Beauclerk - Charles II

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Matthew Rockefeller

Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Matthew Rockefeller » 11 feb 2005 23:02:09

I'm trying to figure out who the mother of my ancestor Charles
Beauclerk was. He was the illegitimate and recgonized son of Maj.
Aubrey William Beauclerk. I have here some information on his father's
ancestry, which you won't find all in Burke's or any other source
alone. Chances are his mother was Irish or Scots-Irish, since he
settled there in Northern Ireland. He is well attested in records of
that period with his father, and after digging I did find out that his
father was the High Sheriff of County Down, but his mother is nowhere
to be found.

Charles II Stuart, King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland (St.
James' Palace, Westminster, Middlesex, England May 29, 1630 -
February 6, 1685 Whitehall, Westminster, Middlesex, England)
with his mistress
Eleanor "Nell" Gwyn (Hereford, Hereford, England February 2, 1650 -
November 14, 1687 Pall Mall, Westminster, Middlesex, England), daughter
of Captain Thomas Gwyn and Helena

Charles Beauclerk, 1st Duke of Saint Albans, Hereditary Grand Falconer
of England, Hereditary Registrar of the Court of Chancery (Westminster,
Middlesex, England May 8, 1670 - May 11, 1726 Bath, Somerset, England)
married April 13, 1694 in London, England
Lady Diana de Vere, heiress of her father's estate (England ca 1678 -
January 15, 1742 Clewer Manor, Berkshire, England), daughter of Aubrey
de Vere, 20th Earl of Oxford and Diana Kirke

Lord Sidney Beauclerk, Vice-Chamberlain of the Household, MP, he
inherited the estate of Richard Topham (London, England February 27,
1703 - November 23, 1744 Garston, Lancashire, England)
married December 9, 1736 in Speke, Lancashire, England
Mary Norris, heiress of Speke Hall (Speke, Lancashire, England March
22, 1698 - November 20, 1766 Garston, Lancashire, England), daughter of
Thomas Norris, High Sheriff of Lancashire, MP and Magdalene Aston

Topham Beauclerk, owner of Clewer Manor (London, England December 22,
1739 - March 11, 1780 Bloomsbury, London, England)
married March 12, 1768 in St. George's, Hanover Square, London,
England
Lady Diana Spencer (Althorpe, Northamptonshire, England March 24, 1734
- August 1, 1808 England), daughter of Charles Spencer, 3rd Duke of
Marlborough and Hon. Elizabeth Trevor

Charles George Beauclerk, bought St. Leonard's Lodge (London, England
January 20, 1774 - December 25, 1845 Ireland/England)
married April 29, 1799 in County Down, Ireland
Emily Charlotte Ogilvie, inherited Ardglass Castle from her father
(Ardglass Castle, County Down, Ireland May 12, 1778 - January 22, 1832
County Down, Ireland), daughter of William Ogilvie and Lady Emilia Mary
Lennox, Dowager Duchess of Leinster, a great-granddaughter
illegitimately of King Charles II

Maj. Aubrey William Beauclerk, High Sheriff of County Down, MP for East
Surrey, owner of Ardglass Castle and St. Leonard's Lodge (Horsham,
Sussex, England February 20, 1801 - February 1, 1854 Country Antrim,
Ireland)
not married to
?

Rev. Capt. Charles Beauclerk, priest and former Captain in the Royal
Army (Country Antrim, Ireland ca 1824 - January 27, 1880 Portsea,
Hampshire, England), he had two sons that settled in America, one in
Canada, one in South Africa, and three daughters.

Matthew

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 11 feb 2005 23:31:01

"He is well attested in records of that period with his father, and after digging I did find out that his father was the High Sheriff of County Down, but his mother is nowhere
to be found. "

As per your usual method of creating fictitious pedigrees you provide NO sources. Not a single citation. "Digging" is not a source, no matter what David Hughes taught you.
*flips hair, swivels head*
Will Johnson

Matthew Rockefeller

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Matthew Rockefeller » 12 feb 2005 00:00:41

Every generation can be found in Burke's Peerage you stupid, braying
ass. And digging consists of looking at birth certificate records and
property deeds, call it what you will. A recent prominent descendant of
this line passed away and his obituary was in the New York Times, go
look that up, if you have the brain power. Some people actually look at
records and don't just get their information from the encyclopedia
brittanica or what have you.

