On Monday, January 8, 2001 at 12:23:04 AM UTC-5, douglasr...@hotmail.com wrote:
Dear Charles:
Thank you for post below regarding the colonial immigrant, Diana
Skipwith, wife of Major Edward Dale, of Lancaster Co., Virginia. I'd
be glad to share my comments on this matter.
As your recent article in TAG pointed out, Diana Skipwith is known to
have appeared under her maiden name in records dated 1655, whereas her husband, Edward Dale's eldest daughter, Katherine (Dale) Carter, was evidently born about 1652. Under normal circumstances, one would
conclude that if Diana witnessed under her maiden name after
Katherine's birth, that Diana couldn't possibly by Katherine's mother. This would presumably be an open and shut case.
However, there was a rare custom among high born Englishwomen of this period to use their maiden names after marriage. As the daughter of a knight and a English baronet, Diana Skipwith was one of the highest
born English women ever to come to the New World. Due to her high
station then, we should not be surprised to see her using her maiden
name after marriage. As such, one must seek other evidence to prove or disprove whether or not Diana was Katherine's mother. In this case,
there are no less than ten pieces of evidences which suggest that Diana was Katherine's mother.
First, research indicates that Diana Skipwith was born in 1621, in England. If she was still single in 1655, as claimed, she would have contracted her marriage to Edward Dale after she had attained her 34th year. This is highly unlikely. The vast majority of Englishwomen in
this period were married before their 30th birthday.
Second, statements in print suggest that Diana Skipwith's husband,
Edward Dale, and her brother, Sir Gray Skipwith, may have immigrated at the same time to Virginia following the death of King Charles I in
1649. If so, it is entirely possible that Diana and Edward were
married in England, prior to their appearance in Virginia.
Third, Katherine (Dale) Carter had a large family which is well
documented in a Carter family prayer book. Among her children, we find
a child named Edward for her father, Diana for her mother, and Henry Skipwith for her mother's father. Unless Katherine (Dale) Carter was
Diana Skipwith's daughter, it would be difficult to explain the
appearance of the name Henry Skipwith Carter among her children.
Fourth, the names of the godparents of Katherine (Dale) Carter's
children are recorded in the Carter family prayer book. In colonial
times, relatives were often employed to serve as godparents. In this
case, we find that Diana Skipwith herself served as a godmother as did Diana's brother, Sir Gray Skipwith's widow, Anne Skipwith, of Middlesex Co., Virginia. It would be odd to find Dame Skipwith as a sponsor for Katherine (Dale) Carter's child, unless she had some connection to Katherine (Dale) Carter herself. If Diana Skipwith was Katherine
(Dale) Carter's mother, then Dame Skipwith would have been Katherine (Dale) Carter's aunt by marriage.
Fifth, there was an long epitaph of Edward Dale's life recorded in the Carter family prayer book. The epitaph states clearly that Edward Dale married Diana Skipwith "early in life" and presents her as his only
wife. Presumably the term "early in life" is prior to his 30th
birthday. If so, we must assume that Diana was also no more than 30
years old herself when she married Edward Dale. This suggests a
marriage in or before 1651.
Sixth, the death records of Edward Dale and his widow, Diana, are also recorded in the same prayer book. No mention is made of any wife for Edward Dale except Diana Skipwith.
Seventh, Edward Dale's will bequeathed his wife, Diana, a life interest
in certain property and named his daughter, Katherine, and two Carter grandchildren as his executors. Had Diana been Katherine's step-
mother, the usual protocol would be for Diana to hold the executorship
to safeguard her interests against her step-children's rights. Since
Diana was not named executrix, one must presume that either Diana was
too ill to serve as executrix, or else that Diana was Katherine's own mother and that Diana did not need to have her interests safeguarded.
Eighth, we find that Diana Skipwith joined her husband, Edward Dale, in conveyances to two of their married daughters, Katherine and
Elizabeth. This shows that Diana had a strong interest in Katherine
and Elizabeth's future, which one would expect if Diana was their blood mother.
Ninth, in one of these conveyances, Diana Skipwith names her son-in-
law, Daniel Harrison, who was evidently married to her daughter, Mary Dale. This reference would suggest that Diana had at least one child
by Edward Dale. If so, under normal circumstances, we would normally suppose that she married Edward Dale before her 30th birthday which
event took place in 1651. Inasmuch as Katherine Dale was born about
1652, Katherine's birth would appear to fall after Diana was likely to have been married to Edward Dale.
Tenth, the theory is presented in Mr. Ward's article that Edward Dale
may have had an earlier wife before he married Diana Skipwith by whom
he had his daughters, Katherine and Mary. It is further suggested that
the unknown first wife may have been a relative of Vincent Stanford.
This theory is based on the fact that Vincent Stanford left a sizeable bequest to Mary Dale in his will. However, it is doubtful that Vincent Stanford had any blood tie to Mary Dale at all, as in his will, he carefully referred to another legatee as his niece, whereas he made no claim to kinship to Mary Dale. Had Mary Dale been related to the
testator, one would presume he would have stated that fact just as he
did for the other legatee who he identified as his niece. Since
Vincent Stanford did not refer to Mary Dale as his kinswoman, it is inappropriate to conclude that Mary Dale's father might have had
earlier unknown first wife, or that the Dale and Stanford families were related by blood or marriage.
Regarding the matter of women using their maiden names after marriage, I've located two contemporary examples of women who used their maiden names after marriage. One is widow Mary Kemp, of Gloucester Co.,
Virginia who signed two powers of attorney about 1700, one as Mary Kemp and one as Mary Curtis. The editor of Virginia Magazine of History and Biography who reported these powers of attorney stated that Curtis
was "doubtless" Mary's maiden name, suggesting that he was aware of the custom for women to use their maiden name's after marriage. The second example I've found is a Chancery suit dated about 1610 in England in
which Anne Clere, widow, was sued by the executor of her late husband, William Gilbert's estate. Research shows that Clere was Anne's maiden name. A second chancery suit states she remained a widow for three
years and then married (2nd) Okeover Crompton. Like Diana Skipwith,
Anne Clere was the daughter of a knight and came from a family with
high born relations. Anne (Clere) Gilbert is the maternal grandmother
of the colonial immigrant, Elizabeth (Alsop) Baldwin, of Milford, Connecticut.
