Reflections. Part III – Pursuing Ancestors: Pedigree Genealogy – Who’s really related!

Pedigree genealogy is the tracing and documenting of one’s familial lineage, sometimes referred to as a “family tree.” It documents hereditary lines of ancestry, relying on verifiable records. DNA analysis may be used to augment or substantiate some pedigree genealogy. But, it is probably not going to satisfy the way a well-constructed pedigree chart can, complete with names, personal stories and historical context.

In Part I we discussed a number of reasons to get involved in genealogy. Among these were family history, proving heredity, being accepted into genealogical societies (e.g., DAR, SAR, Mayflower, Augustan), participating in surname projects or a tie-in to historical personages and/or events, etc.

In Part II, we looked at various understandings about the idea that we are all related. Our conclusion was that, indeed, we are all connected. This holds whether one decides to take the faith-based or various scientific approaches. We also acknowledged that this kind of “proof” of connectedness does not do much for satisfying the reasons why most people engage in genealogy.

Now, in part III, we are going to examine the idea that while we may all be related at some esoteric level, this may not be explicit at the pedigree level. Also, while many people are undoubtedly connected to amazing “others”, both presently and throughout history, proving it could be a bit problematic – albeit adventurous.

When Jennie and William assert they have an unusual intertwined genealogy they are primarily speaking about verifiable lineage, or verifiable pedigree genealogy. However, this is not a claim of exclusivity. Undoubtedly, many others, even millions, can have similar pedigree lines. What we do claim, however, is that our pedigree search continues to reveal uncommon ancestry relationships and elaborate interconnected associations that are not only unusual, but that these lines crisscross throughout several historical periods and events. Moreover, these lines appear to be traceable through multiple pedigree lineages to considerable historical depth. It is exciting enough when someone has a single parent that can provide a special linage. When that same person has both parents providing a portal of lineages it raises the genealogical ante to “unusual.” When the other half of a couple has both parents providing a portal to the same historical framework, then the statistics enter into the “distinctive” range. We appear to have the latter genealogical pattern. Our combined offspring, therefore, face an interesting genealogical journey, should they choose to participate in it.

If ancestors on both our sides had not been at the right place at the right time, where pedigree was a matter of survival and procreation, where keeping heraldic and other records was an obsession, we would not be able to validate the lineages we have to this point. In fact, we probably would not be here at all – and neither would the relatives reading this blog. So, before we go any further we need to take a moment to get some perspective on how all of this came about.

A Genealogical Excursion: For the first few thousand years of “recorded” history humans conveyed the story of their lives and clans mainly by verbal story-telling, augmented by hieroglyphs and cave paintings. From the beginning of the great civilizations, some 6000 years ago, until the start of the Common Era (CE, or 0 AD), if one’s ancestors were of noble lineage they probably left some sort of record of their achievements, demise and burial. Likewise, in Ireland, England, and greater Europe, ancient clans, tribes and kings were documenting their turfs and leaving a genealogical trail. However, the rest of humanity (99.99+%), those who toiled the fields, built structures, served in the military, were servants or slaves, anonymously returned to their earthly origins, leaving scarce records of existence. One notable example during the latter half of this period, and still used as a genealogical reference, is the Jewish-Hebrew genealogic archives within the Old Testament Bible and linked documents. However, this, too, was essentially a record of nobles.

Life in those early times was harsh and short. Disease, famine, conflict and other threats conspired to keep the average life expectancy to less than 35 years. Childbirth claimed an extravagant number of women, many in their early teens. Providing infants survived childbirth, between 50% and 70% of children would die within five years; most within the first year. These numbers did not significantly improve for ordinary people until near the 20^th century, and then primarily for those with ways and means to ensure their survival. Several centuries of plagues wiped out 1/4^th to 3/4^ths of the population in Europe and elsewhere. These events, and centuries of “total war” during the medieval and Reformation periods removed countless millions more from the reproductive pool, and destroyed related records. The Age of exploration (1400s-1700s) brought mass genocide of native and culturally “different” peoples, as well as the enigmas of actual slavery and religious inquisitions. Many millions, including children, died in the filth, squalor and slave-like conditions of the early industrial revolution (1700s-1800s). In the USA, a result of these events was hundreds of thousands of “orphan” children, sometimes shipped by the trainload, to work sites and foster/adoptive parents in the Midwest and beyond (1850s-1920s). Untold thousands lost their identify and pedigree. Through all of the above, the rich and powerful had the ways and means to protect themselves and significant others; to thrive, procreate and to keep records.