As usual you've contributed nothing, you're worthless to this newsgroup
and the genealogical community. You're nothing but a fly attempting to
land on the cake. Thankfully, I've got a swatter in hand. I'll say it
again, don't bother responding to my posts if you don't have anything
to add. It's amazing that it hasn't sunk in yet.

I don't owe you an explantation for anything. I don't have a drop of
respect for you. If someone I respect asks me a question, then I'll
answer it the best I can. You, as I've repeatedly said, have
contributed nothing. You are not an expert, not an author, not even a
genealogist, but simply someone who gets his kicks out of interupting
research that is worthwhile. You're a godless and fruitless man who
needs a hobby that doesn't involve tearing down, but building up. I
suppose you're another atheist, like Gordon Hale. Is it any wonder you
think you evolve from monkeys when you behave like them and mimic them
in everyway.

May God have mercy on your soul!

Matthew

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 12 feb 2005 01:14:50

Hard to tell what original research has been done by your posting. Is
there a death certificate of Charles Beauclerk? A marriage
certificate? either with his parents? What does the 1871 census say
for him (likewise 1861, etc.)

It would be helpful to know what you've done in order to think of where
to look next. Baptismal record? How about court records in County
Antrim?

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 12 feb 2005 01:21:02

Here is the line that Matthew posted, snipped to just show the relevant time period

"Charles II Stuart (b May 29, 1630
<snip>
Rev. Capt. Charles Beauclerk (Country Antrim, Ireland ca 1824 - "

So a line from 1630 to 1824.
When I asked him what "digging" he did to confirm it, here is a quote from his last message. "digging consists of looking at birth certificate records and property deeds, call it what you will. "

BIRTH certificates!!

How much deeper can Matthew go in this cycle of proving that he has no clue what he's about? But please Matthew, if you're looked at "birth certificates" on this line please share with us this fabulous resource that you've miraculously uncovered. We would all be in your debt.
Will Johnson

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 12 feb 2005 01:51:02

In a message dated 2/11/2005 6:33:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
matthew_rockefeller@yahoo.com writes:

I
suppose you're another atheist, like Gordon Hale. Is it any wonder you
think you evolve from monkeys when you behave like them and mimic them
in everyway.




And the message containing the above is sure proof that YOU at least have
risen above your origins? I think not.

I have not called you stupid because you believed in some far off, high
above, mystic figure, proposed by ancient priests so that they wouldn't have to
work at honest labor but could, instead, lay around all day eating and drinking
of the sacrifices. That is highly intelligent on your part? But I did not
call you stupid despite that, and despite how I really might feel. You may
not be stupid. A person can have one foible of belief without being stupid,
I suppose.

Perhaps you just did not have an upbringing which left you open to logic and
instead made it easy for you to believe in myths. Poor, poor fellow. I bet
if you work hard at it you can eventually come to your senses and learn to
think instead of believe. Perhaps if you would go and watch apes and try to
understand them better that would help you.

In the meantime do not try to make the word atheist a dirty word. It is
not. It is a word denoting a person who has considered what is logical and what
is not.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas

Tony Hoskins

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Tony Hoskins » 12 feb 2005 02:51:02

Hello Gordon,

This is "way OT", but here goes.

I was interested in your statement, "[The word "atheist"] is a word
denoting a person who has considered what is logical and what is not."
Though knowing and appreciating what you mean, I don't agree. An atheist
is simply a person who doesn't believe in the existence of a deity,
applications of "logic" to the subject notwithstanding. Besides, my view
is that there are legitimate arguments to be made to the contrary - that
the existence of God is a (if not the only) logical conclusion, given
the *interpretation* of the evidence. It is, I think, an issue of
interpretation, rather than pure reason, logic, etc. - factors too
subjective perhaps, in this special instance, to be helpful.

