tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post4695642684911109272..comments2024-03-19T00:24:23.577-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: My Family and Other EmperorsLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-71304161952563758202017-01-02T04:39:42.516-05:002017-01-02T04:39:42.516-05:00I have Cunningham and Montgomery ancestors who had...I have Cunningham and Montgomery ancestors who had a great feud going on and, unfortunately, kept killing each other!! Seems that the gentry were allowed to commit murder with little consequencemagpiefan59https://www.blogger.com/profile/03679732521630698983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-29138224710625194092016-01-11T15:32:50.566-05:002016-01-11T15:32:50.566-05:00Do you have any evidence of "entry 30", ...Do you have any evidence of "entry 30", I think it is extra/doesn't exist.<br />BoxerDogshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02631552139844625865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-6666363648623760632015-06-16T23:18:05.533-04:002015-06-16T23:18:05.533-04:00Very true. Very true. volarekathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03887278914584852871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-26386056638827077392015-06-16T23:15:11.681-04:002015-06-16T23:15:11.681-04:00LOLLOLvolarekathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03887278914584852871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-44274883420243131272015-06-16T23:13:48.646-04:002015-06-16T23:13:48.646-04:00If he's in your family tree, he's still on...If he's in your family tree, he's still one of your ancestors. volarekathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03887278914584852871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-13671835296319739892013-08-25T08:36:23.627-04:002013-08-25T08:36:23.627-04:00I should add that I've retained "Martel&q...I should add that I've retained "Martel" in my database in spite of the fact that I know the correct names and the history. The reason is purely pragmatic; surnames are important in keeping track of genealogy records since one often needs to search one's database for duplicate entries. It's really hard to keep track of people before surnames became common so it's often convenient to attach a pseudonym. I should have corrected this when I posted. Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-91705121011574950872013-08-25T08:25:34.663-04:002013-08-25T08:25:34.663-04:00As I noted in the "UPDATE" I am not rela...As I noted in the "UPDATE" I am not related to Andrew Ward. I'm pretty sure about the connection of Andrew Ward to Charlemagne.Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-28706243703927279302013-08-24T21:32:37.562-04:002013-08-24T21:32:37.562-04:00Larry,
Can I assume that you are related up to And...Larry,<br />Can I assume that you are related up to Andrew Ward and that you have proven you line to Andrew? I am related to Andrew via Hester and my Sherman line.<br />My reason for asking is that I would like to tell my grandchildren about the connection to<br />Charlemagne as I don't, at my age, have time to do the research.<br />Thanks for your comments.<br />JAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-45908077308077735872011-07-07T16:44:03.427-04:002011-07-07T16:44:03.427-04:00you must remeber if it was not for Charlemagne you...you must remeber if it was not for Charlemagne you would not exist it dosent really matter about the genes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-84944451990982666062011-06-29T14:49:15.684-04:002011-06-29T14:49:15.684-04:00M. Dionis says,
There is no reason to keep the na...M. Dionis says,<br /><br /><i>There is no reason to keep the name "Martel" displayed in this post since neither the one and only Charles Martel appears in the genealogy, nor his dynasty has ever been labeled "Martel".</i><br /><br />OK. I removed it. It's obviously a major distraction for some people.<br /><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-5673957394167342942011-06-29T12:05:05.666-04:002011-06-29T12:05:05.666-04:00I just noticed this post and I think it's wort...I just noticed this post and I think it's worth a comment:<br /><br /><i>I understand your point. The name "Martel" (meaning "hammer") was conferred on the victor of the Battle of Tours.<br /><br />Charlemagne was not born "Charles the Great" but he probably wasn't known as "Charles Martel" either. (He was named after his grandfather.) The last name "Martel" is just a convenient way for genealogists to identify families at at time when surnames were not popular.<br /><br />Sorry if this confused anyone.</i><br /><br /> Actually, the issue is not understanding a point but <b>correcting</b> an obvious mistake still holding in the initial post (I suppose you are still able to edit it). Nobody in France or Germany would confound Charlemagne/Karl der Grosse (i.e. "Charles the Great") with his grandfather Charles Martel (who obviously got his nickname for having "hammered" the Muslim army at Poitiers (Tours) and ended the Muslim advance in Europe), so the name "Martel" should simply deleted from the line "Charlemagne (Charles) Martel King of the Franks". <br /> The future Roman Emperor Charles the Great got his grandfather's name (Charles) because of the commonplace tradition naming after some close parents (see e.g. his first son, Carloman which had the name of his greatuncle - the brother of Pepin le Bref, but also the name of the younger brother of Charlemagne); there should be no "probably" in the phrase concerning how was known Charles the Great (before becoming Great): it was simply, Charles, the son of Pepin le Bref and Bertrada of Laon. <br /> The surname "Martel" is not the common way to identify its' family; actually the Dynasty founded by him is known as "Carolingian" (keeping in mind that the first Carolingian King of the Franks is neither Charles Martel nor Charlemagne but Pepin le Bref). As King of the Franks, Charlemagne is usually labeled Charles I, not with his nick. <br /> There is no reason to keep the name "Martel" displayed in this post since neither the one and only Charles Martel appears in the genealogy, nor his dynasty has ever been labeled "Martel".M. Dionisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-77738806871549903342011-06-29T09:53:18.025-04:002011-06-29T09:53:18.025-04:00Imahler asks,
