PDA

View Full Version : How far back have you traced ALL of your ancestry



Wing Genealogist
08-07-2016, 11:46 AM
I believe this has been posted here before, but I cannot find the discussion.

How far back can you trace all of your ancestral lines? For me, I can go back 7 generations (including myself) to my 64 4g grandparents (actually only 62 as I have a cousin intermarriage).

Additionally, I have been able to trace all of my lines thoroughly enough (and I come from the endogamous Colonial New England families) I have been able to prove all eight of my great-grandparents are distantly related to each other, and 15 of my 16 great-great-grandparents are distantly (and not so distantly) related to each other.

Some folks say I don't have a family tree, but have a family pole. :biggrin1:

Lirio100
08-07-2016, 03:53 PM
Most of my great grandparents were the immigrants; I have all but one of those lines traced back to their origin. That was actually my initial goal, to find out where they'd all come from. One line out of the eight turned out to go back to colonial New England, which was a surprise, I have the other seven back to my 2x great grandparents. I'm not sure I'll be able to resolve the colonial line--it goes back to early New York, which is something of a genealogical black hole.

evon
08-07-2016, 06:47 PM
I am very lucky since Norway has one of the best ancestry records in the world and they are freely available, much of it is found online as well...So for many lines I can trace it to before 1500, but I usually stop at 1600 to 1500 because before 1500 the sources become less reliable and so there can be allot of mistakes (I have one paper trail that go back to the Viking age, but that is just wishful thinking and such data cannot be trusted in most instances)..I would think my average is about 1650's, as I have not done all of them, take it bit by bit...Some of them are also very difficult due to migrations, especially those that immigrated to Norway before the 1800's...

MitchellSince1893
08-07-2016, 07:33 PM
My paternal line mystery stops me at 3 generations. If I exclude him I can go back 5 generations on all lines.

Stephen1986
08-07-2016, 07:37 PM
I can only trace my full ancestry back to my great grandparents, I only know 14 of my great great grandparents due to illegitimacy and fathers being unknown.

BalkanKiwi
08-07-2016, 10:06 PM
Intriguing question. I don't have the time to look at every line in detail but here are the main ones.

Direct paternal - 3rd great grandfather

Direct maternal - 5th great grandparents.

Father's mother's father's line (Croatian) - 16th great grandparents (early 1400s in Croatia)

My Croatian line is the most developed with 237 ancestors in total.

John Doe
08-07-2016, 10:17 PM
My father's side-Great grandparents so that's like what, 1900?

Mum's dad-Late 19th century

Mum's mum-depends, managed to stretch some parts to the late 18th century, but never beyond that.

Guess not having church records is kind of a disadvantage in this field. :-P

geebee
08-07-2016, 11:39 PM
On my father's side, I can get back to all of my 3rd great grandparents with some degree of confidence.

On my mother's side, I used to think this was also true for all but one pair of my 3rd great grandparents. However, I've since uncovered some DNA evidence which raises questions about my maternal grandfather's paternity.

Basically, I have some fairly close matches on his side that don't seem to be able to be accounted for, at least as that part of my tree now stands. Of course, any discrepancies could be on my various cousins' side, except that they seem more consistent with each other.

Baltimore1937
08-08-2016, 03:34 AM
My lines earlier than around the time of the Revolutionary War might be considered mythology, ha ha. But that doesn't mean I plan to erase them, unless I see that they are impossible.

Have they dug up the bones and teeth of the petty kings of Medieval Norway yet? I mean, has my L664 haplogroup shown up among them?

Tolan
08-08-2016, 03:52 AM
I can go back 8 generations (including myself) to my 128 5g grandparents (124 unique, 4 doubles):
http://gw.geneanet.org/jerome4?lang=en&m=A&p=jerome&n=hamon&sosab=10&color=&t=N&only=on&v=8

At the 9th generation, i know 249 on 256

Saetro
08-08-2016, 04:27 AM
I am very lucky since Norway has one of the best ancestry records in the world and they are freely available, much of it is found online as well...So for many lines I can trace it to before 1500
Thank for that information.
Friends have a few Danish and Swedish descendants who have found family way back.
I will encourage those with Norwegian to research also.

Saetro
08-08-2016, 04:44 AM
All generations to my 16 great-grandparents only.
One of my 16 lines appears on this side of the world with no indication as to how he came from the old country.
(Standard colonial joke is that he swam - and hence Australia wins so many Olympic swimming medals! And similarly for USA.)
He did not even list his parents on the marriage certificate, was not literate, worked away from home and died young before he was able to tell family stories to his children.
What he did say does not link with available records.

Still, that hole in the 1860s helps beginners identify with me and encourages them to do better.

A major brick wall in another line taught me more about genealogy and family history than anything else, and eventually I got through it.

Earl Davis
08-08-2016, 10:08 AM
To all 32 x3 great grandparents. After that it goes...

60 out of the 64 x4 great grandparents
119 out of 124 x5 great grandparents
171 out of 256 x6 great grandparents
174 out of 512 x7 great grandparents
130 out of 1024 x8 great grandparents
131 out of 2048 x9 great grandparents

1084 total direct ancestors traced.

evon
08-08-2016, 10:10 AM
Thank for that information.
Friends have a few Danish and Swedish descendants who have found family way back.
I will encourage those with Norwegian to research also.