In closing, I wish to state that should anyone know of any other
examples of English women using their maiden names after marriage, I
would appreciate it greatly if they would forward those examples to me
for inclusion in an article I'm preparing on Diana Skipwith. Also, I
wish to thank MichaelAnne Guido for her invaluable contribution to the history of the Skipwith and Dale families. When Ms. Guido learned of
my interest in Diana (Skipwith) Dale, she generously shared her
extensive research files with me. Her files clarified several points discussed above. I'm most grateful for her assistance. I also wish to thank Gary Boyd Roberts and Jerome Anderson, both of the New England Historic Genealogical Society in Boston, and my co-author, Dr. David Faris, with whom I consulted at length about the Diana Skipwith
problem.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <20010103114758...@ng-cj1.aol.com>,
cmw1...@aol.com (CMW12635) wrote:
Diana Skipwith married Edward DALE, of Lancaster Co., VA. Anarticle I
composed which was published in the January, 2000 issue of TAGpointed out
contemporary records which called into question whether KatherineDale, Edward
Dale's daughter, could have been a daughter born of his marriage toDiana
Skipwith.
I'm advised that Mr. Douglas Richardson has researched this topic andI would
certainly be interested in his comments, etc.
Charles Ward
CMW1...@aol.com
below:Sent via Deja.comRecently, I ran across some rather interesting and significant information: It concerns Margret Skipwith (Baroness Tailboys 1st marriage and 2nd marriage to Peter Askew). It shows the continual use of her first married name by the recorder. Please see
http://www.deja.com/
Anent thi s Sir John Clifton, let us add a little bit of interesting
family history,accidentally discovered in the Colyton church Register,
as to his second marriage . We there read,dated 20 July,1579
“ John Cleftown,of Barrenton,in the Countye of Som’
sett,Knyghte,
was wedded unto the Ryghte Honora ble the Ladye Margerette
Taylboyes,of Collocombe,wydo.
”
This was the Lady Margaret Tailboys
’ “ third venter.
” She had been married twice previously,but the cautious recording scribe in the
Register must have had j ust ideas of precedency,forhe gives her the superior title of her first husband.
She was the daughter of Sir Wm. Skipwith,Knight,and wife,first,
to George (the second Lord Tailboys) ,who died in 1540,and,secondly,
she wedded Sir Peter Carew, Knight, of Mohuns -Ottery, who died
in 1575.
Gale
I, too, have tried to research Katherine (Dale) Carter as I am her direct ancestor through my Carter line: grandmother Mollie Bratton (Carter) Brickell. And is why my first name is Carter. It appears to me that Katherine Dale had to have been born inEngland and was brought the Virginia by her parents Lady Diana (Skipwith) Dale and (Sir) Edward Dale when she was an infant. I have attempted to find marriage records of Edward Dale in Leicestershire County, England but have come up short. I have also
On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 4:50:36 AM UTC-5, Claude Brickell wrote:England and was brought the Virginia by her parents Lady Diana (Skipwith) Dale and (Sir) Edward Dale when she was an infant. I have attempted to find marriage records of Edward Dale in Leicestershire County, England but have come up short. I have also
I, too, have tried to research Katherine (Dale) Carter as I am her direct ancestor through my Carter line: grandmother Mollie Bratton (Carter) Brickell. And is why my first name is Carter. It appears to me that Katherine Dale had to have been born in
Can anyone provide examples of a woman in this time period who gave one of her sons the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?in Parliament. Once on the site, just search Skipwith and go back to the earliest one listed. Especially interesting to me was Diana's g-grandfather Henry Skipwith (d. 1588), who served Queen Elizabeth I and played a role in the Duke of Norfolk's
Maybe you all have already seen these sites, but if not, there's interesting information about the House of Skipwith that you'll find if you google the historyofparliament website. It traces the line down with a lot of info about descendants who served
Also, you'll see a huge list of Diana's cousins (including Eleanor Roosevelt) if you google the website called "famous kin of diana skipwith." Lee Harvey Oswald was a direct descendant! If you click on any of the names, you'll see the path down to themand how they are related to her. It's a fun site and seems accurate.
~Cindy
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 3:53:02 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:in England and was brought the Virginia by her parents Lady Diana (Skipwith) Dale and (Sir) Edward Dale when she was an infant. I have attempted to find marriage records of Edward Dale in Leicestershire County, England but have come up short. I have also
On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 4:50:36 AM UTC-5, Claude Brickell wrote:
I, too, have tried to research Katherine (Dale) Carter as I am her direct ancestor through my Carter line: grandmother Mollie Bratton (Carter) Brickell. And is why my first name is Carter. It appears to me that Katherine Dale had to have been born
served in Parliament. Once on the site, just search Skipwith and go back to the earliest one listed. Especially interesting to me was Diana's g-grandfather Henry Skipwith (d. 1588), who served Queen Elizabeth I and played a role in the Duke of Norfolk'sCan anyone provide examples of a woman in this time period who gave one of her sons the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?
Maybe you all have already seen these sites, but if not, there's interesting information about the House of Skipwith that you'll find if you google the historyofparliament website. It traces the line down with a lot of info about descendants who
them and how they are related to her. It's a fun site and seems accurate.Also, you'll see a huge list of Diana's cousins (including Eleanor Roosevelt) if you google the website called "famous kin of diana skipwith." Lee Harvey Oswald was a direct descendant! If you click on any of the names, you'll see the path down to
special projects of fanatics and usually don't cite useful sources either.~CindyInstead of telling *us* the google the historyofparliament website, you should be providing the exact source citations. Stop being lazy. A website called "famous kin of diana skipwith" is probably not even worth mentioning. These sort of sites are the
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 10:45:48 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:born in England and was brought the Virginia by her parents Lady Diana (Skipwith) Dale and (Sir) Edward Dale when she was an infant. I have attempted to find marriage records of Edward Dale in Leicestershire County, England but have come up short. I have
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 3:53:02 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 4:50:36 AM UTC-5, Claude Brickell wrote:
I, too, have tried to research Katherine (Dale) Carter as I am her direct ancestor through my Carter line: grandmother Mollie Bratton (Carter) Brickell. And is why my first name is Carter. It appears to me that Katherine Dale had to have been
served in Parliament. Once on the site, just search Skipwith and go back to the earliest one listed. Especially interesting to me was Diana's g-grandfather Henry Skipwith (d. 1588), who served Queen Elizabeth I and played a role in the Duke of Norfolk'sCan anyone provide examples of a woman in this time period who gave one of her sons the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?