During the past year, I became active in Mensa http://www.us.mensa.org/
and the Triple Nine Society http://www.triplenine.org/. Much as I
suspected they would be, my new friends and colleagues in these groups
are rather disproportionately atheistic/agnostic. I have long observed
that the unusually intelligent often have views on this subject much
like your own, and these others. I frequently notice that the brighter
the person the more weight is placed on "pure" logic. The more pure
logic is used as a rigid touchstone of reality, the less room for the
"beyond reason" or supra-rational there is. But, contrarian that I am, I
find this narrow construction of "logic" to be blindly literal and,
ultimately for me, because of its restrictiveness, illogical!

Thanks for your interesting words and thoughts. Would be glad to talk
further "off list"

Regards,

Tony Hoskins
Santa Rosa, California

Peter Stewart

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 12 feb 2005 03:20:23

Well said, Tony - and by some way the most intelligent opinion posted here
on any subject in a good while.

Peter Stewart




""Tony Hoskins"" <hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us> wrote in message
news:s20cec02.015@CENTRAL_SVR2...
Hello Gordon,

This is "way OT", but here goes.

I was interested in your statement, "[The word "atheist"] is a word
denoting a person who has considered what is logical and what is not."
Though knowing and appreciating what you mean, I don't agree. An atheist
is simply a person who doesn't believe in the existence of a deity,
applications of "logic" to the subject notwithstanding. Besides, my view
is that there are legitimate arguments to be made to the contrary - that
the existence of God is a (if not the only) logical conclusion, given
the *interpretation* of the evidence. It is, I think, an issue of
interpretation, rather than pure reason, logic, etc. - factors too
subjective perhaps, in this special instance, to be helpful.

During the past year, I became active in Mensa http://www.us.mensa.org/
and the Triple Nine Society http://www.triplenine.org/. Much as I
suspected they would be, my new friends and colleagues in these groups
are rather disproportionately atheistic/agnostic. I have long observed
that the unusually intelligent often have views on this subject much
like your own, and these others. I frequently notice that the brighter
the person the more weight is placed on "pure" logic. The more pure
logic is used as a rigid touchstone of reality, the less room for the
"beyond reason" or supra-rational there is. But, contrarian that I am, I
find this narrow construction of "logic" to be blindly literal and,
ultimately for me, because of its restrictiveness, illogical!

Thanks for your interesting words and thoughts. Would be glad to talk
further "off list"

Regards,

Tony Hoskins
Santa Rosa, California

Peter Stewart

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 12 feb 2005 03:25:38

I should amend this: the most intelligent opinion on any OT subject....

Happily we also have some outstanding contributors who never stray from the
field of medieval genealogy. I should also add that I don't necessarily
agree with Tony's remarks, just appreciate them.

Peter Stewart

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:HJdPd.157508$K7.27559@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Well said, Tony - and by some way the most intelligent opinion posted here
on any subject in a good while.

Peter Stewart




""Tony Hoskins"" <hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us> wrote in message
news:s20cec02.015@CENTRAL_SVR2...
Hello Gordon,

This is "way OT", but here goes.

I was interested in your statement, "[The word "atheist"] is a word
denoting a person who has considered what is logical and what is not."
Though knowing and appreciating what you mean, I don't agree. An atheist
is simply a person who doesn't believe in the existence of a deity,
applications of "logic" to the subject notwithstanding. Besides, my view
is that there are legitimate arguments to be made to the contrary - that
the existence of God is a (if not the only) logical conclusion, given
the *interpretation* of the evidence. It is, I think, an issue of
interpretation, rather than pure reason, logic, etc. - factors too
subjective perhaps, in this special instance, to be helpful.