After consolidation of the early Roman Catholic Church in Europe (Circ. 300 CE) some common folk got a break. Births, baptisms, marriages, deaths and burials were “religiously” recorded by parish affiliation. Didn’t belong to a parish? Born outside of marriage? Not baptized? Scant “paper trail” there. Moreover, during the first 18 centuries, CE, millions of church and public records were lost due to wars, fires, plagues, and natural disasters. Overwhelming numbers of deaths, mass burials cremations and a lack of scribes also took their toll on genealogical records. Around 600-800 CE surnames began to emerge, usually connected to nobility, landmarks, or trades. However, surnames resembling anything close to modern usage did not develop until after the age of discovery (1400s). Census and tax rolls helped document existence, but primarily for the few with property. The vast majority of common people (e.g., serfs, slaves and transients) weren’t considered worth the effort. Numbers sometimes; names, almost never. Females were especially degraded in significance, even among nobility they were often little more than economic-political chattel, except for a few royals.

About 500 years ago, world-wide massive dispersions of populations began. During the next several centuries millions would travel to “new worlds” and a mingling of culture would begin on a previously unthinkable scale. Expanded shipping and commerce manifests and census records offered documentation for additional people. Although genealogy was largely limited to nobility and the people and things they cared about. Notable families, especially in New England, maintained their heritage and kept records for their part of this “Great Migration.” In the 1800s photographs gave tangible evidence of existence. (Most didn’t include dates, places or names back then either!).

The bottom line of this short genealogical assessment of record keeping is humbling. If you’re genealogical linage was directly tied into European and Middle Eastern nobility (including kings, queens, nobles, church leaders and their close relatives) you probably have a pedigree portal that goes back 1-2 thousand years or more. Once a person finds themselves firmly linked to that spiraling heritage trek the connections are accessible and revealing. Conversely, if close ancestors were not part of a royal or noble lineage, being able to trace a pedigree line much beyond 300-400 years is difficult to unlikely.

So who do we think we are? Well, so far the journey suggests the following: Our ancestors reveal direct pedigree links to the kings, queens, dukes, earls, bishops, and their immediate relatives in what are now Ireland, Great Britain (N. Ireland; England; Scotland; Wales), France, Germany, Italy, Eastern Europe, Northern Europe, Middle East, Northern Africa, and other geographical venues. One way this happens is that nearly all of these people were “family.” They married, intermarried and left a clear trail of who was related to whom, why, and what of it. Once one is firmly tied into these records the “rest is history.” However, discovering those pedigree lines has not been easy. The genealogy pathway is strewn with road blocks, dead ends, misdirections, etc. As well as occasional ambivalence, on our part as well as others. So far, it has taken almost five decades of work, especially intense during the past decade, as well as several DNA tests and participating in a number of genealogical societies, settings and resources. Building on pedigree lines at home, we linked to genealogical roots abroad. Relatives of those “old” world notables came to the “new world” as part of the adventurous great migrations of the 1500s-1700s. Our ancestors were among the first waves to settle the “new world,” and included royalty, nobility, “pilgrims”, inn-keepers, traders, political leaders and titled farmers, as well as a few rouges and convicts. Fortunately, by this time good public records were being kept, such as crime and punishment, licenses, land grants, estate tax, wills, etc. Nevertheless, it appears a number of lesser known relatives simply vanished.

After establishing themselves in eastern North American seaboard colonies, our ancestor “pioneers” moved deeper into New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and other areas, occasionally crisscrossing paths. They were awarded land grants for service in the early English colonial-Native American wars, French-English Wars, American Revolutionary and the so-called War of 1812. They were among the first to settle areas in Virginia and current West Virginia, Ohio Western Reserve, Kentucky, and other areas. Others moved on and played early roles in settling the Midwest and Deep South.

Reflections III –  Epilog. Crucial to our premise about an unusual genealogical pedigree, is that the relationships expressed may be distinctive, but certainly are not exclusive. Through time, millions of essential, albeit unknown, people had offspring. Today their ancestors number in the hundreds of millions. However, they cannot link their DNA or pedigree records beyond a limited number (5-10) of generations. A small number might get back another few generations. The records and reference data simply doesn’t exist beyond this for the vast majority. For reasons previously noted, we are fairly confident it does for both of us. We find our ancestors living, working with and related to the nobility of Europe for some 1400 years. The ties and records appear to be substantive. Moreover, we tie into a number of “gateway” ancestors. (These are key figures in history where genealogical linkages converge, and/or serve as springboards to an array of historical pedigrees, such as, John Gaunt, Olive Welby, Duke of Normandy [aka, King William I, England], and Charlemagne.) We have discovered this through a mixture of genealogical tools, such as hereditary records, genealogy consultations, and DNA analysis. An interesting aspect of genealogy research is that the more information one has, the more doors are opened in a cascading fashion. It helps that World-wide data bases are rapidly coming on line.

