The Royal Descents Of 688 Immigrants

[D. Spencer Hines]

Excellent!

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Deus Vult

Vires et Honor
---------------------------------------------

Once again Gary Boyd Roberts has assembled all recent royal descent
research, some yet unpublished, and produced an authoritative, up-to-date
compendium.

In the 2006 edition of The Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants he added
eighteen new immigrants to his previous 650. In this edition, he has added
twenty-eight more, so that with a few disproofs (Curwens/Corwins of
Massachusetts and New York, Byes of Pennsylvania, and Edwardses, one Evans
and Hugh Jones of Pennsylvania), this total is now 688.

With this enlarged compendium, plus the works of DOUGLAS RICHARDSON *** on
Magna Carta and Plantagenet ancestry, which add much biographical detail on
many medieval figures and cover over 200 of the 688 immigrants, royal
descent literature has reached a new level of comprehension and reliability.

Genealogical Publishing Company is proud to offer the public these benchmark
works that lead to an almost 800- year expansion (ca. 900–1700) of the
ancestry of many thousands of Americans.

<http://www.genealogical.com/products/The%20Royal%20Descents%20of%20600%20Immigrants/4963.html>

[Gjest]

[email protected] wrote:

Just where can one get a complete list of these 688 individuals?
How many sets of siblings are among this group of 688?
What is the blood relationship of each to the other 687?

Might make a fun project to trace all their descendants down to the
present.. or near present.

Not fun! Utter frustration and disaster! You will find on the net
so many bogus descendants that it would be a lifetime project to
sift through them all.

Doug McDonald

[Duvall, Jeffery A]

Granted that trying to compile a complete list of all 688 individual's descendants to the present day would be impossible, it would still be nice if we could find a list of the 688 immigrants covered in the book.

Jeff Duvall

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 12:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The Royal Descents Of 688 Immigrants

[email protected] wrote:

Just where can one get a complete list of these 688 individuals?
How many sets of siblings are among this group of 688?
What is the blood relationship of each to the other 687?

Might make a fun project to trace all their descendants down to the
present.. or near present.

Not fun! Utter frustration and disaster! You will find on the net
so many bogus descendants that it would be a lifetime project to
sift through them all.

Doug McDonald

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[Leo van de Pas]

But thanks to the previous books of Gary Boyd Roberts, at least 600 (and
more) have been known for a long time.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Duvall, Jeffery A" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 6:09 AM
Subject: RE: The Royal Descents Of 688 Immigrants

Granted that trying to compile a complete list of all 688 individual's
descendants to the present day would be impossible, it would still be nice
if we could find a list of the 688 immigrants covered in the book.

Jeff Duvall

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 12:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The Royal Descents Of 688 Immigrants

[email protected] wrote:


Just where can one get a complete list of these 688 individuals?
How many sets of siblings are among this group of 688?
What is the blood relationship of each to the other 687?

Might make a fun project to trace all their descendants down to the
present.. or near present.


Not fun! Utter frustration and disaster! You will find on the net
so many bogus descendants that it would be a lifetime project to
sift through them all.

Doug McDonald

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.10/1241 - Release Date:
1/24/2008 9:58 AM

[John Brandon]

Granted that trying to compile a complete list of all 688 individual's descendants to the present day would be impossible, it would still be nice if we could find a list of the 688 immigrants covered in the book.

Scroll down to the bottom of this page and there's a link you can
click to see the 500 immigrants that were included in the first
edition:

http://home.comcast.net/~gwyddon/

[Denis Beauregard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:00:21 -0600, [email protected] wrote in
soc.genealogy.medieval:

[email protected] wrote:
On Jan 25, 3:40 pm, "D. Spencer Hines" <[email protected]> wrote:
You don't know what you are biting off.

Just showing all the ways various Presidents of the United States or
Presidents of Yale or Harvard are interrelated is a massive task.

DSH

I wasn't planning on doing this alone!
Such a project would need a team of people to be successful.
With that said, I wonder how many posters are descended from one of
these 688 individuals?
That info alone would make a start.... hint, hint, hint.


You obviously don't realize the magnitude: there are perhaps
10 to 50 million people on that list!

I'm descended from two of them.

There are already some attempts to find descendants of Charlemagne,
Hugues Capet and a few English kings. So, if you limit one of those
projects to 1800 for instances, then you can estimate the number of
known descendants living in 1800 re the number of people in the same
countries, then the same in 1775, 1750, etc. to estimate how fast each
is growing, and finally you can estimate how many living descendants
we have today.

I made this kind of computation on the Quebec Royal Descents list I
have in my site. While my estimate is realistic to 1800 (I know I
missed some descendants in 1771-1800 and cousins can be counted
twice), I can see the gateway with the more descendants and focus on
the 5 biggers to estimate how they can grow in the next 2 centuries,
giving an estimate of the royal population.

