together and find his birth mother.
Another type of revelation that can be uncovered through DNA is a genetic connection through slavery, another controversial outcome that many unfortunately will deny. As I've posted elsewhere, one of my closest DNA matches (at 100 centimorgans) is the grandson of a slave of my white 3rd great-grandfather. Until DNA testing, nobody could know that this slave was the son of the slaveowner. And of course it doesn't stop there, since my 3rd great-grandfather has thousands of descendants, and his slave had ten children who also populated much of southeast Georgia. So the white descendants in these various databases find themselves matched to African-American descendants, if they even notice it. Most do not have the curiosity to notice or look into these connections. When I approached one of my white distant cousins from this family, an educated woman and experienced genealogist, and told her what I discovered along with my African-American relative, she said, dismissively, "That kind of thing didn't happen as often as you think." But it is exactly the kind of thing I take particular relish in uncovering.
Interesting, because I think "that sort of thing" happened all the time way back when. Could any of us potentially be the descendant of a long ago American slave owner + slave union? Sure, assuming your roots go that far back in this country.
What does it mean to you, personally, if you trace your family tree back and discover that you are, in fact, the descendant of a long ago ancestor who was the offspring of a slave owner and their slave?
Do you feel that personally or do you just accept that as an interesting piece of history?
The most awkward experiences I have had with other researchers (mostly on Ancestry) is not from NPEs but from "bad genealogy" -- they latched on to something like a dog with a bone when it is wrong. It is a real match on DNA, but they will swear it is on one line because we share a particular surname, when it is actually on another line. Then, Ancestry horns in and connects us on ThruLines on the incorrect family line (since removed). My ancestors came from some isolated places with shallow gene pools or restricted movement. It is possible to be related to people in more than one way and sometimes the most obvious connection is wrong, especially if it is a common name in that area.
Interesting, because I think "that sort of thing" happened all the time way back when. Could any of us potentially be the descendant of a long ago American slave owner + slave union? Sure, assuming your roots go that far back in this country.
What does it mean to you, personally, if you trace your family tree back and discover that you are, in fact, the descendant of a long ago ancestor who was the offspring of a slave owner and their slave?
Do you feel that personally or do you just accept that as an interesting piece of history?
You can see lots of examples of this on Finding Your Roots, the genealogy program hosted on PBS by Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Everyone has a different reaction, but this type of discovery usually elicits a range of emotions. Most will be grateful for any scrap of truth about their ancestors, when their family history has been obscured by lies and lack of records.
For me, as a descendant of the slaveowner and his wife, a great grand-nephew but not a descendant of the slave, I have to wonder if the rest of the family knew that this young slave was the son of their father, that he was a half sibling of the other children who were mostly grown by the time he was born. Did they accept it as something that "happened all the time", or did they not have any idea he was his child? How did they interact with each other?
You can see lots of examples of this on Finding Your Roots, the genealogy program hosted on PBS by Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Everyone has a different reaction, but this type of discovery usually elicits a range of emotions. Most will be grateful for any scrap of truth about their ancestors, when their family history has been obscured by lies and lack of records.
For me, as a descendant of the slaveowner and his wife, a great grand-nephew but not a descendant of the slave, I have to wonder if the rest of the family knew that this young slave was the son of their father, that he was a half sibling of the other children who were mostly grown by the time he was born. Did they accept it as something that "happened all the time", or did they not have any idea he was his child? How did they interact with each other?
I think the wife and the rest of the family would have turned a blind eye to the possibility of the boy being the father's son. Same sort of thing would have been the case if "Dad" had visited a brothel and gotten one of the women pregnant or had an illicit affair with a "loose" woman - the offspring would not have been recognized by the family.
It was a different time for sure. How many chaste wives had their own little secrets?
I think that you handled the whole thing just fine. I guess my point was, that I can't see myself caring that much about this type of revelation in my own family tree. If I got a call out of the blue from a potential distant relative who wanted to meet me, I would feel sort of on the hook to meet them even though in my own head I would be like..."why???"
Granted, the folks that have submitted their DNA in the database probably also have at least a mild interest in learning more about their family trees.
