Replies

When you go back to someone born in 1460, that’s approximately 16 generations back. Assuming that Adam de Scarisbrick, Lord of Gorsuch was Neil Gorsuch’s 13-great-grandfather, he was one of 65,536 ancestors from that generation for Neil Gorsuch. His other 65,535 13-great-grandparents contributed just as much to his generic make-up, but locating them and adding them to his family tree is a lot more difficult.

If you go back twenty generations (to persons born circa the early 1300s), you would find over a million 17-great-grandparents (although chances are that a lot of those names would appear multiple times in ones tree). Thirty generations back (around the late 900s), you would find over one *billion* 27-great-grandparents, which is many times larger than the world’s population at the time; many of ones ancestors from that generation appear hundreds or sometimes thousands of times in ones tree.

We know with mathematical certainty that we are all related to everyone else on Earth, although obviously some more remotely than others. Certainly everyone with even partial European ancestry is a descendant of Charlemagne (who died in 814) .... and of that butcher in Krakow with the five children, and of that seamstress in Cardiff who died at childbirth but whose daughter had four children. Everyone who lived in the 8th and 9th centuries in Europe either is an ancestor of *everyone* of European descent that is alive today, or of no one at all (because their line died out soon after their own death).

But the fact that we all have the same ancestors does not make genealogy any less fun—on the contrary, it makes the challenge greater, and allows us to build upon others’ research. While just about everyone in America is a descendant of Charlemagne, the challenge of genealogy is to prove it (but good luck trying to prove descent from an 8th-century butcher in Krakow; records for commoners is a lot more difficult to come by). I have to say, it is an extremely rewarding hobby.

Adam de Scarisbrick, Lord of Gorsuch

Wow. There's a name.

One of my uncles was saying he "found out" that we are decedents of Charlemagne and I was like........yeah we ain't special in that regard. And my mom said that well it's better than not being descended from Charlemagne.

Do you recall the story of the girl who did the school project that figured out every President other than Van Buren (and including Obama on his mom's side) was descended from King John of England (as I'm sure are millions of people), the bad guy from "Robin Hood" from whom some many of them have inherited tax happy disease?

I was trying to figure if any of last year's candidates maybe weren't. Trump I would assume is probably is on his mother's (though she was from an Island and was raised speaking Scottish Gaelic) but probably not his father's side (his paternal grandma was surnamed "Christ" btw). Shillery, probably is. Cruz, probably on his mom's side. Rubio, quite possibly not. Sanders, I'm guessing not.

a. While Gorsuch has thousands of ancestors, he has only one male Gorsuch lineage. The male lineage is the one that often dominates. In this case, the Anglican/Episcopalian affiliation was passed to each generation.

b. Genetically, too, the Y chromosome is passed all along the lineage. It has some dominant traits. So, no, males are not equally descended from all ancestors.

c. I’ve only been on Ancestry.com for 3 years.

d. Rev. John Gorsuch was a Royalist.

https://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GSln=Gorsuch&GSiman=1&GScid=2356327&GRid=48354398&;

e. here is how the name developed.
Rev john Gorsuch, father was
Daniel b. 1569, father was
William b 1539, father was
Humphrey Gorsuch b 1510, father was
Walter de Gorsuch b 1490, father was
Adam de Scarisbrick, Lord of Gorsuch, b. 1460. father was
Walter de Scarisbrick, b. 1430, Scarisbrick, Lancaster, Eng

f. Rev. John Gorsuch is Neil’s 8th great-grandfather, so we are going back 10 generations.