Ancestor Articles

I've written articles on a few ancestors. If you'd like further information about the people behind the names, hopefully my articles will be a great starting point.

Articles on Henry VIII:

The Cruelty of Henry VIII

Biography: Henry VIII

Lady Margaret Beaufort:

Biography: Lady Margaret Beaufort

Anne of Brittany:

Biography: Anne of Brittany

More article postings will follow in due course.

Until then, adieu.

Thoughts About The Kingdom of Heaven (Movie)

I watched Kingdom of Heaven today. If you haven't yet, I highly recommend it. I expected the movie to be overly preachy and pointlessly violent. However, I was surprised to find that there was an overwhelming message of peace throughout.

What many people may not realize is that the characters in the movie were actually (loosely) based on real people -- people who have many descendants alive today.

Since this is a genealogy blog, I'll focus on my own relatives.

The King of Jerusalem in the movie was Baldwin IV. He was the son of the half-brother of my ancestor Geoffrey Plantagenet, duc de Normandy. That being the case, King Baldwin IV is my 1st cousin, 28 times removed.

Much of the movie was romanticized; though he was a leper, Baldwin IV never wore a mask. However, I was proud, in a way, of the scene right after he died, when Sibylla removed his mask, because it showed his true face, the face that many lepers possess if they don't have access to modern leprosy antibiotics. And when they showed his face, it was clear that the movie-makers intended the moment to be beautiful, instead of frightening. I found that very touching. Sibylla was looking at her brother's face for the first time in many years. Rather than being disgusted or frightened, she looked down on him in sisterly love and sorrow for the fact that he had been cut down in his prime, due to a terrible disease.

Another aspect of the movie I enjoyed was that even though it was, again, romanticized, parts of it also rang very true -- especially at the beginning when they were in France. Today, what happened to the body of Balian's first wife would be appalling, but back then, suicide was considered a major crime against God. Still, it was unnerving to think about.

On another point about Balian: he wasn't a very young man (like Orlando Bloom, who played him in the movie) when he went to Jerusalem. He was in his forties, which might be considered young today; back then, however, it was considered to be getting on up there in years. Furthermore, it's never been proven that he and Sibylla were in love. Balian actually married Maria Comnena who was Sibylla's stepmother. That made Balian the step-father to Sibylla's younger half-sister, Isabella, who would go on to be Queen of Jerusalem after Sibylla.

Sibylla, on the other hand, married Guy de Lusignan AFTER she was crowned Queen.

By-and-large, it was the lives of Balian and Sibylla who were most heavily fictionalized.

All-in-all, though, I thought the acting was great. Orlando Bloom's performances was kinda blah, though.

How am I related to the kings of Jerusalem? Through the Warrens, of course, which you can read more about here.

The Alley Family

Many Americans alive today, such as the actress Kirstie Alley, can trace their Alley line back to a man named John Alley. I'm one of those Americans.

John Alley was born around 1460 in Great Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, England. Very little is known about John. He's the oldest verifiable person in that line (though there are two candidates that could potentially be his father: John de la'Lee -- various spellings -- of Brittany and, in my opinion, the more likely Willelmus Alley of Great Wycombe). Some sources suggest that John, like his son William, was a mayor of Great Wycombe, which might have been so. Still, I haven't yet independently verified the assertion.

In the 1480's, John married a woman called Agnes (last name unknown). John was believed to have died after August 11, 1506 in Chipping, Bucks, England. There was a will floating about of John's; I saw it a long time ago. When I find it again, I'll post a copy; wills provide amazingly accurate information about a family, because it comes from their own mouths.