You can share this link with them, it is the main portal to the Norwegian source material that has been digitalized thus far, there you can simply input a name and voila, however, it is very important that those who use it realize that prior to modern times there was no spelling standard in Norway, thus a name can be spelled 1000's of different ways and still refer to the same person, an example of this is the name Henrik, which can be spelled as Heinrich, Henrik, Henric, Hinric, etc etc....
http://arkivverket.no/arkivverket/Digitalarkivet

firemonkey
08-08-2016, 12:52 PM
32x 3gt
31x 4 gt

geebee
08-08-2016, 06:56 PM
I think the most distant ancestor in my tree is Hans Reeb, a 13th great grandfather. He was supposed to have been born in about 1490, presumably in one of the German states. He died in 1536, in Weinbourg, Linanger-Westerberg, HRE, Germany. However, this information is from a distant cousin, and I haven't personally confirmed it.

Another early ancestor was my 11th great grandfather Joan (Juan) Canet. I don't know when or where he was born, but he's mentioned in the record of his son Francesc's [Francisco] marriage as being a resident of Alcudia [on the island of Majorca]. Francesc's mother is also mentioned, but only by her first name of Cathelina -- with the honorific "dona".

The marriage took place in Ciutadella, on the island of Minorca, on 8 July 1586. The bride was my 10th great grandmother, Magdalena Socies, daughter of Pere [Pedro] Socies and his wife Martina.

I also have information for the descendants of the Francesc Canet and Magdalena Socies -- or at least for those who were in the line leading to me.

Two things that have been very helpful for me. First, the church in Ciutadela kept very good records. And second, the immigrant ancestor Ramon Luis Canet married a descendant of several "founding families" of Biloxi (Mississippi), Marie Eulalie Ryan. The two of them left a lot of descendants; plus there are many descendants of Eulalie's siblings, and her parents' siblings, and so on.

EDIT: In addition, I share more DNA with some of these descendants than I otherwise might, since I've found that I'm frequently related to them in more than one way. Cousin marriages, and marriages of multiple siblings in one family to multiple siblings in another, happened on more than one occasion.

As a result, I have one cousin to whom I'm related through all but one of his grandparents, though only through one on my side.

vettor
08-08-2016, 07:14 PM
My paternal and maternal lines are in North-East Italy.
Today's ancestors live 30Km form the north adriatic sea, the furthest south the family has ever been.
From this point heading north for 20km is the bulk of my ancestors from present day back to 1680...................all confirmed with registry papers

There is 90% chance my paternal line is from south-Tyrol , Trentino area ~1500................towns of Demulo, Tres and Smarano ...................but I cannot confirm it as yet as I am missing about 100 years of information

rod
08-08-2016, 08:26 PM
16/16 gg
28/32 ggg (2 gg-grandmothers are dead ends - including my mtDNA line where my mother and I have never had a match)

Agnimitra
08-09-2016, 07:04 PM
My tenth great grandfather lived in the 16th century. The tree starts with him though the general family history before him is known.

rocky
08-14-2016, 09:06 AM
I only been able to trace to my great-great grandparents.

blinketyblink
08-15-2016, 08:21 PM
On my paternal grandmother's rather fancy side I've gotten back to the pre-Norman Conquest Saxons
Paternal Grandfather's side, all Irish, only got to the 1600s
Paternal Grandmother's side has a few landed gentry that emigrated to the American colonies and left a paper trail going back to the Normans and medieval Highland chiefs respectively.
Paternal Grandfather's side is still largely a mystery before 1881, I'm working with GRT volunteer groups in the UK to help me track them down as the evidence suggests they were a travelling family.

A Norfolk L-M20
08-15-2016, 08:57 PM
From my genealogy database on Gramps:

Generation 1 has 1 individual. (100.00%)
Generation 2 has 2 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 3 has 4 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 4 has 8 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 5 has 16 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 6 has 29 individuals. (90.62%)
Generation 7 has 51 individuals. (79.69%)
Generation 8 has 47 individuals. (36.72%)
Generation 9 has 36 individuals. (14.84%)
Generation 10 has 10 individuals. (2.34%)
Generation 11 has 4 individuals. (0.39%)
Total ancestors in generations 2 to 11 is 207. (10.31%)

In other words, I have all 16 great great grandparents named and provenance. All English, mainly Norfolk.

Then Generation 6 (G.G.G Grandparents), it starts to decay. 29 out of 32 named. The missing three though are all absent unrecorded fathers of illegitimate children. But it really starts to collapse from Generation 8 (G.G.G.G.G Grandparents), with only 47 direct ancestors for that generation named.

All 207 by the way are South English, with the majority in Norfolk, East Anglia.

Wing Genealogist
08-15-2016, 09:21 PM
Generation 1 has 1 individual. (100.00%)
Generation 2 has 2 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 3 has 4 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 4 has 8 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 5 has 16 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 6 has 32 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 7 has 62 individuals & 1 intermarriage (100.00%)
Generation 8 has 105 individuals & 8 intermarriages (including one couple via 3 different lines)(88.32%)
after this point the intermarriages cross generational lines and it makes counting by hand impossible.