-- William

Our next Blog will look at some less “reflective” aspects of our “tangled” family tree.

Reflections. Part II – Aren’t we all related?

Two qualifications to start – our genealogical “reflections” blogs are mostly written with the western and near-eastern world in mind, although the genealogical aspects apply worldwide. Also, the “reflections” series are a greatly simplified presentation of current thinking on the subjects covered.

The question, “aren’t we all related?” has been brought to our attention on several occasions, although for different reasons. In any event, it certainly offers some interesting discussion ideas.

Not everyone agrees exactly how we might be related, and the importance varies among those with different viewpoints about religion, culture, science, etc. To help clarify the question, four aspects of genealogy are discussed: legal, spiritual, scientific and pedigree. Pedigree genealogy is integral to the question, but will be covered in reflections III.

Although today a lot of genealogy is pursued for enjoyment, it is done in the shadow of immense legal interests. The entirety of human civilization has been a tangled tapestry of dibs on who begot whom, who should get the benefits of inheritance, who’s entitled to the biggest pile of goodies, what type of livelihood they may pursue, who should rule, who should live, where they are entitled to live, and even how one might be allowed to die. Authorities exist to track, regulate and enforce such matters. Today, as always, wars are instituted or mitigated, nations rearranged, and economic, political and social problems revolve around genealogical concerns. These things are not as ubiquitous as they once were, but, “how” we are related remains important.

The spiritual or faith-based notion of how we are related can be a matter of great contention. A preponderance of faith-based models of human origins are premised on the idea that human-kind was spontaneously created, and that all ensuing humans stem from such a special event. Therefore, according to most faith-based perspectives, all humans are related. However, different versions of the origin of humans exist under this heading. For example, the genealogical construct in the Biblical “Adam and Eve” asserts that all humans on earth who have ever existed, down to those alive today, and those yet unborn, stem from a unique, divine event occurring nearly 6000 years ago. For the doctrinaire devotees of the Judeo-Christian faiths this is a settled matter, some variations among followers notwithstanding. Islamic faith follows a similar paradigm. Meanwhile, billions of people, devoted to other forms of faith-based models, hold different views.

An interesting aspect of this construct is that emanating directly from “god” does not guarantee reason, equality, fairness or justice. Thus, one can enjoy abstract notions about human origins, exclusivity of species, clan origins, and relatedness of life, while dismissing those “humans” who vary from a given doctrine, or pattern. Many millions ascribing to a faith-based model accept the idea that different “races”, and sub-races, of humans exist, that some are more superior (or preferred) over others (e.g., cast systems; “slaves”; nobility; social Darwinists), and that it would be better if these didn’t mix genetically. Those with varying skin colors, physical features, creeds, languages and other differences are frequently subject to prejudice, and other “godless” like behaviors.

Empirical (scientific) genealogy is the antipathy of the faith-based model. However, this does not endow devotees with any more claims to humanity or human stewardship. What it does do is require them to understand and follow the processes and procedures of scientific inquiry. Science now clearly supports the observation that we are all made of “star stuff.” The same atoms, molecules, elements and cosmic features that make the stars – the universe – is the same stuff of which we are made. Hence, we are all related at the origin of the universe level.

The Biological Evolution Model emerged in the mid-1800s as a bi-product of the scientific process. This model postulates that all humans are the result of a chemical process which began billions of years ago. This process evolved a feature for replicating life, which since the 1950s we have known as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), a principle component of the human genome. The Genome is the sum of all genetic material for a given species. Through DNA the human population can theoretically be traced to the origin of our species in SE Africa, including the current “version” (Homo sapiens-man the wise; 100,000 – 300,000 thousand years ago). Thus, we’re all related at the human genome level

Incidentally, based on scientific DNA evidence, there are no unique “races” among Homo sapiens. “Race” always was a socio-political construct designed to explain previously unknown human biological variations, and a convenient way of “pigeon-holing’ humans. It’s time to move on.