Maybe you all have already seen these sites, but if not, there's interesting information about the House of Skipwith that you'll find if you google the historyofparliament website. It traces the line down with a lot of info about descendants who
them and how they are related to her. It's a fun site and seems accurate.Also, you'll see a huge list of Diana's cousins (including Eleanor Roosevelt) if you google the website called "famous kin of diana skipwith." Lee Harvey Oswald was a direct descendant! If you click on any of the names, you'll see the path down to
the special projects of fanatics and usually don't cite useful sources either.~CindyInstead of telling *us* the google the historyofparliament website, you should be providing the exact source citations. Stop being lazy. A website called "famous kin of diana skipwith" is probably not even worth mentioning. These sort of sites are
Will, I'm not being lazy. I'm fairly new to genealogy and was not sure how to do what you ask. As I understood it, the historyofparliament website IS the source. I wasn't sure the link would work so didn't provide it, but I'll give it a try: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/ Just search Skipwith, and you'll see them. The website called "famous kin of Diana Skipwith" does cite sources, though you would likely not consider all of them "useful" sources. As I said, it's a "fun" site.
Anyway, I recently had my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale confirmed by a professional genealogist, so now I'm even more interested in Katherine's maternity than before. I've been wondering where the name Katherine came from. As far as Ican tell, and I could be wrong, you have to go back to Diana's g-grandmother Katherine FitzWilliam to find a candidate for the name. There's a blog at WordPress that has a purported line for Edward Dale showing a Katherine Legh/Leigh as Edward Dale's g-
For what it's worth, I read about common naming patterns at this time. Katherine was Edward Dale's eldest daughter, and the 1st daughter was often named after the mother, the mother's mother or the father's mother, so Edward and Diana didn't follow thecustomary pattern, though that purported line for Edward indicates the name of his mother is unknown. Middle names were exceedingly rate at this time and still unusual in the 18th century. It wasn't until the 19th century that they became common.
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 10:45:48 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:born in England and was brought the Virginia by her parents Lady Diana (Skipwith) Dale and (Sir) Edward Dale when she was an infant. I have attempted to find marriage records of Edward Dale in Leicestershire County, England but have come up short. I have
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 3:53:02 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 4:50:36 AM UTC-5, Claude Brickell wrote:
I, too, have tried to research Katherine (Dale) Carter as I am her direct ancestor through my Carter line: grandmother Mollie Bratton (Carter) Brickell. And is why my first name is Carter. It appears to me that Katherine Dale had to have been
served in Parliament. Once on the site, just search Skipwith and go back to the earliest one listed. Especially interesting to me was Diana's g-grandfather Henry Skipwith (d. 1588), who served Queen Elizabeth I and played a role in the Duke of Norfolk'sCan anyone provide examples of a woman in this time period who gave one of her sons the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?
Maybe you all have already seen these sites, but if not, there's interesting information about the House of Skipwith that you'll find if you google the historyofparliament website. It traces the line down with a lot of info about descendants who
them and how they are related to her. It's a fun site and seems accurate.Also, you'll see a huge list of Diana's cousins (including Eleanor Roosevelt) if you google the website called "famous kin of diana skipwith." Lee Harvey Oswald was a direct descendant! If you click on any of the names, you'll see the path down to
the special projects of fanatics and usually don't cite useful sources either.~CindyInstead of telling *us* the google the historyofparliament website, you should be providing the exact source citations. Stop being lazy. A website called "famous kin of diana skipwith" is probably not even worth mentioning. These sort of sites are
Will, I'm not being lazy. I'm fairly new to genealogy and was not sure how to do what you ask. As I understood it, the historyofparliament website IS the source. I wasn't sure the link would work so didn't provide it, but I'll give it a try: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/ Just search Skipwith, and you'll see them. The website called "famous kin of Diana Skipwith" does cite sources, though you would likely not consider all of them "useful" sources. As I said, it's a "fun" site.
Anyway, I recently had my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale confirmed by a professional genealogist, so now I'm even more interested in Katherine's maternity than before. I've been wondering where the name Katherine came from. As far as Ican tell, and I could be wrong, you have to go back to Diana's g-grandmother Katherine FitzWilliam to find a candidate for the name. There's a blog at WordPress that has a purported line for Edward Dale showing a Katherine Legh/Leigh as Edward Dale's g-
For what it's worth, I read about common naming patterns at this time. Katherine was Edward Dale's eldest daughter, and the 1st daughter was often named after the mother, the mother's mother or the father's mother, so Edward and Diana didn't follow thecustomary pattern, though that purported line for Edward indicates the name of his mother is unknown. Middle names were exceedingly rate at this time and still unusual in the 18th century. It wasn't until the 19th century that they became common.
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 10:45:48 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:born in England and was brought the Virginia by her parents Lady Diana (Skipwith) Dale and (Sir) Edward Dale when she was an infant. I have attempted to find marriage records of Edward Dale in Leicestershire County, England but have come up short. I have
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 3:53:02 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 4:50:36 AM UTC-5, Claude Brickell wrote:
I, too, have tried to research Katherine (Dale) Carter as I am her direct ancestor through my Carter line: grandmother Mollie Bratton (Carter) Brickell. And is why my first name is Carter. It appears to me that Katherine Dale had to have been
served in Parliament. Once on the site, just search Skipwith and go back to the earliest one listed. Especially interesting to me was Diana's g-grandfather Henry Skipwith (d. 1588), who served Queen Elizabeth I and played a role in the Duke of Norfolk'sCan anyone provide examples of a woman in this time period who gave one of her sons the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?