What is the specific evidence that ...Imahler asks,<br /><br /><i>What is the specific evidence that proves the parentage of Andrew Ward?<br /><br />And where is a published discussion of that evidence?<br /><br />If there is no good answer to these questions, then there is no reason to believe in the supposed gentry ancestry given for Andrew Ward. </i><br /><br />I'm just an amateur looking into my own genealogy. It's difficult to sort fact from fiction since there's a lot of misinformation out there, especially on Ancestry.com.<br /><br />I try whenever possible to confirm lineages because I know its all too easy to postulate a link to the upper classes in Europe.<br /><br />In the case of Andrew Ward I relied on information published by <a href="http://www.ebooksread.com/authors-eng/new-york-genealogical-and-biographical-society/the-new-york-genealogical-and-biographical-record-volume-103-ywe/page-20-the-new-york-genealogical-and-biographical-record-volume-103-ywe.shtml" rel="nofollow">The New York Genealogical and Biographical Society</a>. Their information seems quite reliable and their conclusions fit with the facts. There's no question that Andrew Ward, the immigrant, was well-connected with the gentry so it's reasonable that he descends from someone of note.<br /><br />The speculation is that he is the son of the fourth son of Richard of Homersfield. The fourth son did not inherit much and it's likely that his son, Andrew the immigrant, was not terribly wealthy.<br /><br />I've lost interest in the Wards since they aren't ancestors of mine. If you are interested in tracking down the truth about Andrew Ward's ancestors I suggest you blog about it and start a discussion.<br /><br />Here's the problem. Professional genealogists seem reluctant to jump into popular genealogy to correct misconceptions and promote good practice. In some cases this is understandable since they don't want to be giving away information for free. But popular genealogy is becoming increasingly detached from historical facts and the more false information is propagated, the more it becomes accepted as "true."<br /><br />In the long run, that will hurt the profession so they better act now to do something or they will be (unjustly) marginalized and ignored. <br /><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-75251573179557983872011-06-29T03:32:09.876-04:002011-06-29T03:32:09.876-04:00What is the specific evidence that proves the pare...What is the specific evidence that proves the parentage of Andrew Ward? <br /><br />And where is a published discussion of that evidence?<br /><br />If there is no good answer to these questions, then there is no reason to believe in the supposed gentry ancestry given for Andrew Ward.lmahlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539619495838872195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-5681204572549550452011-06-28T14:50:54.296-04:002011-06-28T14:50:54.296-04:00@ Imahler,
I think there's a general consensu...@ Imahler,<br /><br />I think there's a general consensus about Andrew Wards parents based on recent research. That's not the link that I'm worried about.<br /><br />It's the link between Ruhamah Hill and the family in Connecticut that is probably wrong. It's just about certain that her real father is Captain John Hill of Rhode Island.<br /><br />That means I'm not related to Andrew Ward and not a descendant of Charlemagne through him.<br /><br />I'm working on two other lineages that relate me to Charlemagne. <br /><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-79507822929547674762011-06-28T11:09:38.964-04:002011-06-28T11:09:38.964-04:00A big problem with this descent is that Andrew War...A big problem with this descent is that Andrew Ward (1597-1659),<br />has no proven ancestry.<br />See for example, Robert Charles Anderson, The Great Migration Begins, vol. 3, which mentions proposed parentage for Andrew, but notices that nothing has been proved.<br />If Andrew Ward had a documented royal descent, it would be included in Gary Roberts, Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants, and also Douglas Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry.lmahlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539619495838872195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-23663109324083703982011-05-09T09:14:34.466-04:002011-05-09T09:14:34.466-04:00Ah, your family line just missed all the fun of TH...Ah, your family line just missed all the fun of THE PERCY - NEVELLE FUED. There is nothing like hotheaded hate and war! <br /><br />See:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy%E2%80%93Neville_feudRichbeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04482709138550336344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-68991883139676461462010-06-10T12:50:48.405-04:002010-06-10T12:50:48.405-04:00My Family has a link back to Henry VIII through so...My Family has a link back to Henry VIII through some of his illegitimate off spring. We can also trace back our line to the Viking Lords of Northumbria.Mr Toddnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-1130184116554482982010-03-18T08:25:21.418-04:002010-03-18T08:25:21.418-04:00Genealogy Girl, keep trying. Eventually you'll...Genealogy Girl, keep trying. Eventually you'll find a connection to the known lineages of European nobility and then to Charlemagne.<br /><br />As long as you have some Europeans in your past it's almost certain that you are a descendant of Charlemagne. Of course, you are also a descendant of everyone else who lived in 800 AD but that's not nearly so interesting. :-)<br /><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-85804285073294687282010-03-17T21:18:29.513-04:002010-03-17T21:18:29.513-04:00Wow... This is pretty amazing.