Genealogists use “reproductive” (yDNA) and mitochondrial (mtDNA) in their ancestral pursuits. yDNA is transferred through the paternal line; mtDNA through the maternal line. Over time, variations in human appearance and substance result from DNA mutations facilitated by the environment and the intermingling of different genetic strains within the human population. Eventually, mutations to DNA contribute to the demise of some organisms and the adaptation of others to change. Because mtDNA is passed through the maternal line, and appears subject to less variation, it can be used to trace every living human female to her earliest common ancestor, or “Eve”. In his book, The Seven Daughters of Eve (2001), world renowned DNA genealogist, Bryan Sykes, has identified, through mtDNA, seven original “Eves” representing over 95% of western humanity. Thousands of women lived within the timeframe of the seven Eves, but only the “Eves’” clans’ genes survived. If your ancestors are from Europe or the near East, the chances are excellent that one of these Eves was your mtDNA mommy. William’s Eve is “Katrine”, who lived 15,000 years ago [YAG], Jennie’s Eve is “Helena” (20,000 YAG). The offspring of these seven clan mothers experienced evolutionary changes due to mutations and intermixing with other clans over many thousands of years. These patterns can be traced to 1-3 “Mitochondrial Eves” living in SE Africa many tens of thousands of years earlier.

Current DNA analysis suggests that modern humans are related to within .1-.4% variation (95.5+%). Interestingly, human DNA is also linked to every other biological entity on earth (e.g., Chimpanzees 96-98%; bananas 50%). The biological evolution model suggests our DNA evolved into humanoid forms millions of years ago in Southeastern Africa. After a number “rehearsals” and migrations out of Africa, modern humans (Homo sapiens) journeyed out of Africa about 50-60 thousand years ago, and eventually spread throughout the world. Today, Homo sapiens appear to be the only humanoid species remaining, but evidence exists that Homo sapiens “married” with previous forms of humanoids, such as European Neanderthals. Today, modern humans evolving from their European environment still have DNA markers of those earlier encounters. William’s and Jennie’s DNA both have an estimated 2.9 percent Neanderthal DNA; Europeans average about 2.7%. This slight variation may be due to other human migrations into European terrain, decreasing the impact of Neanderthal DNA markers (Don’t even think about alternative ideas.).

Statistical genealogy, derived from the scientific model, uses a mathematical algorithm to estimate the number of descendants that might be possible from a single progenitor (forebear) over a number of generations. However interesting, this exercise has little value in determining or identifying genealogical lineage. Moreover, the more variables one considers, such as multiple family births, (6-10 several generations ago), “flexible” marriages, and clan connections (aunts, uncles, and cousins), etc., the more unwieldy the accounting becomes, even with a powerful computer. So, theoretically, statistical genealogy may demonstrate how a group, or person, can claim millions of descendants over a few generations, including the possibility of some chance relationships. However, it cannot, currently, determine how, to whom or other individual relationships, even with DNA assistance. It appears that only pedigree-based genealogy can make those connections, where the record exists.

Soon to follow: Part III – Pursuing Ancestors: Pedigree Genealogy – Who’s really related!

       -- William

Reflections. Part I – Why bother with genealogy?

The first edition of our genealogy blog for 2014 is about reflection; appropriate for this time of year. We begin by reflecting on some comments that have developed during our genealogy quests. Although the discussions here are certainly our own integrated viewpoints, they are tempered by other genealogists’ perspectives – amateur and professional. As always, feedback is encouraged.

It is a good idea to remember that genealogy is an elastic discipline. While it involves well-developed practices and procedures, including science, it also thrives on patience, persistence, constant fact checking, intuitiveness, and story-telling. The latter being a time-honored history technique, not necessarily to be confused with the fabrication of events.

The first comment we consider is: why bother with genealogy in the first place? Fair enough. It does take a lot of time and effort and, if one does it with any resolve, it can be expensive. We have certainly encountered amply reasons for not pursuing one’s genealogy, such as: that’s on my bucket list after retiring, kinship loathing and/or resentment over some real or imaginary family contrariness, social antipathy, and don’t know where/how to start. However, in the current effort we’ll strive to focus on the positive. After all, life is ephemeral.

People get involved in genealogy for a variety of reasons. Developing an hereditary roadmap to trace one’s family is high on the list. Wanting to find one’s place in history, or to give history and geography a grander perspective, are also popular motives. On balance, finding out where our DNA may have been, the places our extended family may have occupied in history, or why great, great relatives found it necessary to play “hide and seek” with history, are not trivial for those with a strong sense of curiosity.