My descent from John Alley is as follows:

John Alley m. Agnes

Mayor William Alley (b. c. 1487; d. aft 1550)

Bishop William Alley of Exeter (b. 1510; d. April 15, 1570) m. Sybil Bodleigh (b. 1515)

Archdeacon Roger Alley of Cornwall, Vicar of Pyeworthy (b. 1535, Devonshire; d. 1610)

Jerome Alley (b. 1560, Devonshire; d. 1635, England)

Thomas Alley (b. November 27 1581, Oxford; d. 1656, Oxford)

William Alley (b. 1605, Oxford; d. aft 1632, Salem, Massachusetts)

Henry Alley (b. 1630, Oxford; d. c. 1690, Haverhill, Massachusetts)

Abraham Alley (b. c. 1670, Virginia) m. Winnifred James (b. 1670, England)

Abraham Alley (b. c. 1690, Prince William, Virginia; d. 1760, Brunswick, Virginia) m. Mary

Drury Alley Sr. (b. July 1, 1724; d. 1797) m. Winnifred Alley (his sister)

Shadrick Alley (b. May 1, 1751, Iredell, North Carolina; d. March 1835, Iredell) m. Mary Price (b. 1754)

Howell Lafayette Alley (b. June 26, 1779, North Carolina; d. Aug, 1864, Iredell) m. Ann Turbyfill -- alternate spellings: Turbeville, Turbyville -- (b. c. 1781)

Hamblin Alexander Alley (b. 1799, North Carolina; d. June 1, 1879, Mississippi) m. Martha Ann Turbyfill, relative of his mother (b. 1813, North Carolina)

Miles Glenn Alley (b. December 1841, Tennessee; d. 1929, Texas) m. Canarisa "Caney" Louisa Bell (b. June 8, 1848; d. December 6, 1932, Dyer, Gibson, Tennessee)

Mary Agnes Alley (b. December, 1882, Tennessee; d. November 14, 1949, Dyer) m. Bobby Happle Ramsey (b. August 14, 1879, Tennessee; November 4, 1945, Dyer)

Glenn Newton Ramsey (b. July, 1908, Dyer; d. 1998, Florence) m. Ida Ellen Renaud-Cole (b. 1916; d. October 19, 1972, Florence, Alabama)

Glenn and Ida are my great-grandparents on my mother's side.

As I said in an earlier post, I plan on doing updates on my Scottish heritage. I'm still adding names, links, etc. right now, so I wanna get to a stopping place before I post it here.

Until then.

The Tudors and The Bells: Is it Fair to Take Liberties with Historical People's Lives for the Sake of Entertainment?

Has anyone ever watched The Tudors? 'Cause I have been lately. And I got to say, the show, entertainment-wise, is phenomenal. As for the historical accuracy, some things are very spot-on, such as their portrayal of Sir Thomas More in the early part of the first season. I can't testify to later portrayals of his character, as that's as far as I've gotten in the series. But the rest? Some inaccurate stuff is bothering me, such as the melding of Margaret and Mary Tudor (called Margaret on the show, the king's sister).

This annoys me greatly, because I'm a direct descendant of Margaret Tudor. She and Mary were separate people and it was Mary who married Brandon, not Margaret. And Mary wasn't the queen of Portugal, but the queen of France. (She was married to Francis' father, Louis. Margaret, in fact, was married to the Scottish king.) Furthermore, Margaret/Mary didn't kill her husband.

I understand that for the sake of entertainment, it's almost completely impossible not to take some liberties. But at what price? Is it fair to slander someone who's too dead to defend themselves?

Take my relation, John Bell, for instance. In the movie, An American Haunting, he's portrayed as an incestuous daughter-raper. If he was a daughter-raper, I would know about it, being a rather close relation. To go further still, his wife Lucy, in the extend/unrated version (whatever, I'm not sure, so don't quote me -- it could've been in the main film shown in theaters, but I don't remember it) is shown to have killed him. This did not happen. No one knows exactly what killed him, but I'm certain it wasn't his wife. There was a lot of interest in the Bells at the time. If she had done it, she would've been caught and prosecuted.