I have elsewhere posted where 15 out of my 16 great-great grandparents (from the 5th generation) are distantly (and not so distantly) related to each other. As someone quipped: "I don't have a family tree, I have a family pole!"

Most of my ancestry at this level are from Maine, with a couple from New Hampshire & Massachusetts and one stray line from Delaware. How a farmer boy in interior Maine met and married a lass from Delaware and then moved back to Maine I have no idea. Mind you, this occurred in 1841, 20 years before the Civil War.

dp
08-15-2016, 09:53 PM
since the thread is ALL of your ancestry.
I have names for all my gg-grandparents, but for one I am missing a surname. During the Revolution War one courthouse of a county my family lived in was burned, in the War Between the States, that one and another that my paternal grandfather's line lived in, were burnt. And to make it the worst, the second one had already been burnt in 1830.
Thank goodness for sprinklers.
dp :-)

Myth
08-16-2016, 04:38 AM
I can trace back to my great great great grandparents in Romania, I know their names but I have no idea what they look like. After that, it's a brick wall.

NewAlbion
08-16-2016, 09:16 AM
All my ancestors come from the British isles except one grandmother whose ancestors are from Alsace-Lorraine (the more ethnic German part of France). What is interesting about that is that it doesn't show up on ethnicity results from GEDmatch or ancestryDNA which shows how similar those genetics must be to other Germanic groups who invaded Britain. My sister claims to able to trace this ancestry all the way back to Prussia, one one side at least, and she also claims to be able to trace my maternal great grandfather to London England. He was said to go to Canada then to America. When in America it is said he was in charge of making sure Abraham Lincoln's body arrived to his grave or burial site safely. The other ancestors I only trace back to general regions e.g. Donegal. So it is different depending on the ancestors in question. That is part of the dilemmna of being a born and bred New Yorker rather than born and bred in Britain for me. I'm sure people in Europe are able to trace their ancestors further back with more detail.

Gaku
08-16-2016, 10:17 AM
All my ancestors come from the British isles except one grandmother whose ancestors are from Alsace-Lorraine (the more ethnic German part of France). What is interesting about that is that it doesn't show up on ethnicity results from GEDmatch or ancestryDNA which shows how similar those genetics must be to other Germanic groups who invaded Britain.

Can't identify it at all or erroneously calls it "German". Border regions such as the Alsace will typically be dubbed wrong by DNA because of intermarriage between the locals and likely due to a larger Germanic reference populations [& Americans] versus French reference populations. It is something countless people complain about on sites like 23&me without seeming to realize that borders are lines drawn on a map and mean far less in real life/history.

Gaku
08-16-2016, 11:00 AM
How far back have you traced ALL of your ancestry



Accurately I am like Evon on the first page and stop around the 1600s-1500s or 13 to 16 generations. I have lines that go back to 1100s and the 900s but that is likewise more likely wishful thinking & if nothing else good for a chuckle. The only line I know authentically that goes back quite far is the nobility line as it just isn't me who researched it but older relatives prior & so far my own research [checked against theirs] has yet to show variation. Which goes back 21 generations maternally & 29 generations paternally to 1124 give or take.

rms2
08-16-2016, 12:58 PM
On some of my lines the pedigree extends pretty far, but on my direct y-dna father line I can only get back to my third great grandfather, who was born on 05 February 1804 in Wheeling, West Virginia (part of Virginia at the time), in the Northern Panhandle of West Virginia that juts up along the Ohio River between Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Thanks to y-dna testing and the work of a professional genealogist recently hired by one of my closest y-dna matches, I now have a pool of likely suspects in the tri-state (West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio) area. It's just a matter of figuring out which of them was the father of my third great grandfather.

Baltimore1937
08-16-2016, 11:21 PM
Yeah, the Ohio River was the super highway into the west, after the Revolutionary War. My direct maternal line gets lost back there in the late 1700s & early 1800s. Cynthia A. Lee was allegedly born 1816 in Indiana (census info). My guesstimate of her father's line goes back to Cumberland, Maryland, and Connecticut before that. Her mother is mysterious, although a rare HVR1+HVR2 match goes back to Pennsylvania (if you believe census info). And then there was the Whiskey Rebellion that spurred movement out of Pennsylvania to more remote regions. I sometimes wonder if my lines back there were involved in that.

I've already bragged about another line in my maternal branch (not direct female line) that I still believe goes back via the second colonial governor of Maryland and on back into Medieval history.

crossover
08-16-2016, 11:52 PM
i've traced a few branches on my mom's side of the family tree pre-1600

Ithy
10-24-2016, 08:43 PM
My paper trail ends at mostly 5 generations, I can name a few ancestors from 6 generations down, but I haven't been able to validate them through public records.