Speaking of bucket lists – Age is not a friend of genealogy. When actor Martin Sheen agreed to participate in researching his family’s history on Who Do You Think You Are?, he said, “I’m 71 years old and I don’t know how much longer I’ll be around. I [am] doing it for my grandchildren and their children.” Hence, another reason budding genealogists get involved. Unfortunately, some arrive at the table after the potage is cold and then try to study the remains of a once exquisite ancestral smorgasbord. As a general rule, by the time seniors are willing and anxious to talk about their own or their ancestor’s lives it can be difficult trying to recall personal memories, or tease out the memories of others. Thus, the time to start is yesterday. One discovery is that within any given clan (extended family cluster) one or two individuals have devoted themselves to documenting the family tree, or pedigree. Usually unsung, and sometimes unknown, these individuals work to prod, document and classify the family “jewels.” Identifying these persons and collaborating is important.

Health is another reason that tracing one’s ancestors is becoming popular. A good old-fashioned gum-shoe genealogist can gather a lot about how ancestors’ lived and cause of death. This form of genetic prospecting can produce interesting results. As an example, for years William taught a college course on health and wellness. A requirement was for students to use standard genealogy methods to trace and document their ancestors’ for at least three generations, and further if possible, paying special attention to health, age and cause of death. Typically, many students went to their parents for information. Many of these parents admitted they knew little about their own parents and even less about their grandparents, even though the grandparents might still be living. Birth, death, and census records were introduced. One male student actually wept while relating a conversation he had with his grandfather (gf). His great-grandfather (ggf) had lost several fingers to frostbite and other injuries while attending a picket line for better coal mine health and safety. Eventually, the student’s grandfather, father and other family members benefited from the ggf’s sacrifice. When the student asked the gf why this story was not related to his son (students father), the student’s gf indicated the father never seem to care enough to ask about his grandfather. The student vowed that was never going to happen to his family. Time will tell. Another young lady taking the course moved to seek genetic counseling after learning a certain disease seemed to manifest in her maternal ancestors. Her physician didn’t seem to care and, of course, had no way of doing an adequate history since the family had not keep records, verbal or otherwise. The stories were plentiful over the years, conveying military service, incredible hardships and tragedies, heroics and abundant surprises. If only a few of these lost stories were able to find a home with this current generation, the effort was worthwhile. At least some of the students thought so. As an aside, DNA analysis for medical and health purposes has been available for decades. Unfortunately, the recent offer of making this service available to the general public is coming under criticism. William is doing research on this issue and may address it in a future blog.

Socializing and curiosity are also reasons people find ancestry snooping popular. Some are anxious to learn about previously unknown relatives (cousins, uncles, aunts, et al.), which can be a gateway to further exploration and discoveries. Some like the possibility of being linked to popular, famous or infamous personalities. Some simply enjoy the new past-time of using genealogical social media to do whatever these individuals do to exchange passing fantasies or otherwise enrich their lives. Ever hear a parent muse, “That cannot be a child of mine”, or a child declare, “no way is that dodo my real parent!” Well, now there are genealogical tools for settling that.

Travel and adventure is another excuse to chase ancestors. Genealogical tourism involves visiting cemeteries, taverns, monuments, battlefields, museums and relatives, at home and abroad. Such adventures can provide a sense of discovery, and expose historical and familial connections. Few people are immune to the respect, awe and other emotions that can accompany such genealogical treasure hunting.

Common access joins the reasons genealogy has become so wide-spread and popular during the past 15-20 years (about 1 generation). Until about 2 generations ago the general population relied on verbal stories, along with faded photos, as the primary method by which our culture tried to relate the history of family connections. All too frequently this method was subject to misinformation, distortion and deliberate obfuscation. Formal genealogical societies were often limited to “connected” people with built-in pedigrees. Most people found membership too difficult.

Since the 1990s the explosion of technology through computers and enhanced DNA science has created a fire-storm of interest, activity and access. Even modern transportation and reduced travel restrictions around the world play a part. Today’s genealogist has resources that their ancestors never dreamed about.

Today, the internet allows fast, world-wide research, including DNA testing and other resources. Government records (census, births, deaths, library records, etc.), family archivists, genealogical societies, and surname projects are now readily available. Genealogy has become a “virtual” growth industry. Positions for genealogists have expanded, and higher education offers a variety of genealogy-infused disciplines and degrees. Medical and health related genealogy is expanding rapidly across a range of areas.

Exploring the historical and scientific facets of human development and evolution is an attractive feature of modern genealogy. Those with social and science backgrounds and interests (history, medicine, biology, paleontology; anthropology; human settlement patterns, etc.) are fascinated with the work being done by world-wide DNA projects. The Interdisciplinary nature of these efforts enhance the process. Where this will go within the next decade seems limited only by one’s imagination.

So, why do we bother with genealogy?  We do it for all of the above reasons . . . .