Maybe you all have already seen these sites, but if not, there's interesting information about the House of Skipwith that you'll find if you google the historyofparliament website. It traces the line down with a lot of info about descendants who
them and how they are related to her. It's a fun site and seems accurate.Also, you'll see a huge list of Diana's cousins (including Eleanor Roosevelt) if you google the website called "famous kin of diana skipwith." Lee Harvey Oswald was a direct descendant! If you click on any of the names, you'll see the path down to
the special projects of fanatics and usually don't cite useful sources either.~CindyInstead of telling *us* the google the historyofparliament website, you should be providing the exact source citations. Stop being lazy. A website called "famous kin of diana skipwith" is probably not even worth mentioning. These sort of sites are
Will, I'm not being lazy. I'm fairly new to genealogy and was not sure how to do what you ask. As I understood it, the historyofparliament website IS the source. I wasn't sure the link would work so didn't provide it, but I'll give it a try: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/ Just search Skipwith, and you'll see them. The website called "famous kin of Diana Skipwith" does cite sources, though you would likely not consider all of them "useful" sources. As I said, it's a "fun" site.
Anyway, I recently had my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale confirmed by a professional genealogist, so now I'm even more interested in Katherine's maternity than before. I've been wondering where the name Katherine came from. As far as Ican tell, and I could be wrong, you have to go back to Diana's g-grandmother Katherine FitzWilliam to find a candidate for the name. There's a blog at WordPress that has a purported line for Edward Dale showing a Katherine Legh/Leigh as Edward Dale's g-
For what it's worth, I read about common naming patterns at this time. Katherine was Edward Dale's eldest daughter, and the 1st daughter was often named after the mother, the mother's mother or the father's mother, so Edward and Diana didn't follow thecustomary pattern, though that purported line for Edward indicates the name of his mother is unknown. Middle names were exceedingly rate at this time and still unusual in the 18th century. It wasn't until the 19th century that they became common.
~Cindy
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sites
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:46:12 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sitesOkay, Will, I take your point. Not everyone who posts here is an expert, but happily I'm learning a lot on this site. Hope you enjoyed the historyofparliament site.
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
~Cindy
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sites
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:07:00 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:56:33 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:46:12 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sitesOkay, Will, I take your point. Not everyone who posts here is an expert, but happily I'm learning a lot on this site. Hope you enjoyed the historyofparliament site.
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.~CindySince you don't want to provide exact URL's, I didn't look
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:56:33 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:46:12 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sitesOkay, Will, I take your point. Not everyone who posts here is an expert, but happily I'm learning a lot on this site. Hope you enjoyed the historyofparliament site.
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
~CindySince you don't want to provide exact URL's, I didn't look
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:16:52 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.
~CindyHere's another I found interesting: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/skipwith-henry-1588
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 12:20:55 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:16:52 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.
Do you know the expression teaching your grandmother to suck eggs?~CindyHere's another I found interesting: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/skipwith-henry-1588
The members of this group are well acquainted with the HOP articles
I thought you were trying to make a specific point about something you had found
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:38:01 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:53:09 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 12:20:55 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:16:52 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.
Back to my original question: I'm wondering if anyone can provide an example of a woman in this time period who gave a son the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?Do you know the expression teaching your grandmother to suck eggs?~CindyHere's another I found interesting: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/skipwith-henry-1588
The members of this group are well acquainted with the HOP articles
I thought you were trying to make a specific point about something you had found
~CindyCart...Horse.
I think you need to find a *primary* document, where he signs his name in this exact fashion.
To prove that this was indeed his name in the first place and not a modern invention
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:53:09 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 12:20:55 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:16:52 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.
Back to my original question: I'm wondering if anyone can provide an example of a woman in this time period who gave a son the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?Do you know the expression teaching your grandmother to suck eggs?~CindyHere's another I found interesting: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/skipwith-henry-1588
The members of this group are well acquainted with the HOP articles
I thought you were trying to make a specific point about something you had found
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 6:30:18 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:38:01 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:53:09 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 12:20:55 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:16:52 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.
Entries" by Robert D. Lumsden. It contains a photocopy of a loose page in the Thomas Carter Prayer Book (1662) listing in his handwriting the birth time and date, christening date, and names of the godparents "standing" for his children. The Prayer BookBack to my original question: I'm wondering if anyone can provide an example of a woman in this time period who gave a son the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?Do you know the expression teaching your grandmother to suck eggs?~CindyHere's another I found interesting: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/skipwith-henry-1588
The members of this group are well acquainted with the HOP articles
I thought you were trying to make a specific point about something you had found
Good point, Will, though I have no idea how I would find such a primary document. The professional genealogist with whom I worked sent me some pages from a book called "Known By the Company They Keep: An Analysis of the Thomas Carter Prayer Book~CindyCart...Horse.
I think you need to find a *primary* document, where he signs his name in this exact fashion.
To prove that this was indeed his name in the first place and not a modern invention
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 7:13:36 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 6:30:18 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:38:01 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:53:09 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 12:20:55 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:16:52 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.
Entries" by Robert D. Lumsden. It contains a photocopy of a loose page in the Thomas Carter Prayer Book (1662) listing in his handwriting the birth time and date, christening date, and names of the godparents "standing" for his children. The Prayer BookBack to my original question: I'm wondering if anyone can provide an example of a woman in this time period who gave a son the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?Do you know the expression teaching your grandmother to suck eggs? The members of this group are well acquainted with the HOP articles I thought you were trying to make a specific point about something you had found~CindyHere's another I found interesting: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/skipwith-henry-1588
Good point, Will, though I have no idea how I would find such a primary document. The professional genealogist with whom I worked sent me some pages from a book called "Known By the Company They Keep: An Analysis of the Thomas Carter Prayer Book~CindyCart...Horse.
I think you need to find a *primary* document, where he signs his name in this exact fashion.
To prove that this was indeed his name in the first place and not a modern invention
that Henry signed his name as Henry Skipwith Carter. Charles Ward does seem to be implying that the name Henry "Skipwith" Carter may have been an invention. https://www.genealogy.com/forum/surnames/topics/dale/2164/ I guess in the future I should try and~CindyPlease excuse me if everyone in this group has already seen this, as seems likely since it is quite old. I'm posting it only because I found it an interesting follow up to my previous post and to Will's suggestion about finding a primary source showing
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 6:30:18 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/skipwith-john-1415
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:38:01 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:53:09 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 12:20:55 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 3:16:52 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
It's not that I don't want to provide them. I just thought people would enjoy looking down the list of Skipwiths and clicking on those they wanted to learn more about. There are many to investigate. Here's the first one: https://www.