During the past year, I became active in Mensa http://www.us.mensa.org/
and the Triple Nine Society http://www.triplenine.org/. Much as I
suspected they would be, my new friends and colleagues in these groups
are rather disproportionately atheistic/agnostic. I have long observed
that the unusually intelligent often have views on this subject much
like your own, and these others. I frequently notice that the brighter
the person the more weight is placed on "pure" logic. The more pure
logic is used as a rigid touchstone of reality, the less room for the
"beyond reason" or supra-rational there is. But, contrarian that I am, I
find this narrow construction of "logic" to be blindly literal and,
ultimately for me, because of its restrictiveness, illogical!

Thanks for your interesting words and thoughts. Would be glad to talk
further "off list"

Regards,

Tony Hoskins
Santa Rosa, California



Renia

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Renia » 12 feb 2005 03:31:38

Matthew Rockefeller wrote:

I'm trying to figure out who the mother of my ancestor Charles
Beauclerk was. He was the illegitimate and recgonized son of Maj.
Aubrey William Beauclerk. I have here some information on his father's
ancestry, which you won't find all in Burke's or any other source
alone. Chances are his mother was Irish or Scots-Irish, since he
settled there in Northern Ireland. He is well attested in records of
that period with his father, and after digging I did find out that his
father was the High Sheriff of County Down, but his mother is nowhere
to be found.

Charles II Stuart, King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland (St.
James' Palace, Westminster, Middlesex, England May 29, 1630 -
February 6, 1685 Whitehall, Westminster, Middlesex, England)
with his mistress
Eleanor "Nell" Gwyn (Hereford, Hereford, England February 2, 1650 -
November 14, 1687 Pall Mall, Westminster, Middlesex, England), daughter
of Captain Thomas Gwyn and Helena

Charles Beauclerk, 1st Duke of Saint Albans, Hereditary Grand Falconer
of England, Hereditary Registrar of the Court of Chancery (Westminster,
Middlesex, England May 8, 1670 - May 11, 1726 Bath, Somerset, England)
married April 13, 1694 in London, England
Lady Diana de Vere, heiress of her father's estate (England ca 1678 -
January 15, 1742 Clewer Manor, Berkshire, England), daughter of Aubrey
de Vere, 20th Earl of Oxford and Diana Kirke

Lord Sidney Beauclerk, Vice-Chamberlain of the Household, MP, he
inherited the estate of Richard Topham (London, England February 27,
1703 - November 23, 1744 Garston, Lancashire, England)
married December 9, 1736 in Speke, Lancashire, England
Mary Norris, heiress of Speke Hall (Speke, Lancashire, England March
22, 1698 - November 20, 1766 Garston, Lancashire, England), daughter of
Thomas Norris, High Sheriff of Lancashire, MP and Magdalene Aston

Topham Beauclerk, owner of Clewer Manor (London, England December 22,
1739 - March 11, 1780 Bloomsbury, London, England)
married March 12, 1768 in St. George's, Hanover Square, London,
England
Lady Diana Spencer (Althorpe, Northamptonshire, England March 24, 1734
- August 1, 1808 England), daughter of Charles Spencer, 3rd Duke of
Marlborough and Hon. Elizabeth Trevor

Charles George Beauclerk, bought St. Leonard's Lodge (London, England
January 20, 1774 - December 25, 1845 Ireland/England)
married April 29, 1799 in County Down, Ireland
Emily Charlotte Ogilvie, inherited Ardglass Castle from her father
(Ardglass Castle, County Down, Ireland May 12, 1778 - January 22, 1832
County Down, Ireland), daughter of William Ogilvie and Lady Emilia Mary
Lennox, Dowager Duchess of Leinster, a great-granddaughter
illegitimately of King Charles II

Maj. Aubrey William Beauclerk, High Sheriff of County Down, MP for East
Surrey, owner of Ardglass Castle and St. Leonard's Lodge (Horsham,
Sussex, England February 20, 1801 - February 1, 1854 Country Antrim,
Ireland)
not married to
?