angscoire
12-25-2016, 07:23 PM
All 32 of my great x3 grandparents are known - but i'm missing surnames for 2 of those female ancestors. After that , my paternal ancestors largely dry up ( mainly English , with a little Scots and Irish) , except one line that can be traced back to Tudor times (name of Halliday/Holyday from Houghton-le-Spring , Durham) .
My maternal ancestry has been easier to trace ; the furthest back I can go on her line is to the 17th century and the estate of Glenbuchat in Aberdeenshire . I face problems common to most UK/Irish researchers .The Potato Famine , the Clearances and industrialization meant most my ancestors abandoned the remote rural life and moved to the cities , thereby muddying the paper trail and leaving many brick-walls that can't be broken.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
12-25-2016, 07:49 PM
On my paternal line, father's father, with help, I've gone back 7 generations with certainty. I know who the 8th was, (6th great grandfather) but not where he was born, sometime in the 1660's not long after the Civil War. I would really like to go further back on this one but am reluctant to pay "Ancestry" more money just on the off-chance. :)
Mixed fortunes with other ancestors, especially as I have "Jones" on both the maternal and paternal side, but I've traced them all back to at least the early 1800's and others into the late 1700's. John

CelticGerman
12-25-2016, 08:26 PM
Number of known ancestors of my children (third column). Paternal: green column, maternal: yellow column.13314

SWAHILLI_PRINCE16
12-25-2016, 11:17 PM
8 generations on both sides

Adrian Stevenson
12-26-2016, 09:12 AM
Back to my x 10 Great Grandfather on the Stevenson side. My best result.

Other lines have mixed results from 5 to 8 generations.

Jenny
12-26-2016, 12:58 PM
I can confidently trace all but one grandmother back to the 1600s. Even including one NPE!

Tomris
12-26-2016, 02:47 PM
Only until my great-great grandparents. (1880's) That's why I am not able to figure out anything.I have Norwegian 5th cousins,I've seen their family trees that go back to 1700's. and they all had Norwegian names...I don't think I have Norwegian origins though. lol

A Norfolk L-M20
12-26-2016, 03:08 PM
31 out of 32 great great great grandparents. Just missing one unnamed father. Around 200 years ago.

L1983
12-26-2016, 08:38 PM
Only gone back to 1790s ish.

However, I have about 5 unknown lines within 2-5 generations on both maternal and paternal sides due to illegitimacy. I've also struggled with the Irish side, as trying to find the correct Cotter from Cork has been a nightmare. The same with the Griffiths side who were from Staffordshire. I'd hoped I'd eventually trace them to Wales, but no such luck just yet.

JohnLightbridge
01-05-2017, 11:59 PM
How far back have you traced ALL of your ancestry

Direct Paternal - 1378 Edward + of Staffordshire would have been the first most accurately traced ancestor. There is indication of further along but it gets rather iffy.

Direct Maternal [maiden's paternal] - 1469 Ranulf + of Brighton would be the first most accurately traced ancestor.

Those two have been the main focus.


Paternally as a whole it'd be early-1600s, mid-1500s all except for a few [French, Huguenots] are from the UK.

Maternally is a bit more sporadic. I haven't really had time to research this side but if I averaged it out it'd be about early-1800s, mid-1700s right now. There's still more to be done. Majority UK.

wombatofthenorth
02-11-2017, 10:53 PM
2/2, 4/4, 8/8, 15/16, 23/32, 34/64, 26/128, 11/256, 4/512

farthest back date is 1649 at 7th great-grandparent level
maternal side figured out a lot better than paternal side now

deadly77
02-12-2017, 12:40 AM
On some lines I am reasonably far back but on others I have hit unknowns early. On one line I'm back to 1563 but that's definitely not the case for all.

Of my gg-grandparents, I have all 16. For ggg-grandparents, I'm 31 out of 32 but for three of those I know very little other than a name. Going back a further generation to gggg-grandparents I'm at 40 out of 64. Then I'm down to 39 out of a possible 128 at the ggggg-grandparent generation. But this is ongoing so maybe find out more over the next few years.

Two of my more challenging lines are the outer edges - it looks like my paternal ggg-grandfather and Y-chromosome ancestor was illegitimate. My mtDNA ancestor first appears in the 1881 census living with her married sister. Both sisters list their place of birth as Scotland in every census that they are found in, and both list their father Joseph Hanson as deceased on their respective marriage certificate. But so far I haven't found any of them prior to 1881. More research to do.

kafky
03-06-2017, 10:20 PM
Here are the stats. 99% Portuguese. French and Spanish not traced back.Generation 1 has 1 individual. (100.00%)

Generation 2 has 2 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 3 has 4 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 4 has 8 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 5 has 16 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 6 has 30 individuals. (93.75%)

Generation 7 has 55 individuals. (87.50%)

Generation 8 has 88 individuals. (71.88%)

Generation 9 has 109 individuals. (45.70%)

Generation 10 has 103 individuals. (20.90%)

Generation 11 has 66 individuals. (7.23%)

Generation 12 has 57 individuals. (3.08%)

Generation 13 has 50 individuals. (1.29%)

Generation 14 has 38 individuals. (0.48%)

Generation 15 has 26 individuals. (0.17%)

Generation 16 has 24 individuals. (0.09%)

Generation 17 has 16 individuals. (0.03%)

Generation 18 has 16 individuals. (0.01%)

Generation 19 has 18 individuals. (0.01%)

Generation 20 has 17 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 21 has 17 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 22 has 15 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 23 has 13 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 24 has 13 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 25 has 14 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 26 has 15 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 27 has 15 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 28 has 14 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 29 has 15 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 30 has 14 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 31 has 12 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 32 has 7 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 33 has 6 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 34 has 2 individuals. (0.00%)

Generation 35 has 2 individuals. (0.00%)

Total ancestors in generations 2 to 35 is 854. (0.00%)

Candy
03-18-2017, 01:36 AM
On my mom's side, I have it traced back to Jean de Cherie, born in Picardy, France in 1380 who was granted safe passage to England with his father in 1407. On my dad's side, it's all screwed up...somehow our family tree has managed to tell me that Boudicca is my 44th great grandmother, but I have no idea how accurate it could actually be lol.

backdrop12
04-29-2017, 07:35 AM
Direct paternal grandfather -> Can only go back to great grandparents . Not much is known about them other than they were from present day Mukacheve Ukraine (1880s-1900s). Was hidden by my parents for some reason ( I have never seen my grandparents on this side nor have I actually was told who they were or never saw a picture of them ).