Entries" by Robert D. Lumsden. It contains a photocopy of a loose page in the Thomas Carter Prayer Book (1662) listing in his handwriting the birth time and date, christening date, and names of the godparents "standing" for his children. The Prayer BookBack to my original question: I'm wondering if anyone can provide an example of a woman in this time period who gave a son the FULL name of her STEP-mother's father?Do you know the expression teaching your grandmother to suck eggs?~CindyHere's another I found interesting: https://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1558-1603/member/skipwith-henry-1588
The members of this group are well acquainted with the HOP articles
I thought you were trying to make a specific point about something you had found
Good point, Will, though I have no idea how I would find such a primary document. The professional genealogist with whom I worked sent me some pages from a book called "Known By the Company They Keep: An Analysis of the Thomas Carter Prayer Book~CindyCart...Horse.
I think you need to find a *primary* document, where he signs his name in this exact fashion.
To prove that this was indeed his name in the first place and not a modern invention
~Cindy
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:46:12 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sitesJust as reliable as this website: http://www.countyhistorian.com/knol/4hmquk6fx4gu-1-will-johnson.html
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
The difference is that Rich Hall is an author, whose edited and published material
can be found in libraries across the country. The same cannot be said for Will Johnson.
Leslie
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sites
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 10:42:47 AM UTC-7, Leslie Mahler wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 11:46:12 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
~CindyHere's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
~CindyThe Famous Kin website, is the *personal* website of someone who is devoted to this task
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sitesJust as reliable as this website: http://www.countyhistorian.com/knol/4hmquk6fx4gu-1-will-johnson.html
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
The difference is that Rich Hall is an author, whose edited and published material
can be found in libraries across the country. The same cannot be said for Will Johnson.
LeslieI have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not either
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also not be the
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source. None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also not be
Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source. None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also not be
expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would have
~Cindy
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source. None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also not
expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would have
President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor of
I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey Oswald!
~Cindy
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also
have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would
President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor of
I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey Oswald!
~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source. None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also not be
expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would have
~CindyNote, however, that neither Mary Dale Harrison Jones or Elizabeth Dale Rogers, the other two of Diana Skipwith Dale's daughters named any daughter Diana let alone any son Henry Skipwith.
A quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2022 à(s) 19:28:03 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source. None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also not
expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would have
~CindyNote, however, that neither Mary Dale Harrison Jones or Elizabeth Dale Rogers, the other two of Diana Skipwith Dale's daughters named any daughter Diana let alone any son Henry Skipwith.
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 8:17:05 AM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
A quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2022 à(s) 19:28:03 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also
have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would
order to see if they are related.Paulo, you make a good point! Maybe someday there will be a DNA study which will clear up Katherine Dale's maternity for good. I'm surprised there haven't already been some studies using DNA from Katherine's descendants and Skipwith descendants in~CindyNote, however, that neither Mary Dale Harrison Jones or Elizabeth Dale Rogers, the other two of Diana Skipwith Dale's daughters named any daughter Diana let alone any son Henry Skipwith.
~CindyAFAIK, this is too far removed in time for DNA to be helpful. For now, I assume Katherine Dale Carter is Diana Skipwith Dale's daughter. The only evidence against it is that Diana used her maiden name in two documents after Katherine Dale was born. Note
A sábado, 23 de julho de 2022 à(s) 16:42:27 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 8:17:05 AM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2022 à(s) 19:28:03 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also
have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would
order to see if they are related.Paulo, you make a good point! Maybe someday there will be a DNA study which will clear up Katherine Dale's maternity for good. I'm surprised there haven't already been some studies using DNA from Katherine's descendants and Skipwith descendants in~CindyNote, however, that neither Mary Dale Harrison Jones or Elizabeth Dale Rogers, the other two of Diana Skipwith Dale's daughters named any daughter Diana let alone any son Henry Skipwith.
Note one of those documents was not actually signed by Diana, it was just a court record mentioning her. The writer may simply have used her maiden name because he knew she ws the sister of Grey Skipwith. What was the other document? Anyways, note both~CindyAFAIK, this is too far removed in time for DNA to be helpful. For now, I assume Katherine Dale Carter is Diana Skipwith Dale's daughter. The only evidence against it is that Diana used her maiden name in two documents after Katherine Dale was born.
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 12:47:51 PM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
A sábado, 23 de julho de 2022 à(s) 16:42:27 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 8:17:05 AM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2022 à(s) 19:28:03 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should
would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I
order to see if they are related.Paulo, you make a good point! Maybe someday there will be a DNA study which will clear up Katherine Dale's maternity for good. I'm surprised there haven't already been some studies using DNA from Katherine's descendants and Skipwith descendants in~CindyNote, however, that neither Mary Dale Harrison Jones or Elizabeth Dale Rogers, the other two of Diana Skipwith Dale's daughters named any daughter Diana let alone any son Henry Skipwith.
Note one of those documents was not actually signed by Diana, it was just a court record mentioning her. The writer may simply have used her maiden name because he knew she ws the sister of Grey Skipwith. What was the other document? Anyways, note both~CindyAFAIK, this is too far removed in time for DNA to be helpful. For now, I assume Katherine Dale Carter is Diana Skipwith Dale's daughter. The only evidence against it is that Diana used her maiden name in two documents after Katherine Dale was born.
Paulo, I don't know how accurate this site is, but here is what it says about how far back in time DNA can be helpful: https://whoareyoumadeof.com/blog/how-far-back-can-you-go-with-dna/Yes, I think it does.
What is the significance of both documents being signed before the death of her father Baronet Henry Skipwith? Does that make it more likely that she would have used her maiden name even after she was married?
