Posted on 05/14/2010 11:54:44 AM PDT by American Quilter
Thank you!!! I’ll go look at it right away.
If you find that you have many lines at all going back to the early colonial years, say 1620-1650, you’ll also find that you’re related to a lot of well known people in the modern era.
This is true of virtually everyone with early colonial ancestors. The population was comparatively small, and so it didn’t take too much intermarriage for a huge number of seemingly diverse descendants to share ancestry way back when.
This isn’t anything grand or unusual, so if somebody tries to become snobbish about it, they’re a little insecure, imho.
Of course, you typically need to really have your direct lines down pat and begin to explore marriage and descent outside those direct lines, to begin finding the interesting third, fourth or fifth cousins twice removed.
Another thing to look for: if you encounter a seeming mystery wife back in the early 1800’s and before, with no known surname and a given name that sounds like a nickname, you should explore the possibility that she was a native indian. Some tribes are better known than others, but usually siblings were known and mentioned, probably living nearby.
Genealogy is fascinating to pursue, for the unusual history that you’ll encounter alone. Above and beyond that, it give such a sense of ownership and belonging, it brings historic events home to know that some of your people played a part and were there.
Happy hunting, you’ll hit some frustrating ones, but that’s what makes it so intriguing, like a puzzle to solve.
I am a descendant of Baldwin II. Which means that I am the rightful queen of Jerusalem. Of course, you have to ignore a few irregular births, but illegitimate offspring have inherited before.
But then I would have to admit having a french ancestor....in public... no throne is worth that!
Yes, it IS like being a sleuth, and if everything was there, neatly laid out for us, it wouldn’t be as much fun. I would have liked to have ancestors from colonial days, but the only possibility is if one of my French Canadian ancestors went south. Who knows, though, what I’ll find as I keep looking!
Or, in our case, a "mystery" GGG Aunt. Obviously German Mother, Father, and brother...but her picture? It's stunningly obvious that she's a native American; her dress is typical for the time, but the scarf around her neck is even accented with beadwork. I can only surmise, though no records exist that I know of, that she was the product of a first marriage...or something...LOL!
Remarriage after a first wife died in childbirth was all too common. My dad’s family goes back 250+ years in this one place, so there are three family graveyards, two of them old and inactive, and there are many, many infants buried there. There are several mothers who died on the same day as their baby, one occurring on Christmas Day, 1912. My own paternal grandfather remarried after his first wife died in childbirth, but his only child from that marriage, a daughter, survived.
This is my fathers side came in 1604 http://www.tenneyfamily.org/ and my mother side is all German from about the 1800 interresting stuff.
Mine was the maternal Grandfather...his first wife and twins died during childbirth; left with six children, he married my Grandmother. She & the babies are buried on one side of my Grandfather; my Grandmother on the other...that stone always saddens me.
I'm sure that must have been the case with Isabelle, although a first wife is never mentioned. She was very beautiful.
We’re still trying to sort out who’s who and where, in that second family graveyard. Nearly four decades of economic hardship beginning about 1864 meant graves from that period were marked with fieldstones instead of “store boughten” engraved marble headstones.
They fared pretty well in comparison to my great grandmother’s people. Their family graveyard, known as “the big lot,” is almost entirely marked with fieldstones. That graveyard isn’t even on a road anymore, so it’s a hike getting back in there to tend to it at all. The aftermath of the Civil War in the south was very hard on some families.
I have family in Westchester county NY from 1790 census and on. From 1790 to 1840, most census only names the head of the house. Children are listed as younger than 5, male or female with just a line mark in the column. Ages continue in sections such as 5 to 10, 10 to 15 etc with a mark indicating sex. How many women under 25, how many males under 25 and no names. Now my ancestors seemed to love the name of their patriarch, George. They're ALL George, Grandfather, Father, Son, Cousin...... So one doesn't know which George belongs to whom. I have been at it for 3 years trying to figure out who in the census belongs to whom. As the Georges reach their majority they are listed as head of house the confusion is unbelievable!
Wow, you have my sympathy! That would be really tough to figure out.
Night. :-)
Hi AQ how are you? Long time no see. How is Colorado Springs these days.
I’m fine, angcat, and you? Colorado Springs is fine, too. We’re a big, red island in a rising blue tide. We hope to oust Democrat Bill Ritter from the governor’s office and replace him with Scott McInnis, a fine conservative.
I’m slightly awed that you grew up in NYC. It’s a place I’ve seen only on TV and in the movies (and once from the Newark airport—I didn’t realize immediately what city it was, and had to ask). Did you like that high-energy environment?
And those same people think their liberty is guaranteed and inviolate, so that voting is often too much trouble for them. Their ancestors were wiser.
Let’s see...no one knew for sure if my great-grandmother had a brother, and also descendants. Turns out it was true; I was contacted by two cousins - one living in Poland and one in Australia.
Was contacted by someone who knew my husband’s parents - his wife is a cousin.
Connected with a lady whose father fathered my husband’s grandmother. His identity was hidden from the family - the story was that he had been killed while in the military. None of it was true. This lady in Ohio sent me a photo of her father, and for the first time, our family had a photo of my husband’s greatgrandfather.
Learned that my husband is 3rd cousins 5x removed from Abraham Lincoln. Hope to have my husband’s DNA analyzed to confirm or deny his relation.
According to an obituary that some kind girl sent me, my husband’s g-g-g-g-grandmother was related to Gen. Winfield Scott through *her* grandfather who was a Scott. Haven’t found the link just yet.
Oddly enough, learned that my husband is also a distant relative to John Hinckley, Jr.
Husband is also related to Adam Shipley of Annapolis. He had no idea when he was at the Naval Academy that he was walking in the footsteps of ancestors from 10 generations prior.
I wish we could afford another annual membership because genealogy is highly addictive. Until then, I’ve been filling in some blanks from reading through some of the old books that are now digitized online. Truly fascinating stuff!
What an interesting history! Thanks for sharing it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.