Direct paternal Grandmother -> Was one of the first dutch immigrants to be in New York City and my 6th great grandmother is part of the John H Camp lineage ( distantly related to FDR , Theodore , Joseph Smith , Alvin Ray , etc ).

Direct Maternal Grandmother - I can only go back to my great grandparents on this line . The Marschners came from a very rich background . They had indentured servants and helpers when entering into the US . the marschner side had " sorb " on the earliest census , but then replaced with germany. My great grandmother ( sybdelo ) is from Russia, but I have no info on her.

Direct Maternal Grandfather - Can only go back all the way to my 2nd great grandfather. He was an orphan in kent county Delaware . No records were made on parents. Alot of bad luck happened on this side of the family.

Pylsteen
04-29-2017, 11:18 AM
Too far. I have the luck of being mostly Dutch, who have great records, and having a recent connection to the elite of the 17th/18th century. Before 1650, a sharp drop occurs in the amount of ancestors I know, because of the lack of primary sources. However, through some noble ancestry and through older land-holder books, I can connect to French, German, Swiss and Dutch high nobility around 1400, almost always through a bastard-child, except for the Swiss case, in which the older nobles lost their privileges early, but still remained part of the urban elite, and a case of the marriage of a lower noble to a non-noble merchant. So, then we are talking about 20 generations ago. I told myself to stop there, because the ancestry of the medieval West-European high nobility is already well-known, and to incorporate hundreds of nobles, intermarrying with each other since Carolingian times, would be a bit complex.
I do include though some lines of non-nobles, mostly urban merchants, going back to 1200. These are merchants from Bruges/Ghent.

deuterium_1
05-21-2017, 06:07 PM
I have been able to trace back my genealogy to the 1300s:

Qazi Wahid
Qazi Muhammad Sheikh
Qazi Nizamuddin
Qazi Sheikh Nasrullah
Qazi Nizamuddin
Ghulam Mustafa
Sheikh Muhammad Shah
Sheikh Azeemullah (Nawab Sheikh Pahar)
Sheikh Chand
Habibullah Siddiqui
Abdul Shakoor Siddiqui
Masood Hasan Siddiqui
Enayatullah Siddiqui
Mohammad Wali Siddiqui
Moazzam Ali Siddiqui
Ghulam Ali Siddiqui
Bukshish Ali Siddiqui
Nusrat Ali Siddiqui
Khairat Hussain Siddiqui
Ehsan Hussain Siddiqui
Munawar Hussain Siddiqui
Hefazat Hussain Siddiqui (Maternal Grandfather)

JFWinstone
05-22-2017, 02:19 PM
Thanks to the Dutch records being so good I have back to the early 1500s on a few Dutch lines that go back to North Germany/South Denmark.

geomattica
05-23-2017, 07:23 PM
1300s: Yorkshire, England

Baltimore1937
05-28-2017, 05:51 AM
Yeah, the Ohio River was the super highway into the west, after the Revolutionary War. My direct maternal line gets lost back there in the late 1700s & early 1800s. Cynthia A. Lee was allegedly born 1816 in Indiana (census info). My guesstimate of her father's line goes back to Cumberland, Maryland, and Connecticut before that. Her mother is mysterious, although a rare HVR1+HVR2 match goes back to Pennsylvania (if you believe census info). And then there was the Whiskey Rebellion that spurred movement out of Pennsylvania to more remote regions. I sometimes wonder if my lines back there were involved in that.

I've already bragged about another line in my maternal branch (not direct female line) that I still believe goes back via the second colonial governor of Maryland and on back into Medieval history.

Well, I now am reasonably convinced (lack of documentation of Cynthia's birth) that her revised father's line stems from the big Virginia Lee clan (which includes Robert E. Lee). Although her assumed mother came from Virginia, there is still some kind of earlier connection with New England. That direct maternal line is the hardest to find out. I sub-title my tree at Ancestry "cousins, ancestors, and mythicals". The mythicals part has all those Medieval kings, Queens and Emperors, etc.

Baltimore1937
05-30-2017, 03:34 PM
Well, I now am reasonably convinced (lack of documentation of Cynthia's birth) that her revised father's line stems from the big Virginia Lee clan (which includes Robert E. Lee). Although her assumed mother came from Virginia, there is still some kind of earlier connection with New England. That direct maternal line is the hardest to find out. I sub-title my tree at Ancestry "cousins, ancestors, and mythicals". The mythicals part has all those Medieval kings, Queens and Emperors, etc.