~Cindy
A sábado, 23 de julho de 2022 à(s) 18:34:35 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 12:47:51 PM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A sábado, 23 de julho de 2022 à(s) 16:42:27 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 8:17:05 AM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2022 à(s) 19:28:03 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should
would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I
in order to see if they are related.Paulo, you make a good point! Maybe someday there will be a DNA study which will clear up Katherine Dale's maternity for good. I'm surprised there haven't already been some studies using DNA from Katherine's descendants and Skipwith descendants~CindyNote, however, that neither Mary Dale Harrison Jones or Elizabeth Dale Rogers, the other two of Diana Skipwith Dale's daughters named any daughter Diana let alone any son Henry Skipwith.
Note one of those documents was not actually signed by Diana, it was just a court record mentioning her. The writer may simply have used her maiden name because he knew she ws the sister of Grey Skipwith. What was the other document? Anyways, note both~CindyAFAIK, this is too far removed in time for DNA to be helpful. For now, I assume Katherine Dale Carter is Diana Skipwith Dale's daughter. The only evidence against it is that Diana used her maiden name in two documents after Katherine Dale was born.
Paulo, I don't know how accurate this site is, but here is what it says about how far back in time DNA can be helpful: https://whoareyoumadeof.com/blog/how-far-back-can-you-go-with-dna/
What is the significance of both documents being signed before the death of her father Baronet Henry Skipwith? Does that make it more likely that she would have used her maiden name even after she was married?
~CindyYes, I think it does.
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 7:21:29 PM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
A sábado, 23 de julho de 2022 à(s) 18:34:35 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 12:47:51 PM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A sábado, 23 de julho de 2022 à(s) 16:42:27 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 8:17:05 AM UTC-4, Paulo Ricardo Canedo wrote:
A quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2022 à(s) 19:28:03 UTC+1, Cindy H. escreveu:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should
would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I
in order to see if they are related.Paulo, you make a good point! Maybe someday there will be a DNA study which will clear up Katherine Dale's maternity for good. I'm surprised there haven't already been some studies using DNA from Katherine's descendants and Skipwith descendants~CindyNote, however, that neither Mary Dale Harrison Jones or Elizabeth Dale Rogers, the other two of Diana Skipwith Dale's daughters named any daughter Diana let alone any son Henry Skipwith.
born. Note one of those documents was not actually signed by Diana, it was just a court record mentioning her. The writer may simply have used her maiden name because he knew she ws the sister of Grey Skipwith. What was the other document? Anyways, note~CindyAFAIK, this is too far removed in time for DNA to be helpful. For now, I assume Katherine Dale Carter is Diana Skipwith Dale's daughter. The only evidence against it is that Diana used her maiden name in two documents after Katherine Dale was
Paulo, I don't know how accurate this site is, but here is what it says about how far back in time DNA can be helpful: https://whoareyoumadeof.com/blog/how-far-back-can-you-go-with-dna/
What is the significance of both documents being signed before the death of her father Baronet Henry Skipwith? Does that make it more likely that she would have used her maiden name even after she was married?
Here is a very interesting article about Edward Dale, husband of Diana Skipwith: https://collation.folger.edu/2016/07/earliest-recorded-shakespeare-america/~CindyYes, I think it does.
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also
have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I would
President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor of
I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey Oswald!
Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should
would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I
President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor of
I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey Oswald!
I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within genealogical time.
To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should
would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I
President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor of
of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey Oswald!
I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within genealogical time.
To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of descendants
It might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should
would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down. I
of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor
I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey Oswald!
time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within genealogical
of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of descendants
It might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It
I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down.
of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor
Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey
time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within genealogical
descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of
opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're back to differingIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It
I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed down.
ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (
Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey
time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within genealogical
descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of
differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're back toIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNA
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It
down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed
ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (
Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey
genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within
descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of
differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're back toIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors.
down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed
ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (
Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee
genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within
descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of
differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're back toIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors.
down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were passed
ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (
Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee
genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within
descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of
differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're back toIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 11:29:12 AM UTC-4, pj.ev...@gmail.com wrote:errors. It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains
passed down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were
(ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter
Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee
genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within
descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of
differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're back toIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines. This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Here's a very interesting article about the DNA test involving Richard III: http://www.citigen.org/2017/03/17/could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty/Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors.
passed down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were
ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (
Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee
genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within
descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA of
differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're back toIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines. This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:35:04 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:errors. It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 11:29:12 AM UTC-4, pj.ev...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains
passed down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were
Carter (ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas
Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee
genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within
of descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the DNA
to differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're backIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines. This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
The Plantagenet male-line descent as a basis for the "legitimacy of British royal lineages" was overthrown with the Tudor conquest or "seizure" of the throne in 1485. So it's a little late to wonder about this.Here's a very interesting article about the DNA test involving Richard III: http://www.citigen.org/2017/03/17/could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty/Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 5:11:13 PM UTC-4, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:errors. It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:35:04 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 11:29:12 AM UTC-4, pj.ev...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains
passed down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine were
Carter (ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas
Lee Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than
genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within
DNA of descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the
to differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we're backIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
of Lancaster and son of Edward III) in the Beaufort line. Having John of Gaunt as an ancestor solidified his claim, as did his marriage to Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV, which united the two houses, the red rose of Lancaster and the white roseIt's true that Henry VII declared himself king by the judgment of God and right of conquest when he won the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. However, in order to be secure, he had to convince the Yorkists of his claim. He descended from John of Gaunt (DukeThe Plantagenet male-line descent as a basis for the "legitimacy of British royal lineages" was overthrown with the Tudor conquest or "seizure" of the throne in 1485. So it's a little late to wonder about this.Here's a very interesting article about the DNA test involving Richard III: http://www.citigen.org/2017/03/17/could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty/Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 6:08:59 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:errors. It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 5:11:13 PM UTC-4, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:35:04 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 11:29:12 AM UTC-4, pj.ev...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains
Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
were passed down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine
Carter (ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas
Lee Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than
within genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two,
DNA of descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter's maternity.To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with the
back to differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we'reIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Duke of Lancaster and son of Edward III) in the Beaufort line. Having John of Gaunt as an ancestor solidified his claim, as did his marriage to Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV, which united the two houses, the red rose of Lancaster and the whiteIt's true that Henry VII declared himself king by the judgment of God and right of conquest when he won the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. However, in order to be secure, he had to convince the Yorkists of his claim. He descended from John of Gaunt (The Plantagenet male-line descent as a basis for the "legitimacy of British royal lineages" was overthrown with the Tudor conquest or "seizure" of the throne in 1485. So it's a little late to wonder about this.Here's a very interesting article about the DNA test involving Richard III: http://www.citigen.org/2017/03/17/could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty/Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
I was referring specifically to the message embedded in the URL: "could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty".paternity event which caused the difference between Richard III and other royal scions or possible heirs would have been moot after a few years of successful Tudor rule, let alone sixty or seventy.