Again, is it fair to label John Bell a daughter-raper and Lucy Bell a murderess when they, like Margaret Tudor, are too dead to defend themselves? Those who think it's fine to do so would probably use the argument that it's all in good fun, for entertainment purposes, but what's the price? After all, these people have real, living relatives and descendants. Is it fair to tarnish our family -- my family -- like this? Remember: the majority of people watching this show and this movie thoroughly think that what they are watching are accurate portrayals of what really happened. Is it fair to purport ridiculous things for the sake of good viewing?

Don't get me wrong. I absolutely enjoy The Tudors and An American Haunting. I think the storytelling, acting, and direction is phenomenal. I enjoy it even more when I remember it's all in good fun. But still, there's always that nagging voice in the back of my mind that can't help but be offended when faced with made-up events that put my relatives in a less-than-stellar light.

Update

My research is going well. I've passed the 1,000 mark on names added to my family tree. (The exact number at this precise moment is 1,123.)

And that's why I've been so silent so long (well, that and work). But I plan on making a big update soon about my Scottish lineage. I descend from a lot of prominent families of old Scotland (such as the Stuarts/Stewarts, Douglases, Wallaces, Lindsays, Campbells, MacDonalds, etc).

I'm really interested in connecting with distant Scottish cousins both here (America) and abroad (like the old country itself). So, if you're Scottish and think we might be related, let me know!

Until then, adieu.

From Wales to Switzerland : the Robert/Roberts Family

More accurately, this entry would be titled "From Wales to Switzerland to South Carolina to Alabama..." but I thought that was too long.

I hit a breakthrough in tracing my Roberts side of the family only to hit another roadblock: William Robert.

William Robert was born in 1598 in Aberyswith, Wales. And that's all I have to go on. I don't know who his wife was or where he did, though I do know the name of his son, Daniel, whom I descend from. More research on William is definitely needed.

From Wales to Switzerland

Something peculiar happened during the lifetime of Daniel Robert: he moved from Wales to Switzerland. Without knowing in full the specifics, I can make some educated guesses as to why. (After all, back then, most British peoples immigrated to the various colonies of Great Britain -- not foreign countries.)

Daniel was born around 1630 in Aberyswith. By the time he died, which was after 1656, he was living in St. Imier, Switzerland.

From Switzerland to South Carolina

His descendants, who bare French names, were alleged to be associated with the Huguenot Movement.

William Robert was born during the latter part of the French Wars of Religion. While he was born in Wales, and I have no knowledge of him or his family being French prior to his son leaving for the continent, he definitely lived in a time were Britain was going through its own religious upheaval. He would've been a young man during Henry VIII's initial breaking with the Roman Church. Not to mention, Calvinism and Lutheranism had already been going on long before that, and they were punishable under English Law at the time. So, perhaps the Robert family of Wales had Protestant sympathies before Henry declared himself head of the Church of England.

Daniel married a woman named Marie Hugent. I've been able to find nothing about her, save for her name, but geography suggests that she was Swiss; if she wasn't Swiss, etymology suggests she was French.

Daniel's son and grandson were both named Pierre. Senior was born in St. Imier, where Daniel died. Junior was born in Basel, Switzerland. Both men died in a place referred to as French Santee, Charleston, South Carolina. Huguenots fled to the Carolinas often, so this further implies that they were Huguenots or had sympathy for them.

Pierre Jr's son was named Jacques de Bordeaux Robert; Jacques was born in French Santee on April 3, 1711, and died there on November 11, 1774. His middle name (which means "of Bordeaux" -- a city in France) is interesting. It was also the middle name of his mother, Judith de Bordeaux Videaul (Videau per some sources). I have Judith's family traced back a good bit and I can't find any reason why her middle name would be de Bordeaux. Her family mainly comes from Normandy (though her grandfather is from Picardy); Bordeaux is in Aquitaine. That leads me to believe that someone in her family, perhaps further down the line than I've traced thus far, must've been from Bordeaux. And since I have all of her grandparents and one set of great-grandparents traced back, whoever bore that name (or came from there) must've been important enough for them to remember.