I bumped into a different Lee line that I'll have to look more into. This is the William Fairfax Lee downstream children, which I haven't even begun to look at, and I'm slow. I have a DNA match at Ancestry with him in their tree.

Baltimore1937
06-04-2017, 08:28 AM
I bumped into a different Lee line that I'll have to look more into. This is the William Fairfax Lee downstream children, which I haven't even begun to look at, and I'm slow. I have a DNA match at Ancestry with him in their tree.

Well, this new Lee line doesn't seem to connect after all. So I'm back to my other plausible branch. Although only plausible, I traced it back to an earl in Scotland along one line (Sir Thomas Bruce 1599-1663). But my direct maternal line is still blank.

JerryS.
06-04-2017, 10:14 AM
English: 1757 Dartford Kent to the Virginia colonies.
German: 1852, Bremen to Illinois.
Italian: 1907 Crotone commune Calabria to U.S.A.

crossover
06-05-2017, 01:58 AM
depends on which part of the family tree you are talking about in my case. on my mom's side varies from as late to early 1800's, and earliest to 1200's(moctezuma line)

Baltimore1937
06-05-2017, 05:18 AM
Well, this new Lee line doesn't seem to connect after all. So I'm back to my other plausible branch. Although only plausible, I traced it back to an earl in Scotland along one line (Sir Thomas Bruce 1599-1663). But my direct maternal line is still blank.

I notice there is a connection to Abraham Lincoln in this plausible branch; not direct line, but as a cousin. The problem with adding ever more people to this hypothetical branch is that I may very well have to laboriously delete each individual if and when this plausible branch proves to be erroneous.

Sikeliot
06-05-2017, 11:35 AM
Around 1850 on each side. The furthest photo I have back is my great-great grandmother, a mixed-race woman from the Portuguese empire.

(!)--SSA--(!)
06-05-2017, 08:24 PM
English: 1757 Dartford Kent to the Virginia colonies.
German: 1852, Bremen to Illinois.
Italian: 1907 Crotone commune Calabria to U.S.A.

I visit Dartford Kent often. It is a nice town.

Wing Genealogist
06-07-2017, 01:58 PM
My original post was asking folks how far back can they trace ALL of their ancestry, rather than how far back can they trace one line of their ancestry.

For me, I do have ancestral lines which trace back into the Nobility (and eventually Royalty). Counting myself as the first generation, I have been able to trace ALL of my ancestry back Seven Generations, and missing only 8 of my 128 8th Generation ancestors.

I am working on "proving" my paper-trail is accurate by correlating my autosomal DNA matches with various ancestral lines. This is a real murky issue. I have done autosomal testing at Ancestry, 23andMe, and FTDNA, and have transferred my 23andMe results to Gedmatch. 23andMe doesn't show family trees, and most FTDNA Family Finder results have failed to link a tree with their results. Even when a Family Finder match has a tree, there is no easy way to find out if your match also has matching ancestors.

Ancestry does a good job of not only linking family trees to DNA results, but they have developed software to detect when a DNA match also has a "paper-trail" match. The problem with Ancestry results is they refuse to create a chromosome browser, and without this tool there is no way to prove the DNA match actually came from the paper-trail match.

I have created a specialized ahnentafel table (by couples rather than by individuals) documenting my ancestry and listing DNA matches who also descend from the couple. Using this format, I currently can basically "prove" my paper trail out to my Fifth (and most of my Sixth) generation due to the fact they are supported by multiple DNA matches. I have even been able to "prove" the parentage of one of my ancestors who had no paper-trail due to the fact of multiple DNA matches to a couple who were of the right age to be his parents, lived in the same area, and had a gap in the births of children to allow him to be placed as a child.

Pylsteen
06-07-2017, 02:07 PM
In that way; six generations (or four, since the paternity of my gg-grandmother is dubious; she was born way before her parents marriage as illegitimate child of her mother; at the marriage her husband acknowledged her as his rightful daughter, and she is mentioned as the "natural" child of the couple. The story is however that her mother begot her while working as a maid. I don't like this uncertainty. Can DNA offer a solution? Maybe, but the father candidates, being the men from the household she worked, are from the same small region as the official father). From the seventh generation onwards I have illegitimate ancestors with an unknown father, and "native" ancestry of which there are no records left. In the eleventh generation I pass the point of knowing less than half of my ancestry.

raschau
06-09-2017, 04:55 PM
My pedigree is complete only to the 5th generation. Ancestors start to go missing in the 6th.

Wallice
06-13-2017, 02:44 AM
1700s

Baltimore1937
06-15-2017, 12:05 PM
Well, I now am reasonably convinced (lack of documentation of Cynthia's birth) that her revised father's line stems from the big Virginia Lee clan (which includes Robert E. Lee). Although her assumed mother came from Virginia, there is still some kind of earlier connection with New England. That direct maternal line is the hardest to find out. I sub-title my tree at Ancestry "cousins, ancestors, and mythicals". The mythicals part has all those Medieval kings, Queens and Emperors, etc.

