Ain't genealogy fun?

[timseh]

I've been doing a significant amount of digging lately into my family history. I've hit a few walls along the way. I "believe" that the Harbison branch from which I'm descended came from county Stirling. I can't substantiate it 100% yet, but I'm working on it.

Along the way, I've been lucky to have some relatively "famous" ancestors for which I do have hard documentation. Edward Doty, who arrived on the Mayflower is one. I managed to Trace the line from Doty to Doughty, Fitz William, Dymoke, Ludlow, Marmion, De Chillham, Fitzroy, to... omg... Plantaganet... Was beginning to feel sick when I saw this...

Hope springs eternal, though... If some of the genealogies to be found on the likes of wikipedia can be taken as more or less accurate when it comes to direct descent, one branch of the family that spawned John "Lackland" Plantagenet (to whom I can trace a direct line) can be traced directly to Kenneth MacAlpin (born in 810 on the island of Iona - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cináed_mac_Ailpín ).

I suppose that's Scottish enough... No?

[gilmore]

I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm, but virtually everyone of European descent descends from royalty, especially those with British ancestry where the gene pool was more self-contained and closed than in the rest of Europe.

The math is the answer. We have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents, etc. If you go back far enough, there are many, many more ancestors in, say, the 40th generation, or maybe 1,000 years ago, than there were humans alive on the planet, around 1,099,511,627,776.

In doing genealogical research, we rely on records such as wills, deeds, marriage agreements, etc that basically document the transference of wealth. Hence, royalty and the aristocracy are better documented than peasants, and it is more likely that one will come across evidence of descent from them than from peasants, even though the latter were much more numerous. As some one once said, we all descend from Charlemagne, but we also descend from his stable boy.

[joeybear]

I tried learning mine for many years, but no one on my dad's side of the family would ever say a word about anything, other than "we're 100% Irish". Then, pops died. I never knew anything else. Then, my grandmother died a few months later. In her remains, I found about 20 pages of my family heritage on my dad's side. Needless to say, I now know why no one talked about our ancestors The story is amazing, but too long to share

[ForresterModern]

I tried learning mine for many years, but no one on my dad's side of the family would ever say a word about anything, other than "we're 100% Irish". Then, pops died. I never knew anything else. Then, my grandmother died a few months later. In her remains, I found about 20 pages of my family heritage on my dad's side. Needless to say, I now know why no one talked about our ancestors The story is amazing, but too long to share

Nope, can't do that, JB----give us a taste then take away the dessert. Go ahead and tell us because now we are interested and you have our attention.

[timseh]

That's ok. My enthusiasm's not really dampened. Heck, I'm just lucky I was actually able pin down hard evidence that led me back to someone whose lineage was documented (more or less).

This is just "fun" at this point. To tell you the truth, I was surprised that I didn't find any inbreeding in my own family. I was pretty shocked when I managed to trace both my father and mother's side of the family back to arriving on this continent on Mayflower. As it got closer, I more than half expected to find out that a couple of siblings went their own ways before those two lines met up again.

It just struck me as odd, given the mix of peoples here, that after almost 400 years after arriving here, we're still stuck in the rut of not expanding much beyond the same social circle when it comes to marriage.

[SteveB]

timseh
Good luck with the genealogy, it is almost as addictive as kilts. If you are using Ancestry.com, or other internet based family trees, please use them with caution. I hope that the Mayflower line(s) to Doty are correct, as there are quite a few being put on the internet that have been disproven. I have spent many hours digging through the doty, doughty, etc families in New York and New Jersey to find that some attributed to John Doty of the Mayflower, are in fact from a John Doughty of Aberdeenshire, Scotland.
Slainte

[timseh]

The Mayflower records, I know are correct. That research was done several generations ago and is well documented in my family. We hold an original copy of a 1000 page tome on the history of the family in America written by one Ethan Allen Doty and published in 1897. This was given to my Great Grandfather, who was born in 1896 (The two branches of the family were still closely tied at that time as his grandmother was a Doty. The Doty of the Mayflower was not John, but Edward.

I'm not sure who you're referring to when it comes to John Doty of the Mayflower...? Edward had numerous children by Faith Clarke, one of whom was John, born in 1639 at Plymouth. Edwards father was John Douty, born 1570 in Louth, died 1655 in London. Variations in the spelling of the name occur for Edward, largely because he was said to be illiterate.

[Frank McGrath]

If it weren't for the stories in our past, Geneology would not be interesting. If you don't have a good story or three, Your forebears (and your fivebears) led mundane lives.