Right, the perceived kingly claims of Henry VII were rather bolstered by his and wife's several descents from Edward III, but Henry and Elizabeth were both descended only through a mix of males and females, not in a strict male-line descent. The non-
On Tuesday, August 2, 2022 at 9:54:03 AM UTC-4, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:contains errors. It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 6:08:59 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 5:11:13 PM UTC-4, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:35:04 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 11:29:12 AM UTC-4, pj.ev...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it
state.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable
were passed down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and Katherine
Thomas Carter (ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and
than Lee Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin
within genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two,
the DNA of descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter'sTo me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with
back to differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we'reIt might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Duke of Lancaster and son of Edward III) in the Beaufort line. Having John of Gaunt as an ancestor solidified his claim, as did his marriage to Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV, which united the two houses, the red rose of Lancaster and the whiteIt's true that Henry VII declared himself king by the judgment of God and right of conquest when he won the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. However, in order to be secure, he had to convince the Yorkists of his claim. He descended from John of Gaunt (The Plantagenet male-line descent as a basis for the "legitimacy of British royal lineages" was overthrown with the Tudor conquest or "seizure" of the throne in 1485. So it's a little late to wonder about this.Here's a very interesting article about the DNA test involving Richard III: http://www.citigen.org/2017/03/17/could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty/Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
paternity event which caused the difference between Richard III and other royal scions or possible heirs would have been moot after a few years of successful Tudor rule, let alone sixty or seventy.I was referring specifically to the message embedded in the URL: "could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty".
Right, the perceived kingly claims of Henry VII were rather bolstered by his and wife's several descents from Edward III, but Henry and Elizabeth were both descended only through a mix of males and females, not in a strict male-line descent. The non-
Henry VII's ancestry helped him deal with some Yorkist pretenders during his reign, and his ancestry ensured that the right to the throne of his descendants could not be challenged. William the Conqueror spent years subduing his opponents and had toharrow the North and starve the inhabitants there in order to cement his right to rule by conquest alone. Thankfully, Henry VII was able to avoid that scenario. You are probably right about any non-paternity event becoming moot after successful Tudor
On Tuesday, August 2, 2022 at 6:11:29 PM UTC+2, Cindy H. wrote:contains errors. It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
On Tuesday, August 2, 2022 at 9:54:03 AM UTC-4, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 6:08:59 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 5:11:13 PM UTC-4, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:35:04 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 11:29:12 AM UTC-4, pj.ev...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 9:59:48 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 12:42:22 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 8:41:39 AM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:13:19 AM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 7:02:52 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 5:53:40 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 5:43:46 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 6:59:07 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:34:15 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 2:28:03 PM UTC-4, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 5:41:30 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-7, Cindy H. wrote:
On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not eitherThanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it
state.Saying a website is unreliable is not tantamount to saying "this person is full of shit"
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable
Katherine were passed down. I would have expected some of those children to have been named after their grandmother if Diana Skipwith was indeed their grandmother. Unless the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale simply hadn't liked Diana.That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.I find it a bit strange that none of the children of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale seem to have named their own children Diana or Skipwith, not even Henry Skipwith Carter, though the names Edward, Dale, and
Thomas Carter (ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.~CindyOops! Diana would have been their g-grandmother.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and
than Lee Harvey Oswald!I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin
within genealogical time.I've just read this report and find it sound.Here is the study: https://christchurch1735.org/images/Research-and-Discover/Lumsden_DNA.pdf~CindyOne DNA test?
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two,
the DNA of descendants of Mary Dale Humphrey, Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and Katherine Dale Carter to see what kind of relationship may exist. If well done, such a study might be the best/only way to definitively prove/disprove Katherine Dale Carter'sTo me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.That report goes back in time to John Carter b. 1613, so it seems to me that it would be possible to have a DNA study that compared the DNA of descendants of Sir William Skipwith (son of Sir Grey Skipwith, Diana's brother) with
Prayerbook.It might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's
re back to differing opinions about Katherine's maternity unless/until someone discovers a document proving that Edward Dale had been married to someone before he married Diana Skipwith.It is much more problematic to compare DNA off daughter lines.Thanks, Will. I thought it might be possible to get around that problem by comparing DNA from Sir Grey Skipwith's line to the DNA from a male descendant of Katherine Dale Carter, but I guess that wouldn't work. So it looks like we'
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Duke of Lancaster and son of Edward III) in the Beaufort line. Having John of Gaunt as an ancestor solidified his claim, as did his marriage to Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV, which united the two houses, the red rose of Lancaster and the whiteIt's true that Henry VII declared himself king by the judgment of God and right of conquest when he won the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. However, in order to be secure, he had to convince the Yorkists of his claim. He descended from John of Gaunt (The Plantagenet male-line descent as a basis for the "legitimacy of British royal lineages" was overthrown with the Tudor conquest or "seizure" of the throne in 1485. So it's a little late to wonder about this.Here's a very interesting article about the DNA test involving Richard III: http://www.citigen.org/2017/03/17/could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty/Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Well I would suggest before you go any further, that you confirm your own line using Autosomal DNAA possibility, though a professional genealogist in Virginia recently traced my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
non-paternity event which caused the difference between Richard III and other royal scions or possible heirs would have been moot after a few years of successful Tudor rule, let alone sixty or seventy.I was referring specifically to the message embedded in the URL: "could-a-dna-test-unthrone-the-british-royalty".
