Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

How Many Generations Since Adam Are You?

family history

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Magen_Avot

Magen_Avot

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ months.
  • 317 posts
  • LocationMiddle East

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:20 AM

I was thinking about some family history and we have a line that is tracable to Adam due to some fortunate connections to royalty and the tribes of Israel. If we accept that there are no errors in historical records the generation number we are is known. I was just wondering if anyone else out there also knows what generation number they are? Or other interesting info related? I don't want to give up the 'number' til later. :D

#2 Wingnut

Wingnut

    A little nutty, with wings

  • Members
  • 10312 posts
  • LocationCleveland, OH

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:34 AM

I had a mission companion who had a sister (she was one of 8 kids) who had traced one of her husband's lines back to Adam, through Charlemagne. She had it printed and framed on her wall. I haven't gotten that far on any of my lines, but I wouldn't be surprised if my royal line does have a connection.
Now the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed. -- C.S. Lewis

If we're going to be stupid about this, we're going to be stupid on my terms. -- my husband

#3 Dravin

Dravin

    Gneiss Guy

  • Members
  • 13059 posts
  • LocationIndiana

Posted 11 May 2013 - 08:49 AM

Personally I'd be skeptical of royal genealogies that go back to Adam or what have you. To my understanding there was a tendency to embellish such genealogies to create authority or prestige by claiming descent from famous figures from antiquity.
Hindsight is all well and good... until you trip.

#4 Vort

Vort

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 10101 posts
  • LocationSeattle area

Posted 11 May 2013 - 11:09 AM

I have several lines that trace back "to Adam" through various Medieval royal lineages. They are nonsense. Few genealogical lines can be traced back reliably before the 1500s, and very few are reliable before about 1000 AD. The "Adamic line genealogies" are fabrications. Sorry to rain on people's parades...
As if anyone could knowingly commit sin without being changed both in spirit, body, and mind. Let me say this again, sin changes who we are! --james12
***********************
Nice hand, friend, but those are not the cards I dealt you.

***********************
Impenetrability! That's what I say!

#5 Anddenex

Anddenex

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2805 posts

Posted 11 May 2013 - 11:46 AM

One of my Jewish lines is traceable back to Adam, however depending on Vort's response I assume it maybe hypothetical. According to my Jewish cousins, this is factual.

#6 pam

pam

    Keep your hands off my gumdrops.

  • Administrators
  • 51344 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 11 May 2013 - 02:45 PM

I have several lines that trace back "to Adam" through various Medieval royal lineages. They are nonsense. Few genealogical lines can be traced back reliably before the 1500s, and very few are reliable before about 1000 AD. The "Adamic line genealogies" are fabrications. Sorry to rain on people's parades...


Actually it is the royal lines that can be traced back much easier than the regular folk. This is according to a distant cousin of my that was one of the heads of the family history section of the church. Royals kept records much better than others and therefore they are easily found. The church has a department that works strictly on royal lines.

#7 selek

selek

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 988 posts

Posted 11 May 2013 - 02:55 PM

Actually it is the royal lines that can be traced back much easier than the regular folk. This is according to a distant cousin of my that was one of the heads of the family history section of the church. Royals kept records much better than others and therefore they are easily found. The church has a department that works strictly on royal lines.


My youngest and I had a great deal of fun tracking back our lineage through the extant records.

Apparently, we are related to the Charlemagne-era French royalty (along with about half the Western hemisphere).

When I told Danni this didn't surprise me, she asked why.

I retorted, "How many times have you been told you're being a 'royal pain'?" and "How often do I call you 'princess'?".

Like another member of the family (Queen Victoria), she retorted with a haughty, nose-in-the-air, supercillious, "We are NOT amused."

We snickered and gave up the hunt when the "history" "revealed" that we were related to either Joseph of Arimathea a/o one of the lesser apostles.

Before a certain point in time, the records really are little more than a politically expedient, faith promoting rumor designed to bolster this or that petty noble's claim to fame.

I suspect that a lot of people are going to be disappointed during the Millenium when the records are unsealed and people discover that rather than related to Charlemagne or this or that noble, they are actually descended from the peasant who emptied his chamber pot. ;)
2 Timothy 1:7
For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

#8 annewandering

annewandering

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4295 posts

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:37 PM

lol I suppose its rude to laugh but when was the last time these genealogists that trace lines back to Adam followed the genealogies in the Bible? They have huge gaping holes. Now if you are going to trace back through royalties to the Egyptian princes then you are going to have a problem switching from there back to the Bible genealogies. Just think about it. Now I had the good fortune to trace mine back to Odin and Thor. Just try to beat that!! It must be true too because it was on family group sheets.

#9 Wingnut

Wingnut

    A little nutty, with wings

  • Members
  • 10312 posts
  • LocationCleveland, OH

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:58 PM

Personally I'd be skeptical of royal genealogies that go back to Adam or what have you. To my understanding there was a tendency to embellish such genealogies to create authority or prestige by claiming descent from famous figures from antiquity.


This makes a lot of sense to me, though I'd never thought of it before.
Now the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed. -- C.S. Lewis

If we're going to be stupid about this, we're going to be stupid on my terms. -- my husband

#10 Magen_Avot

Magen_Avot

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ months.
  • 317 posts
  • LocationMiddle East

Posted 11 May 2013 - 10:33 PM

Well, the only thing my mother-in-law knows is that my wife is the mother of our children. As for me,... she said she can't be sure I'm the father. :eek:

It's good she's not keeping the history in my case or Charlemagne just might end up being my childrens father. :king:

Anyway, I had read this article: How many generations have there been since Adam and Eve

No doubt it's guesswork, but honestly, it's all we have right now. It was interesting to me personally, because my siblings and I are generation 144 according to what we have.

I was interested in knowing where others fell in context to the article, if they were willing to brave the "rain". :D

#11 talisyn

talisyn

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2376 posts
  • LocationWilds of Idaho

Posted 12 May 2013 - 03:43 PM

All the royalty in my family line has been younger sons and daughters who never inherited lol. However, being a descendant of Harold Bluetooth is completely awesome.

#12 annewandering

annewandering

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4295 posts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 01:36 PM

All the royalty in my family line has been younger sons and daughters who never inherited lol. However, being a descendant of Harold Bluetooth is completely awesome.


You are not proud of Odin? Or how about that Mongolian King?
Fact is most of us hit royalty lines. Once there its all a tangled mess. All the serfs were not that well documented.
I suppose it might be fun to trace lines back to Adam but there is no accuracy in those and we already know we all trace back to Adam and Eve. Being related to them is not like an amazingly surprising family connection.

#13 Normandy

Normandy

    Member

  • Inactive 1+ months.
  • 102 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 08:39 AM

This thread is old, but I found it very interesting! I don't think of my family tree as a fact once I get to the 1200's. It's just so washy. I was able to trace my father's side back to Adam through Irish and Scottish royalty. Adam would be my 142nd paternal great grandfather. I don't know how accurate it is and I tend to be doubtful about it. On my mother's side I was able to trace our family back to 1360 to my 18th maternal great grandfather. It's fairly accurate and I've been able to use historical records to confirm genealogies with the help of relatives who still live in England and have access to it.

Edited by Normandy, 28 October 2013 - 08:41 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq