I must be one of those Southerners a poster was referring to in an earlier response:
If I believe the undocumented family lines (at least past about 1800) that Ancestry.com furnishes me, I can trace my lineage on both my mother and father's side back to the Stuarts of Scotland and England, a lineage which ultimately leads even further back to Robert the Bruce, William the Conqueror, and Charlemagne.
Here's how:
---My paternal grandfather's mother's family emigrated from Virginia to Texas shortly before the American Civil War. About the earliest ancestor on that side of the family to come to America was a younger son of the Earl of Crawford, a Scottish earl who was a direct descendant of James III.
---My maternal grandmother's mother's family came to Texas from Kentucky shortly before the American Civil War, although the family also previously lived in Virginia (in the South, who didn't). One of the earliest ancestors on this side of the family was a direct descendant of one of the mistresses of Charles II, Lucy Walters. Charles recognized Lucy's son, who became James [Stuart], Duke of Monmouth. However, he didn't recognize her daughter, Mary, who married an Anglo-Irish aristocrat. A couple of generations later, their descendants also moved to Virginia. Since James' English descendants include Sarah Ferguson, Lady Diana Spenser, and Camilla Parker Bowles, I'm looking forward to the family reunion! LOL
Except for the fact that I knew my paternal grandfather family came from Virginia to Texas and my maternal grandmother's family (on her mother's side) came from Kentucky to Texas, I didn't have any idea that I had a royal lineage, although I certainly knew that I had Scots and English ancestry. Previously, my greatest ancestral claim to fame was that my paternal great-grandmother was the first woman college graduate in Texas! Does any of this make any difference in my life. Not in the least.
2007-05-30 22:18:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ellie Evans-Thyme 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes, via some handy gateway ancestors from England and Wales, who came over to the US in the 17th century.
I have a few descents from Edward I, possibly one from Edward IV (pretty strong circumstantial evidence but need a little more concrete proof), Charlemagne (most people who can trace back beyon about 1500 can say this though). Oh, and King John, the unpopular one (as in SHakespeare's play).
Also from various Welsh medieval princes such as Llewellyn the Great, Llewellyn the Last, probably a few other Llewellyns in there.
This is not uncommon if you have a 'gateway' or two - they are handy that way! (Some of them have had their fancy descents disproven so....careful with them! I have lost a few lines this way).
2007-05-31 02:13:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Yep. How's Charlemagne? There are, however, royalty from several countries, including England and Wales, Denmark, and France.
Considering the fact that each person has two parents, each of those parents has two parents, by the time you go back only 30 generations, it would take more people than currently are alive on earth just to produce you!
What does that mean? It means that your ancestors, my ancestors, every one's ancestors married first cousins, uncles married nieces, etc. In ancient Rome, they even married brother-sister, mother-son, etc. My Dad knew of a man that had children by his own daughter (his child was his grandchild).
So, it is almost guaranteed that everyone alive today has royalty in his/her blood.
2007-05-30 16:33:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nothingusefullearnedinschool 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
I'm descended from a minister who used to be presented a coat of fingers for serving to to translate the King James Bible. Also from an excessively ancient Netherlands household which at one factor can have been minor the Aristocracy. I have got to admit I discover the warriors plenty extra fascinating. I have a number of who served within the Revolution and the War of 1812 however just one Civil War veteran (Confederate). Oh--and Lee Greenwood's spouse is my 3rd or fourth cousin.
2016-09-05 17:21:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by arguelles 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A lot of people, particularly a large portion of the Anglo Saxon people of the American South.
A lot of southerners, including those of humble means, have more than one coats of arms in their family trees. That does not mean they are entitled to display one. There are some who have the ones their ancestor brought over from England 300-400 years ago and they don't flaunt them. They can't buy groceries with them.
Then there are people who buy them from those who sell them based solely on a surname and they flaunt them and are not entitled to do so.
2007-05-30 16:44:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Shirley T 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes, my dad's grandma was a starforth which was her family's name when they moved to America but when they were in englnd they were staffords, which is in some way royalty. We have a really old bible that has some famous duchess's name in it
2007-05-30 16:22:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by dolaindeed 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, but I have a friend who is royalty.
2007-05-30 16:22:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by newyorkgal71 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
no, just a former president or two,
oh yea we had a horse thief too.. LOL!
royalty isnt important really, kinda boring if you ask me- the horsethief's story is much more interesting
rj
2007-05-30 18:03:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by cometkatt 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Yep. Vlad Dracula. Just kidding, I don't think anyone can prove they are related to him, but he was a Szekely, and so am I.
2007-05-30 17:34:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by Lisa A 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
no
2007-05-30 17:05:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by madsatanspawn2 1
·
0⤊
0⤋