Message from discussion Oldest Genealogy?
Reply-To: "Drew C." <dhc...@midsouth.rr.com>
From: "Drew C." <dhc...@midsouth.rr.com>
Subject: Oldest Genealogy?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 04:56:24 GMT
X-Trace: twister.midsouth.rr.com 1047444984 22.214.171.124 (Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:56:24 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:56:24 CST
Organization: RoadRunner - Midsouth
I have been doing research for a few years now, and I have traced some of my
genealogy back... way back. I have discovered some Royal European
genealogy. Most people with this luck would find out that if they are
related to some Ancient (pre-1500's) European royalty, there are related to
almost all European royalty. Now basic research shows that these Kings,
Dukes, Counts, etc. trace their genealogy way back as well. Some trace
theirs back to the famous couple Adam and Eve. Now if you believe in the
story of Adam and Eve, then this is where your genealogy ends. However,
let's say that I don't believe in this story, then were does my genealogy
turn from fact to legend? When do y'all think genealogy starts to become
inaccurate? The 1500's (15 generations), 1500 years ago (40+ generations),
2000 years ago (75 generations), 2500+ (90 generations; you start getting
biblical here), or when?
Thanks in advance,