It still looks like I'm connected to the big Virginia Lee clan via my Cynthia Lee, 1816-1856. But I no longer bet on a direct New England connection, although I sure have a lot of DNA matches that are from there. Anyway, assuming my Lee line is correct, I also have an indirect connection to Abraham Lincoln via his mother Nancy Hanks. What makes this funny is that Robert E. Lee and Abraham Lincoln are in the same big tree!

greerpalmer
07-05-2017, 04:20 PM
I believe this has been posted here before, but I cannot find the discussion.

How far back can you trace all of your ancestral lines? For me, I can go back 7 generations (including myself) to my 64 4g grandparents (actually only 62 as I have a cousin intermarriage).

Additionally, I have been able to trace all of my lines thoroughly enough (and I come from the endogamous Colonial New England families) I have been able to prove all eight of my great-grandparents are distantly related to each other, and 15 of my 16 great-great-grandparents are distantly (and not so distantly) related to each other.

Some folks say I don't have a family tree, but have a family pole. :biggrin1:

Nothing creates a bigger headache than having the same name appear multiple times in your tree and doubting whether it's a mistake or not. I'm sure we have a common connection in NE.

EDIT: We're not related through my big Massachusetts family roots--but you do match my Mother GEDmatch T593339---likely through Maryland families.

2nd EDIT: We have 29 potential GEDCOM matches--all colonial Mass which is my Father's side. kit 7950338

Shadogowah
07-06-2017, 01:50 PM
With most of the branches I reached six generations back. I don't live in my home country and I only used online tools that allowed me to check public records. They law in Spain that institutionalized having civil records separated from the Catholic Church ones was passed around the mid XIX.

In order to find ancestors before the XIX century I need to start searching Church records and that I have to do it visiting the related churches and archives personally. Implies sacrificing holidays days and convincing my wife to travel to specific towns and places in Spain sometimes far away from the closest international airport.

Sassoneg
07-11-2017, 01:30 AM
I am very lucky since Norway has one of the best ancestry records in the world and they are freely available, much of it is found online as well...So for many lines I can trace it to before 1500, but I usually stop at 1600 to 1500 because before 1500 the sources become less reliable and so there can be allot of mistakes (I have one paper trail that go back to the Viking age, but that is just wishful thinking and such data cannot be trusted in most instances)..I would think my average is about 1650's, as I have not done all of them, take it bit by bit...Some of them are also very difficult due to migrations, especially those that immigrated to Norway before the 1800's...


What's the best website for Norwegian tracing? Mine stop dead after the boat to America.

evon
07-11-2017, 08:29 AM
What's the best website for Norwegian tracing? Mine stop dead after the boat to America.

https://www.digitalarkivet.no/en/

A Norfolk L-M20
07-11-2017, 10:49 AM
I currently have all 16 of my 16 2 x great grandparents (Generation 5) named with province, etc. That generation on average were born circa 1840. All in SE England. I'm very confident of the documented validity of that Generation.

However, I also have 31 out of 32 3 x great grandparents (Generation 6) named. That generation on average born circa 1815. The one missing was the father of an illegitimate 2 x great grandfather in Norfolk. I also do pretty good still at Generation 7 (4 x great grandparents), with 57 named out of 64. It peels away from Generation 8 (5 x great) born circa 1760.


The same for my children. All 16 2 x great grandparents, and 31 out of 32 3 x great grandparents (an unidentified Irish 3 x great grandmother).

My Gramps database number of direct ancestors report:

Generation 1 has 1 individual. (100.00%)
Generation 2 has 2 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 3 has 4 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 4 has 8 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 5 has 16 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 6 has 31 individuals. (96.88%)
Generation 7 has 57 individuals. (89.06%)
Generation 8 has 65 individuals. (50.78%)
Generation 9 has 50 individuals. (20.31%)
Generation 10 has 34 individuals. (7.03%)
Generation 11 has 11 individuals. (1.17%)
Generation 12 has 1 individual. (0.05%)
Total ancestors in generations 2 to 12 is 279. (6.94%)

My children's Gramps database number of direct ancestors report:

Generation 1 has 1 individual. (100.00%)
Generation 2 has 2 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 3 has 4 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 4 has 8 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 5 has 16 individuals. (100.00%)
Generation 6 has 31 individuals. (96.88%)
Generation 7 has 48 individuals. (75.00%)
Generation 8 has 71 individuals. (55.47%)
Generation 9 has 79 individuals. (30.86%)
Generation 10 has 62 individuals. (12.50%)
Generation 11 has 50 individuals. (5.08%)
Generation 12 has 34 individuals. (1.71%)
Generation 13 has 19 individuals. (0.46%)
Generation 14 has 6 individuals. (0.07%)
Generation 15 has 6 individuals. (0.04%)
Generation 16 has 2 individuals. (0.01%)
Total ancestors in generations 2 to 16 is 438. (0.68%)

EDIT: Oh, and Abraham Lincoln's paternal line came from one of the Norfolk parishes where I had a lot of ancestors - Swanton Morley. Indeed, some of my ancestors there were illegitimate. I wonder ... ?