Jacques' son was named James Roberts and that's where the surname acquired the S at the end, possibly to Anglicize it. (After all, during the time in which they lived, the German Zeh because See and the German Joachim became Yocum.)

From South Carolina to Alabama

Stephen had a daughter when he was fifty years old. Her name was Milla J. Roberts and she was born on August 29, 1804. Here's the rub: Stephen died in Barnwell, South Carolina in November of 1823 while Milla was born, lived, and died in Marion County, Alabama. I have to wonder why Stephen died in South Carolina. Was he just visiting? Did he move back there from Alabama after his daughter was married off? Or did he never live with his daughter at all? I can't be sure, because I know nothing of Milla's mother other than that her name was Sarah Grimes and she was almost as old as Stephen.

My Descent From Milla:

Milla J. Roberts m. George R. Tucker
James Rains Tucker m. Emmaline Berryhill
Josiah Newton Tucker m. Amanda "Mandy" M. Reese
Geneva Irene Eldora Tucker m. William Henry McDonald
George Washington McDonald m. Alma Wyers and produced my grandma

When Ancestors Become Mythical: Separating Myth from Reality

When you read the title of this post (if you did), you might not have realized I was being serious: but I was.

Many people who've traced their genealogy back to ancient times run into this problem. Particularly if you're of royal European descent. Usually, it happens in Norse traditions: a legendary (or partially legendary) king is descended from a god. Some sources actually allege that Dan I of Denmark was, in reality, the source of the Odin/Woden/Votan legends.

While I think the chronology is a little off there, in terms of realism (and also negates the fact that Odin comes from an ancient Indo-Europeaon source, predating Dan I), it's the perfect example of ancestry diverging into the realm of mythology.

Another example is the ancient Irish kings. Most Irish people (like myself) can legitimately trace our lineage back to these ancient men. However, when you do further research, the ancestors of the Irish kings come from Egypt, descending from a woman called Princess Scota, who was the daughter of the Pharaoh. Scota being the progenitor of the Irish nation, is, however, far more believable than saying we are actually descended from gods like Odin or Zeus since it could be argued the Scota was actually a real, historical person.

One of the strangest things I've noticed in genealogy is the purposeful desire of genealogists to trace their genealogy back to mythical people and gods. I noticed an example of this when I was doing research last night.

It's commonly accepted that many of the Biblical patriarchs were real people; in fact, religion aside, I believe there's enough archaeological evidence to prove they were. And, naturally, there are people who trace their descent to the Biblical patriarchs. Whether they really can with validity or whether the connections are based upon ancient fabrications or legends isn't the issue. The issue that I found last night was these people's need and desire to take that a step further -- a strange step further.

I came across many articles likening the ancient Biblical patriarchs to ancient gods or legendary figures in other cultures and religons. To my best understanding, it's because whoever wrote these articles believes in the church-accepted timeline of the planet Earth. And that's fine -- that's their belief. But, however, to say that the legend of Saturn/Kronos comes from the Biblical Jacob is stretching it; after all, archeological and linquisitic evidence proves that the legends of Kronos predate Jacob's time.

Furthermore, similar articles liken Jacob's son, Judah, to Zeus and claim that the etymology for Judah and Zeus is one and the same. However, this isn't true. Judah comes from the Hebrew word "Yehudah" which means "praised"; Zeus, on the other hand, comes from the Proto-Indo-European "Dieus" which was, naturally, the Proto-Indo-European god of the sky. Dieus gave rise to Zeus, Jupiter/Iupiter (from the epithet dyeu-patar, meaning "father Dieus/Zeus"), and the Vedic Dyaus Pita. All of these are sky gods and in no way related to Judah. Also, the root Dieus predates the name Yehudah by thousands of years.

I know that it's human nature to connect reality to our own beliefs, but when do we take it too far?

So, my questions are:

1. Do you add people to your family tree knowing that they are only legendary or mythical?

and

2. Do you think it discredits genealogy to add mythical people to genealogical databases?

Please, discuss. I would love to hear other people's views on this!