Rev. Capt. Charles Beauclerk, priest and former Captain in the Royal
Army (Country Antrim, Ireland ca 1824 - January 27, 1880 Portsea,
Hampshire, England), he had two sons that settled in America, one in
Canada, one in South Africa, and three daughters.

In the 1881 census for Pelham Lodge, Landport, Portsea, Hampshire,
England, one Aubrey Beauclerk is given as age 8, born County Antrim,
Ireland. He was living with his mother, Bessie, a widow whose income
came from Landed Property. Bessie was aged 38 and born in County Clare,
Ireland. Her other children were: Amy aged 19 of no occupation, born
County Down, Ireland; Maud aged 17 of no occupation, born County Antrim,
Ireland; Florence aged 16 born County Antrim; and Charles aged 5, born
Boulogne-sur-Mer, France. There were two servants.

Presumably the same Aubrey Beauclark (sic) and his son, Charles, appear
on the 1920 census for Queens, NY. Charles, age 11, was born in New
Jersey, (father born England, mother born Massachusetts). Aubrey, Hotel
Superintendent and widower age 48 (immig 1886, naturalized 1915), was
born in England, as were both his parents. They were both living with
Aubrey's son-in-law, Edward Gersbach (Office Manager in Tobacco company,
age 25), who was born in New York, while both his parents were born in
Germany. The wife of Edward Gersbach was Anna, age 25, born
Massachusetts (father born England, mother born Massachusetts), and
their new baby daughter was Dorothy Gersbach, born in New York. They
lived at Thrall Place, Woodham County, Queens, NY. [Charles was still in
New York in 1930 aged 21 living with brother-in-law Edward and wife Ann
Gersbach.)

One Aubrey William Beauclerk appears on the 1871 census for Leeds,
Yorkshire, England, aged 8 and born in Southampton. He was son of
Charles Beauclerk, a Dealer in Works of Art, aged 35, born Plymouth,
Devon. His wife was Sarah Caroline, aged 32, born Southsea, Hampshire.
Other children (all born Southampton) were sons Amalius age 9 and
Frederick William age 7, Blanche de Vere Beauclerk age 5, and Diana de
Vere Beauclerk, age 3. They had no live-in servants.

The 1901 census for 11/14 Bolton Gardens West, Brompton, Kensington,
London, shows Aubrey de Vere Beauclerk, a married visitor of his Own
Means, aged 63, born in Ardglass, County Down, Ireland. He was one of
numerous visitors staying at this (unnamed) hotel. [Burke's Peerage
1953, shows him to be the son of Major Aubrey William Beauclerk, MP, of
Ardglass, Co Down.]

Ancestry.com's One World Tree (for what it is worth) gives Aubrey
Beauclerk (born 1872) as son of Charles Beauclerk (b 1823 Ardglass, died
1880 Boulogne) and wife Elizabeth Maria Murphy (b 1823, d 1888
Guernsey), listing similar children to the 1881 census, above. This
Charles is given as son of Aubrey William Beauclerk and Ida Goring.
However, Alan Freer's Rootsweb Worldconnect database gives Charles's
mother as simply "mistress".

However, the IGI (Familysearch.com) gives his birth as 6th June 1872 in
County Antrim, Ireland, child of Aubrey William Beauclerk and Elizabeth
Maria Murphy, which suggests his birth was legitimate. The source they
give for this, is:
Quarterly returns of births in Ireland, 1864-1955, with index to births,
1864-1921 Ireland. General Register Office.

Renia

Denis Beauregard

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Denis Beauregard » 12 feb 2005 03:47:59

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 01:47:58 +0000 (UTC), hoskins@sonoma.lib.ca.us
("Tony Hoskins") wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:

Though knowing and appreciating what you mean, I don't agree. An atheist
is simply a person who doesn't believe in the existence of a deity,
applications of "logic" to the subject notwithstanding. Besides, my view
is that there are legitimate arguments to be made to the contrary - that
the existence of God is a (if not the only) logical conclusion, given
the *interpretation* of the evidence. It is, I think, an issue of
interpretation, rather than pure reason, logic, etc. - factors too
subjective perhaps, in this special instance, to be helpful.