Erik
07-11-2017, 05:22 PM
I have all great-grandparents down, but beyond that I have a lot of gaps and emptiness. I can trace 1 specific (non-direct) line back to the 1750s, but that's it.

dp
07-11-2017, 07:44 PM
If knowing given names is sufficient then I know all my great-great grandparents. For gg-grandmothers, I have one I don't know a maiden name for --just "Nancy", one only attested by a son's death certificate, and two that are brick walls even with having documentation of their surnames.
What do you get with 4 brick walls -- a box.
dp :-)

psampson
07-20-2017, 10:41 PM
Only five complete generations for me, 3 missing from the 6th generation - one of whom is a NPE

kostoffj
07-25-2017, 06:29 PM
I can go back completely 4 generations before me, to all my second great-grandparents. Then records of my Irish ancestors on my paternal side cease (that's the generation that emigrated to the USA). I haven't been able to go farther back but I haven't overturned all the rocks yet, but I don't think I'll get anywhere. Very common Irish names and they were all poor, and the Irish weren't great record keepers and a lot of what they did have, as I understand it, was lost during the 1916 rebellion when the rebels holed up in the archive building and it got shot to hell.

The other relations on my paternal side are Dutch, and those records go back 11 generations and in one case 12. Early settlers in New York.

On my maternal side, most of my ancestors are German and German Swiss, and I can go back 7 generations in all cases, and in some cases, quite a bit more, and in one case, 20 generations.

Some cultures place a higher value on record keeping than others, seems to be the lesson here.

This was a challenge for me especially because I was adopted at birth and the first challenge was even finding out who my biological family are.

Shadogowah
07-26-2017, 08:37 AM
I can go back completely 4 generations before me, to all my second great-grandparents. Then records of my Irish ancestors on my paternal side cease (that's the generation that emigrated to the USA). I haven't been able to go farther back but I haven't overturned all the rocks yet, but I don't think I'll get anywhere. Very common Irish names and they were all poor, and the Irish weren't great record keepers and a lot of what they did have, as I understand it, was lost during the 1916 rebellion when the rebels holed up in the archive building and it got shot to hell.

The other relations on my paternal side are Dutch, and those records go back 11 generations and in one case 12. Early settlers in New York.

On my maternal side, most of my ancestors are German and German Swiss, and I can go back 7 generations in all cases, and in some cases, quite a bit more, and in one case, 20 generations.

Some cultures place a higher value on record keeping than others, seems to be the lesson here.

This was a challenge for me especially because I was adopted at birth and the first challenge was even finding out who my biological family are.

Hello kostoffj

Civil records will not take you too far in time because they are a relative modern invention. You need to look in church records.

And I am no expert on Irish history but I know that it was compulsory for Catholic church to record the parents and grandparents of any baptized child since the Council of Trent and I am pretty sure that every single Irish child was baptized at some point. I think the absence of data today have more to do with Cromwell and the English occupation since the XVII century than the rebels in 1916.

A Norfolk L-M20
07-26-2017, 12:37 PM
Update.

100% up to and including Generation 5 (2 x great grandparent).

I have my first gap at Generation 6 (3 x great grandparent), due to an unrecorded father of an illegitimate birth in Norfolk, East Anglia. That still gives me 96.9% coverage of that generation.

I still have pretty good coverage at Generation 7 (4 x great grandparent) with 57 out of 64 direct ancestors at that generation, giving 89%.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17756&d=1501072419

wombatofthenorth
07-27-2017, 02:53 AM
all lines to great-grandparent level so I have 8 of 8 and it all seems quite solid

at the 2x great-grandparent level I have 16 of 16 but one of the lines has a possible first name but no other details and one other is very likely but not for sure and one other is a bit tentative

at the 3x great-grandparent level I have 23 of 32 although 2 are potentially questionable and a 3rd very slightly questionable and one that is known for sure has the birthdate and location as very tentative but the first name is known (and he had no surname, most Latvians were held as serfs until well into the 1800s)

at the 4x great-grandparent level I have 37 of 64 but 4 are slightly tentative and 4 are very tentative

at the 5x great-grandparent level I have 25 of 128 and 3 are slightly tentative and 1 is very tentative

at the 6x great-grandparent level I have 11 of 256

at the 7x great-grandparent level I have 4 of 512 and 2 are slightly tentative

the farthest back is 1649

on most of the farthest back on each line we don't have the birthplace (although it is most likely Latvia for most of them and probably the same parish as for their kids in most cases)

so far we have not managed to track a single birth to outside of Latvia, every single birthplace on the tree is Latvia, but we know that there needs to be some connection to (going by either genealogy tracing and surname, various DNA ancestry and matching clues, etc.):
Scotland, Finland, Oceania and most likely also Netherlands, somewhere in the Balkans, Poland, Germany, Sweden, Norway and perhaps Ireland and who knows
although all of this stuff doesn't add up to all that much the total ancestry percentage, probably about 10%

it would be so cool to manage to find a way to trace one line outside of the Baltics and to an outside location of origin and then start doing research there, but so far we can't get past the Latvian boundary, it's so hard to know how to trace back to a different country with no clear clues where to really look exactly, at least at this point (although my dad did recently get a new match, pretty small, who has a very extensive tree that seems to be all Swedish, so extensive that it seems like one the Swedes on the tree must also be one of my direct ancestors, but no clue at this point which one it could be and my mom has some matches who have very extensive Dutch ancestry trees, etc.)

my mom's side is way better worked out than my dad's, have all but 6 of her 32 4x great-grandparent level (and 4 of them are blocked by her one line with the out of wedlock 1878 birth which blocks lots of things obviously)