If I see a fairly close relative and haven’t the faintest clue of how they’re related to me, my first thought is that this might help me break down a brick wall in my family tree. The revelation was more for my cousin’s benefit, since she wants to meet close relatives and had very little knowledge of her long-deceased father’s family. For me, it’s an interesting footnote. If it carried more significance for her, I’d be motivated to do some digging and try to help. This woman is over 80 years old, so if she wants to find things out about her father’s family, now’s the time.
I’ve only ever exchanged messages over 23andMe and Ancestry.com. I’ve never asked to meet anyone else, and no one has ever asked to meet me. The best thing that’s come of these messages is a second cousin twice-removed who messaged me with stories about my grandparents’ generation and beyond, and sent a copy of his Bar Mitzvah video from 1965, which was just a treat. It was mystifying seeing video footage of my grandparents (among other relatives I knew from my youth) over one half-century ago. He lives on the opposite coast, but if I ever were out his way, I’d be open to meeting for lunch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
I've been through this with many DNA connections, and it's not necessarily lack of brain power, but lack of interest or motivation to uncover historical infidelities, if not outright denial or distrust in the science. Genetic genealogy requires certain skills that seem to mystify even highly educated people. I helped an adoptee with a Ph.D. in Physics identify his birth mother when it was clear to me that he had no idea what he was doing with his results. And it was a similar case to what you described in your own family history, with his closest match (2c1r) having Ashkenazi ancestors whose paper trails disappeared in Russia in a very few generations. But I was able to piece it together and find his birth mother.
I’m sure that’s true for many people. I can tell you that in this specific instance, this woman wasn’t experiencing cognitive dissonance. She just couldn’t put two and two together (which is fine by me).
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
You can see lots of examples of this on Finding Your Roots, the genealogy program hosted on PBS by Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Everyone has a different reaction, but this type of discovery usually elicits a range of emotions. Most will be grateful for any scrap of truth about their ancestors, when their family history has been obscured by lies and lack of records.
For me, as a descendant of the slaveowner and his wife, a great grand-nephew but not a descendant of the slave, I have to wonder if the rest of the family knew that this young slave was the son of their father, that he was a half sibling of the other children who were mostly grown by the time he was born. Did they accept it as something that "happened all the time", or did they not have any idea he was his child? How did they interact with each other?
It was fascinating to learn that one branch of Larry David’s paternal line dated back to early 1800s German American Jewry, including at least one slave-owner who fought for the Confederacy. I believe David’s exact words were, “Oh Professor, I’m so sorry.”
My wife’s maternal grandmother was raised Mormon and is mostly of English and Scottish ancestry, dating back to the 1600s Massachusetts Bay Colony. So between this easily traceable ancestry, and a family tradition keenly focused on genealogy, my wife has an interesting range of ancestors from the Antebellum period, including (unsurprisingly) some slave-owners and Confederate War veterans. Her perspective is that it’s not something she wants to publicize, and she’s certainly not proud of this aspect of her heritage. But she’s not ashamed either, and why should she be? I get more of a kick out of her genealogy than she does, including the many celebrities to whom she’s distantly, distantly related by virtue of her Colonial American heritage.
The most interesting thing I can say about my celebrity connections is that Andy Samberg’s paternal uncle is a predicted third cousin, and someone named Richard Lewis (but, sadly, is almost definitely not the Richard Lewis) is a predicted second cousin, once removed. So it goes for the descendants of turn-of-the-20th-century shtetl Jewry.
I think the wife and the rest of the family would have turned a blind eye to the possibility of the boy being the father's son. Same sort of thing would have been the case if "Dad" had visited a brothel and gotten one of the women pregnant or had an illicit affair with a "loose" woman - the offspring would not have been recognized by the family.
Except in my ancestor's case, his slave/child lived with him and his wife until he was old enough to live on his own. Usually with brothels/affairs the father doesn't raise the illegitimate child. In the 1870 Census, this now emancipated slave was listed as Black and 15 years old, in the household of my white ancestors and some other grown children, a son-in-law, and grandchild. Did they not suspect anything? Despite being enumerated as "Black", he looks very white in his portrait. By 1880, this former slave was married with some children of his own, living next door to his white relatives. They all had the same last name, and his was the only Black family on the street. But nobody has figured out who his mother was. She may have been "sold down the river."
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.
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.