Atheist is the only answer when you ask: but who fathered God ?

Would it be possible to get back to medieval genealogy and to stop
the long series of OT messages ? And in the Camilla thread, please
stop to rename the topic as it helps many readers to kill that OT
thread.


Denis

--
0 Denis Beauregard
/\/ http://www.francogene.com
|\ >>Adresse modifiée souvent/email changed frequently<<
/ | Société généalogique canadienne-française
oo oo http://www.sgcf.com

Nathaniel Taylor

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Nathaniel Taylor » 12 feb 2005 07:33:04

In article <1108162841.544233.217060@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Matthew Rockefeller" <matthew_rockefeller@yahoo.com> wrote:

[in reply to Will Johnson's call for documentation]

As usual you've contributed nothing, you're worthless to this newsgroup
and the genealogical community. You're nothing but a fly attempting to
land on the cake.

In fact Will's post serves a specific purpose--though it could have been
gentler. He has noted, correctly, that you have made genealogical
claims without reference to evidence (I would still like to hear of a
source which supports the descent of the lords of Roquefeuil d'Anduze
from Bernard of Septimania). In this case, most of this Beauclerk line
is perfectly plausible, would be easy to trace in well-available
sources, and I assume the people in it are largely as you have described
it--I do not doubt the line on the face of it. But, since your question
involved a specific problem in the last two generations, you might have
provided some information as to the sources of the information you
already have on those two men--to prevent interested people, who might
be willing to help, simply retracing steps already taken. To be sure,
the earlier part of this line has a certain intrinsic interest. An
agnate royal Stewart line ending up, after two bastardies, in the
19th-century US is certainly worth noting--the sort of thing Gary Boyd
Roberts would want to include in his compendia.

But Will's tone may perhaps partly be explained on another basis:
long-term readers of this list have generally found new arrivals who
think that having a particularly intresting or high-status ancestry
entitles them to be imperious and insulting, or (what is far worse)
somehow exempts them from the requirements of scholarship, to be
tiresome.

Nat Taylor

a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://home.earthlink.net/~nathanieltaylor/leaves/

John Brandon

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av John Brandon » 12 feb 2005 18:07:32

An agnate royal Stewart line ending up, after two bastardies, in the
19th-century US is certainly worth noting--the sort of thing Gary Boyd
Roberts would want to include in his compendia.

And we know that they have exalted present-day descendants (i.e.,
members of the Rockefeller family), something that is almost more
important to Gary (for some odd reason) than that they have a royal
line. So this Beauclerk item is something he'd probably want to look
into.

Matthew Rockefeller

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Matthew Rockefeller » 13 feb 2005 17:31:49

Excellent, Renia. This is what I'm talking about, actual research. I've
looked through the census records for them as well, but you've found a
little more than I did, for which I'm grateful.

The two sons of Charles who moved ot the United States were Ernest and
Aubrey, the one that moved to South Africa was Charles, and the oldest
son who moved to Canada was Henry.

Henry had an interesting wife of note, their info follows:

Henry Wyndham Beauclerk, Director of the Bank of Montreal, Director of
the Brompton Pulp and Paper County, moved to Canada in 1906 (Belfast,
County Antrim, North Ireland December 14, 1869 - January 3, 1937
Montreal, Quebec, Canada)
married June 3, 1911 in St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada
Hon. Alice Josephine Shaughnessy, Member of the I.O.D.E. (Milwaukee,
Milwaukee County, Wisconsin October 28, 1880 - November 15, 1963
Montreal, Quebec, Canada), daughter of Sir Thomas George Shaughnessy,
1st Baron Shaughnessy, President of the Canadian Pacific Railway,
Knight of Malta, KCVO and Elizabeth Bridget Nagle, Member of the
I.O.D.E.