Right, the perceived kingly claims of Henry VII were rather bolstered by his and wife's several descents from Edward III, but Henry and Elizabeth were both descended only through a mix of males and females, not in a strict male-line descent. The
harrow the North and starve the inhabitants there in order to cement his right to rule by conquest alone. Thankfully, Henry VII was able to avoid that scenario. You are probably right about any non-paternity event becoming moot after successful TudorHenry VII's ancestry helped him deal with some Yorkist pretenders during his reign, and his ancestry ensured that the right to the throne of his descendants could not be challenged. William the Conqueror spent years subduing his opponents and had to
Last I checked no "non paternity event" has been proven? The modern family which was compared is far more likely to be the weak link?
On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:36:43 AM UTC-7, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.Will, you're being an a-hole. You know damned well that genealogy is not based on DNA.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
their non-biological children, pass down inheritnaces, and have family dynamics that are just as interesting as the dna doner.Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.SHE WOULD NEVER AND YOU TAKE THAT BACK. ABIGAIL WAS HONEST AND CHASTE.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
--Joe C
P.S. for what it is worth, this statement doesn't make any sense. paper lines can have errors and so can dna tests; it doesn't mean they are worthless. And whether or not the biological line is sound doens't mean that the paper parents didn't raise
On Wednesday, August 3, 2022 at 2:19:13 PM UTC-7, joe...@gmail.com wrote:their non-biological children, pass down inheritnaces, and have family dynamics that are just as interesting as the dna doner.
Tracing a line through paper, is not worth anything, if you don't have the DNA evidence for yourself.SHE WOULD NEVER AND YOU TAKE THAT BACK. ABIGAIL WAS HONEST AND CHASTE.
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
--Joe C
P.S. for what it is worth, this statement doesn't make any sense. paper lines can have errors and so can dna tests; it doesn't mean they are worthless. And whether or not the biological line is sound doens't mean that the paper parents didn't raise
Ahhhhh ha ha ha ha ha.
But my implication is that an NPE can occur at *any* generation.
It doesn't have to have occurred four hundred years ago.
It might have occurred 80 years ago as well
Can an NPE with a closely-related male-line (agnate) cousin of the claimed/ believed father be detected by DNA methods?
On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 8:58:16 AM UTC-7, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:and repeat.
Can an NPE with a closely-related male-line (agnate) cousin of the claimed/ believed father be detected by DNA methods?My own personal method does not need males, since I rely on the autosomal DNA results.
What I do is plot out how each match is supposed to be related (by tree) and confirm whether or not that makes sense by the size of the centimorgan match.
If a person is supposed to be a first cousin, and only matches 30 cms (or does not match at all), then they are not a first cousin at all. Then you have to figure out whose tree has the NPE by using a third match that matches one but not both. Rinse
It's a long process, but you *can* rebuild the correct tree using these methods.Will, I find the two tests and hundreds of matches easy, but the "...and their trees" part maddening. So many folks out there who don't have or don't share tree information. I've spent hours and hours constructing trees for exact mtDNA matches -- using
Even to the point of determining who the missing line must be. That is, which family, has provided the missing biological piece. And thus, which family in the tree, is not biologically related.
You just need at least two tests, administered, and then the hundreds of matches they each generate, and their trees.
On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 4:42:48 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:and repeat.
On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 8:58:16 AM UTC-7, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
Can an NPE with a closely-related male-line (agnate) cousin of the claimed/ believed father be detected by DNA methods?My own personal method does not need males, since I rely on the autosomal DNA results.
What I do is plot out how each match is supposed to be related (by tree) and confirm whether or not that makes sense by the size of the centimorgan match.
If a person is supposed to be a first cousin, and only matches 30 cms (or does not match at all), then they are not a first cousin at all. Then you have to figure out whose tree has the NPE by using a third match that matches one but not both. Rinse
the tiny bit of info they do have -- in the (vain LOL) hope I can find our common motherline ancestor. No luck yet, but lots of exploration and fun, and have made the acquaintance of many Virginia and Kentucky families with very scant paper trails. Also,It's a long process, but you *can* rebuild the correct tree using these methods.
Even to the point of determining who the missing line must be. That is, which family, has provided the missing biological piece. And thus, which family in the tree, is not biologically related.
You just need at least two tests, administered, and then the hundreds of matches they each generate, and their trees.Will, I find the two tests and hundreds of matches easy, but the "...and their trees" part maddening. So many folks out there who don't have or don't share tree information. I've spent hours and hours constructing trees for exact mtDNA matches -- using
On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 10:15:50 AM UTC-7, Jinny Wallerstedt/Girl 57 wrote:Rinse and repeat.
On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 4:42:48 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 8:58:16 AM UTC-7, ravinma...@yahoo.com wrote:
Can an NPE with a closely-related male-line (agnate) cousin of the claimed/ believed father be detected by DNA methods?My own personal method does not need males, since I rely on the autosomal DNA results.
What I do is plot out how each match is supposed to be related (by tree) and confirm whether or not that makes sense by the size of the centimorgan match.
If a person is supposed to be a first cousin, and only matches 30 cms (or does not match at all), then they are not a first cousin at all. Then you have to figure out whose tree has the NPE by using a third match that matches one but not both.
using the tiny bit of info they do have -- in the (vain LOL) hope I can find our common motherline ancestor. No luck yet, but lots of exploration and fun, and have made the acquaintance of many Virginia and Kentucky families with very scant paper trails.It's a long process, but you *can* rebuild the correct tree using these methods.
Even to the point of determining who the missing line must be. That is, which family, has provided the missing biological piece. And thus, which family in the tree, is not biologically related.
You just need at least two tests, administered, and then the hundreds of matches they each generate, and their trees.Will, I find the two tests and hundreds of matches easy, but the "...and their trees" part maddening. So many folks out there who don't have or don't share tree information. I've spent hours and hours constructing trees for exact mtDNA matches --
mtDNA is not a very useful genealogical toolYes, autosomal tests taken and used, as of course mtDNA on its own is not useful. It is useful, though, to make connections with others...Never can tell what might emerge. And I'm in it for the long haul.
I hope that you and your matches have also taken Autosomal DNA tests so you can at least figure out if you're related within twenty generations.
Yes, autosomal tests taken and used, as of course mtDNA on its own is not useful. It is useful, though, to make connections with others...Never can tell what might emerge. And I'm in it for the long haul.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 45:22:49 |
| Calls: | 6,648 |
| Files: | 12,197 |
| Messages: | 5,329,773 |