This is a great website. It is one family's ancestry, unlike any I have
seen so far. It is organized in family groups, with "quick family
charts" as well as descent to the present day for each.
Of particular interest is the inclusion of photos, shield, coats of
arms, effigies, et alia.
The photos are captioned to show where the "story" of each is found in
the database.
CE Wood
Great website
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
CE Wood
Re: Great website
OOPS! Here is the url:
http://www.renderplus.com/hartgen/indices/index_a_1.htm
CE Wood wrote:
http://www.renderplus.com/hartgen/indices/index_a_1.htm
CE Wood wrote:
This is a great website. It is one family's ancestry, unlike any I have
seen so far. It is organized in family groups, with "quick family
charts" as well as descent to the present day for each.
Of particular interest is the inclusion of photos, shield, coats of
arms, effigies, et alia.
The photos are captioned to show where the "story" of each is found in
the database.
CE Wood
-
Stewart Baldwin
Re: Great website
On 8 Oct 2005 20:45:21 -0700, "CE Wood" <wood_ce@msn.com> wrote:
The reliability of the information seems quite bad to me. It looks as
though the compiler has used some of the very worst sources.
Stewart Baldwin
This is a great website. It is one family's ancestry, unlike any I have
seen so far. It is organized in family groups, with "quick family
charts" as well as descent to the present day for each.
Of particular interest is the inclusion of photos, shield, coats of
arms, effigies, et alia.
The photos are captioned to show where the "story" of each is found in
the database.
http://www.renderplus.com/hartgen/indices/index_a_1.htm
The reliability of the information seems quite bad to me. It looks as
though the compiler has used some of the very worst sources.
Stewart Baldwin
-
Gjest
Re: Great website
For me it is a rather large red flag when such things as "A Norman" and
"Alamannia" are treated as surnames - much like terms such as "Miss"
and "Mrs" being used for medieval and ancient women. It is a signal
that the compiler does not have enough basic historical and
genealogical knowledge to post such a site, however entertaining it
might be for that family.
"Alamannia" are treated as surnames - much like terms such as "Miss"
and "Mrs" being used for medieval and ancient women. It is a signal
that the compiler does not have enough basic historical and
genealogical knowledge to post such a site, however entertaining it
might be for that family.
-
Denis Beauregard
Re: Great website
On 9 Oct 2005 19:35:06 -0700, lostcooper@yahoo.com wrote in
soc.genealogy.medieval:
And what is the problem ? I mean, a name is a mean to identify
someone. At the era where there were no family name, how will you
identify them without that mean ?
Denis
--
0 Denis Beauregard - Les Français d'Amérique
/\/ http://www.francogene.com/genealogie-quebec/
|\ French in North America before 1711
/ | http://www.francogene.com/quebec-genealogy/
oo oo Mon association de généalogie: http://www.sgcf.com
soc.genealogy.medieval:
For me it is a rather large red flag when such things as "A Norman" and
"Alamannia" are treated as surnames - much like terms such as "Miss"
And what is the problem ? I mean, a name is a mean to identify
someone. At the era where there were no family name, how will you
identify them without that mean ?
Denis
--
0 Denis Beauregard - Les Français d'Amérique
/\/ http://www.francogene.com/genealogie-quebec/
|\ French in North America before 1711
/ | http://www.francogene.com/quebec-genealogy/
oo oo Mon association de généalogie: http://www.sgcf.com
-
Gjest
Re: Great website
In a message dated 10/9/2005 8:15:09 PM Pacific Standard Time,
no@nospam.com.invalid writes:
And what is the problem ? I mean, a name is a mean to identify
someone. At the era where there were no family name, how will you
identify them without that mean ?
I think what he means is something like that
1) You add a person to your database that historians call "John of Burgundy"
2) You then add his children ..... Mark Burgundy, Philip Burgundy.
That would not be correct if Mark was actually called Mark of Bohemia. And
would only serve to confuse people. It would be like called "Thomas of
Woodstock" by a strange name like Thomas England or Thomas Plantagenet or Thomas
FitzEdward or some odd thing by which he was never actually known in his
lifetime or later.
Will Johnson
no@nospam.com.invalid writes:
And what is the problem ? I mean, a name is a mean to identify
someone. At the era where there were no family name, how will you
identify them without that mean ?
I think what he means is something like that
1) You add a person to your database that historians call "John of Burgundy"
2) You then add his children ..... Mark Burgundy, Philip Burgundy.
That would not be correct if Mark was actually called Mark of Bohemia. And
would only serve to confuse people. It would be like called "Thomas of
Woodstock" by a strange name like Thomas England or Thomas Plantagenet or Thomas
FitzEdward or some odd thing by which he was never actually known in his
lifetime or later.
Will Johnson
-
Gordon Banks
Re: Great website
Some people do that to satisfy the software they are using, which
doesn't work well on people without surnames (may insert question marks,
etc.). I think it can be harmless, as long as the person doesn't
actually believe these are surnames.
On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 19:35 -0700, lostcooper@yahoo.com wrote:
doesn't work well on people without surnames (may insert question marks,
etc.). I think it can be harmless, as long as the person doesn't
actually believe these are surnames.
On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 19:35 -0700, lostcooper@yahoo.com wrote:
For me it is a rather large red flag when such things as "A Norman" and
"Alamannia" are treated as surnames - much like terms such as "Miss"
and "Mrs" being used for medieval and ancient women. It is a signal
that the compiler does not have enough basic historical and
genealogical knowledge to post such a site, however entertaining it
might be for that family.
-
Gjest
Re: Great website
In a message dated 10/8/05 8:59:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time, wood_ce@msn.com
writes:
<< OOPS! Here is the url:
http://www.renderplus.com/hartgen/indices/index_a_1.htm >>
Ok C Wood. I gave this site a go.
My review is a C +
Not only does it fail to give sources for any particular fact, but it also
fails to give sources whatsoever.
It also has the nasty disadvantage of giving fictitious birthyears to people
merely based on the birthyear of a spouse or child without explaining when
these are estimates, guesses, projections, or actually based on some document.
In addition it has the nice failure of giving birth locations the same as
marriage and death locations for persons who we actually do not know those
details. Instead of saying "OF" a place for example, it states that a person was
married in the same place where they were born, when we actually, in those cases
I checked, don't know this.
So I don't see this as being a great website. But rather one that adds to,
instead of helping see through, the confusion.
Will Johnson
writes:
<< OOPS! Here is the url:
http://www.renderplus.com/hartgen/indices/index_a_1.htm >>
Ok C Wood. I gave this site a go.
My review is a C +
Not only does it fail to give sources for any particular fact, but it also
fails to give sources whatsoever.
It also has the nasty disadvantage of giving fictitious birthyears to people
merely based on the birthyear of a spouse or child without explaining when
these are estimates, guesses, projections, or actually based on some document.
In addition it has the nice failure of giving birth locations the same as
marriage and death locations for persons who we actually do not know those
details. Instead of saying "OF" a place for example, it states that a person was
married in the same place where they were born, when we actually, in those cases
I checked, don't know this.
So I don't see this as being a great website. But rather one that adds to,
instead of helping see through, the confusion.
Will Johnson