If you don't ...Wow... This is pretty amazing.<br /><br />If you don't mind my asking, is there a specific way for a person to determine their link to Charlemagne? I've been tracing my family tree for over a decade, and I still can't find anything but labourers and fishermen with no ties to nobility at all (but I guess it doesn't help that I get stuck at around 1800 in so many branches of my family tree).Genealogy Girlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02507972542821679644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-29523353798830706022009-10-17T08:27:46.820-04:002009-10-17T08:27:46.820-04:00...there might have been inbreeding in the generat...<i>...there might have been inbreeding in the generations following Charlemagne.</i><br /><br />Inbreeding amongst the nobility?! Shocked, shocked I am that you would suggest such a thing! [/sarcasm]The Rathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487724361976424018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-28673831027735207422009-10-16T20:35:59.293-04:002009-10-16T20:35:59.293-04:00After some more thought, there might have been inb...After some more thought, there might have been inbreeding in the generations following Charlemagne. My 2^(-40) number assumed independent genetic coupling. If two tenth generation descendants of Charlemagne had an offspring, that offspring would have the same number of Charlemagne alleles as the parents. <br /><br />The apparent paradox is resolved by noting that there are 2^(40) ancestors. Half came from 2 ancestors, 1/4 from 4 ancestors, and so forth. So the probability that any particular allele came from a particular ancestor is small, the probability that it came from any ancestor will be sum up to one.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-16988701327492202302009-10-16T09:46:29.643-04:002009-10-16T09:46:29.643-04:00athel says,
That makes us distant cousins, becaus...athel says,<br /><br /><i>That makes us distant cousins, because Catherine Chideocke was my great^15 grandmother.</i><br><br><br />Glad to meat you, "cousin." We ought to have a family reunion where we all get together for a picnic. <br /><br />Do you know any backyards that can hold close to a million people? :-)<br><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-29975423933278394642009-10-16T09:41:33.831-04:002009-10-16T09:41:33.831-04:00NAL says,
Let me see, you get half your genes fro...NAL says,<br /><br /><i>Let me see, you get half your genes from your father and half from you mother. After 40 generations you have 2^(-40) of the genes from the first generation. There's not that many genes in the human genome. So, you probably have zero Charlemagne genes in your genome.</i><br><br>That's correct, and it's even correct if you consider all possible alleles—not just the ones found in "genes."<br /><br />But it does raise an interesting point. What you say is true of each and every one of your ancestors living at the time of Charlemagne. There's an extremely low probability that you got any of your current alleles from any of those ancestors.<br /><br />Since we clearly must have gotten our alleles from somewhere, how do we resolve this apparent paradox?<br><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-11466810885463026712009-10-16T09:33:12.808-04:002009-10-16T09:33:12.808-04:00Buzz says,
Charlemagne was Charles the Great. Cha...Buzz says,<br /><br /><i>Charlemagne was Charles the Great. Charles Martel was Charles the Hammer, his grandfather.</i><br><br>I understand your point. The name "Martel" (meaning "hammer") was conferred on the victor of the Battle of Tours.<br /><br />Charlemagne was not born "Charles the Great" but he probably wasn't known as "Charles Martel" either. (He was named after his grandfather.) The last name "Martel" is just a convenient way for genealogists to identify families at at time when surnames were not popular. <br /><br />Sorry if this confused anyone.<br /><br />[martel \mar"tel\ is from F. marteler, fr. martel, marteau, hammer, a dim. fr. L. martulus, marculus, dim. of marcus hammer]<br /><br><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-26392118302870388742009-10-16T08:37:44.695-04:002009-10-16T08:37:44.695-04:00Let me see, you get half your genes from your fath...Let me see, you get half your genes from your father and half from you mother. After 40 generations you have 2^(-40) of the genes from the first generation. There's not that many genes in the human genome. So, you probably have zero Charlemagne genes in your genome.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.com