In the 1880 census the older sons were listed at their school, while
Aubrey and Charles were at home, along with their three sisters.

Ida Goring was the first wife of Aubrey William Beauclerk and they
married in 1834, but she apparently wasn't the mother of Charles
Beauclerk.

I'm not sure where the family at Leeds fits in. I can't find them on
the entire tree for the Beauclerk family, so they're a mystery to me.
There is a branch of Beauclerks in New Jersey also, and I'm not sure
how they fit into the pedigree.

Matthew

Matthew Rockefeller

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Matthew Rockefeller » 13 feb 2005 18:03:45

I'm just about done replying to him. It's not good for my well being or
his. When someone calls me a liar, point blank, then they are asking
for abuse. I'm one of the few people in this world who always means
well, and I don't take lightly to my integrity being insulted.

Who is this Will Jhonson anyway to being questioning me? That's my
point. It's nothing personal. You say long-term readers, but I don't
find him making useful comments in the archives. Everyone I talk to in
emails are appauled at how he talks to everyone, including the true
long-term contributors and other serious genealogists, and contributed
nothing himself.

In some cases I've gone to great pains to research individuals and
check marriage records and the link, baptismal records, and I seriously
don't appreciate him having no appreciation for my time and work. When
he starts treating me and others with a fair amount of respect, then
he'll end up learning a lot more. People will answer respectful
inquiries, but nobody takes being called a liar well.

Matthew Rockefeller

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Matthew Rockefeller » 13 feb 2005 18:16:43

Some interesting food for thought Tony. I frequently end up running
into this attitude, even among some people I respect. For me
personally, the atheist republican is my natural enemy. I believe in
almost a socialist way that people should love one another and respect
one another. To me the Native American Indians had the truest
philisophy. Don't waste anything, love the Supreme Being, and love your
neighbors. It's so primative and basic, but yet seemingly so difficult
to catch on. I do love the way folks like Bill O'Reilly calls
professors pinheads, kind of ironic, don't ya think? I think agnostics
are great folks, thinkers. Atheism, no matter what they try to call it,
is a religion amongst itself, and a destructive one. It's one that
doesn't value the human being. In my kabbalistic philosophy every human
has a divine spark, something that links to the divine from which they
came.

I find it hilarious that kabbalist Isaac Luria said that someday people
would falsely say men came from monkeys, long, long before Darwin was
even born. Kabbalah is the true science of the world, and the essence
of truth in the universe. As soon as people learn to love one another
and recognize that they are divine, then the world will be a more
positive and productive place.

Matthew

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 13 feb 2005 19:00:26

Isn't this subject off topic? Your Beauclerk problem is clearly 19th
century and outside the dates of discussion. Even Charles II is
outside the scope of SGM technically.

Again, read my earlier posting and you need to tell us not so much what
you have as what research you've done in order for us to give you
advice on where to turn next.

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 14 feb 2005 05:20:02

In a message dated 2/13/2005 8:08:01 PM Pacific Standard Time,
matthew_rockefeller@yahoo.com writes:

In some cases I've gone to great pains to research individuals and
check marriage records and the link, baptismal records, and I seriously
don't appreciate him having no appreciation for my time and work. When
he starts treating me and others with a fair amount of respect, then
he'll end up learning a lot more. People will answer respectful
inquiries, but nobody takes being called a liar well.

Irrelevant, specious, tendentious and pointless.
Prove me wrong, post your sources.
Otherwise wear your egg.
Birth certificates for people in the 17th century no less ?
Who is the charlatan here?
Will Johnson get my name right.

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 14 feb 2005 05:20:03

And in addition, mister descendent of God, you could post some of your
well-researched details on your own ancestor where others could check them. I'm
sure we'd all be edified by the information with sources cited on your descent
from Baha U'llah.

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 14 feb 2005 05:30:03

In a message dated 2/13/2005 11:08:38 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
matthew_rockefeller@yahoo.com writes:

Don't waste anything, love the Supreme Being, and love your
neighbors. It's so primative and basic, but yet seemingly so difficult
to catch on. I do love the way folks like Bill O'Reilly calls
professors pinheads, kind of ironic, don't ya think? I think agnostics
are great folks, thinkers. Atheism, no matter what they try to call it,
is a religion amongst itself, and a destructive one. It's one that
doesn't value the human being. In my kabbalistic philosophy every human
has a divine spark, something that links to the divine from which they
came.





I respectfully request you to refrain from writing such off topic messages
to this forum. You have cast down a gauntlet for me which I, because I have
not desire to continue to bore the true genealogists here, will not pick up.
If, however, you do not desist in such efforts I MUST take arms against your
inane philosophy.

Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas

Renia

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Renia » 14 feb 2005 15:04:10

WJhonson@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 2/13/2005 8:08:01 PM Pacific Standard Time,
matthew_rockefeller@yahoo.com writes:


In some cases I've gone to great pains to research individuals and
check marriage records and the link, baptismal records, and I seriously
don't appreciate him having no appreciation for my time and work. When
he starts treating me and others with a fair amount of respect, then
he'll end up learning a lot more. People will answer respectful
inquiries, but nobody takes being called a liar well.


Irrelevant, specious, tendentious and pointless.
Prove me wrong, post your sources.

Anyone with a large ancestry has thousands of sources. You want them
all? Or you want him to do your work for you and prise out the
individual sources for individual people? You ask too much.

Otherwise wear your egg.
Birth certificates for people in the 17th century no less ?

Where does he say this? I interpret him as saying he has looked at more
modern birth certificates.

Who is the charlatan here?
Will Johnson get my name right.

That probably depends on you. You have munged your email address, and
Jhonson is how you appear. Who is to know what is the correct spelling
of your surname.

Looking through the archives, I see you are as guilty as the next person
of not citing sources. When you do cite them, they are online sources
(primarily Leos) and encyclopedias, not primary sources. Wikipedia,
useful though it can be, is a user-contributary encyclopedia, and full
of mistakes. The only other source you cite, is your web site,
advertising your services as a professional genealogist.

Renia

Gjest

Re: Beauclerk - Charles II

Legg inn av Gjest » 14 feb 2005 17:21:04

In a message dated 2/14/2005 6:15:39 AM Pacific Standard Time,
renia@DELETEotenet.gr writes:

Anyone with a large ancestry has thousands of sources. You want them
all? Or you want him to do your work for you and prise out the
individual sources for individual people? You ask too much.



No Renia I want him to post ONE source, that proves ANYTHING he says. So far
that is too much for him to bear.

Where does he say this? I interpret him as saying he has looked at more
modern birth certificates.



Renia he posted a line from 1650 or so to about 1820 or so and claimed to
have proved the line from in part "... birth certificates...". That is what I
pointed out. The implausibility if not impossibility of such a thing.


That probably depends on you. You have munged your email address, and
Jhonson is how you appear. Who is to know what is the correct spelling
of your surname.



Incorrect. I have not "munged" my address. My email address is Wjhonson and
it always has been, he assumed my surname was also Jhonson when in fact it is
Johnson.


Looking through the archives, I see you are as guilty as the next person
of not citing sources. When you do cite them, they are online sources
(primarily Leos) and encyclopedias, not primary sources. Wikipedia,
useful though it can be, is a user-contributary encyclopedia, and full
of mistakes. The only other source you cite, is your web site,
advertising your services as a professional genealogist.

But see I do cite them. And Leo's cite rests on top of well-known sources.
And on wikipedia you could not be more mistaken. The entries there are not
only read but CORRECTED by a committee or persons, some quite expert in their
field. That is not less useful, but actually MORE useful than an encyclopaedia
that is never corrected. And some of the more edited entries list their
sources as well as you quite well know I'm sure.

And I have never advertised my own cite on this list. If I have please post
such an advertisment.

Thank you for your concern.
Will Johnson

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»