I find that 5.5% of couples married in 1700-1799 in my database are
royal descents. Because the ratio is increasing as the time goes,
in 1799, we have probably 10% of Quebec population with some royal
roots. The population was multiplied by 10 in the next century.
We can estimate an increase by 2 each 30 years and that each couple
had an average of 4 children (to multiply the population by 2,
each child becoming half of the couples married at the next
generation).


1800 10
1830 19
1860 34
1890 57
1920 81
1950 97

In 1800, about 10% of people were royal descents, so 90% were not.
90% of the not royal married 90% of the not royal, staying not
royal (81%). So that in 1830, 19% had some royal blood. The
population continued to grow at a similar rate until the 1960s
so that circa 1950, about 97% of the Quebec population with French
roots had some royal ancestry. It can be 98% today, i.e. about
98% of 85% (% with French roots) of 7 M (total) or roughly 5,8 M,
plus as much out of Quebec (Canada and USA).

In USA, the conditions were different, so you must adapt the
computation to them. Good luck


Denis

--
0 Denis Beauregard -
/\/ Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/
|\ French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/
/ | Maintenant sur cédérom, début à 1770 (Version 2008)
oo oo Now on CD-ROM, beginnings to 1770 (2008 Release)

[John Foster]

You are assuming that he has only one computer, assuming that future
computers aren't any faster than the one he has now, that he doesn't have
any help to do additional entry, and that the bulk data couldn't be scanned
in. Many of us are using TMG now, which can already generate a publishable
narrative sentence structure of what is already in the data, without doing
any extra keying at all, which can be imported or bridged from other
genealogy software, even. Can it store 50 million names in the future? The
way computer storage is going now, probably. I'm looking at a terabyte right
here at home now. Can the software genealogy database handle that many
names? I'm only going with a "maybe". Besides, I and my own additional set,
along with the research of half of the people in the world would have to be
added in there somewhere. Figure 800 million names then. In those 80 years
that it takes with this extra work, there could be another 4 or so new
generations to add.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
John C. Foster, retsof *at* austin.rr.com was retsof *at* texas.net
RETSOFtware, where QUALITY is only a slogan...

TX4.US
RETSOF.US
COKELEY.US
LOVE-M-ALL-PETCARE.TX4.US
----- Original Message -----
From: "joe c" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.history.british, alt.talk.royalty, soc.genealogy.medieval,
soc.history.medieval
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: The Royal Descents Of 688 Immigrants

I wasn't particularly thinking about doing it all on the net. I agree
that there is way too much dreck out there to attempt doing it that
way but there are always the old fashion ways... primary sources, etc.

No, this couldn't be done. Some of these people have at least 50
Million descendants. i't's likely that even if you could find all the
descendants, that merely transcibing them into a book once you had
done the "hard" work (if you could type the names at 5 seconds a
piece, and there were 500 Million of them, would take approximately 80
years.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 25, 5:11 pm, wjhonson <[email protected]> wrote:

On Jan 25, 11:35 am, John Brandon <[email protected]> wrote:

Scroll down to the bottom of this page and there's a link you can
click to see the 500 immigrants that were included in the first
edition:

http://home.comcast.net/~gwyddon/

I hate frames editing.  I would never impose frames on visitors to my
sites.  The only thing I hate more is floating *Helper* menus which
don't help at all imho, they just get in your way (cf. Medlands)

At any rant, I mean rate...
The direct link ishttp://home.comcast.net/~gwyddon/RD500.htm

You can float over the link off her main page (don't click) and the
direct link will appear either floating at your mouse, or at the
bottom of the browser.  But regardless I've added the direct link to
my own Sources page.

Will Johnson

Thanks Will, the link is appreciated muchly.

[Gjest]

On Jan 26, 11:16 am, Denis Beauregard <denis.b-at-
[email protected]> wrote:
(deletion)

Denis and others:

You are replying to all newsgroups on this thread - the troll Hines is
cross-posting to the sporge-infested newsgroup alt.talk.royalty.

If for some unknown reason you insist on chatting with this dull
troll, kindly trim your groups to reduce the risk of infection.

Or better, ignore the troll.

Kind regards

Michael

[Denis Beauregard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:29:54 -0600, "John Foster"
<[email protected]> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:

genealogy software, even. Can it store 50 million names in the future? The
way computer storage is going now, probably. I'm looking at a terabyte right

I know someone having a set of 3 millions of images of records
(not names, but a complete image). If the average is only 5
records/image and 3 names/record, then he has names of 45 M
people on those records on one disk.

Now, if you have only the data, even with a not very efficient
database (let's say 1000 characters/name), on a 250 gigabyte disk
(which is now standard on a desk computer), you could have
250 M names on the computer.

here at home now. Can the software genealogy database handle that many
names? I'm only going with a "maybe". Besides, I and my own additional set,
along with the research of half of the people in the world would have to be
added in there somewhere. Figure 800 million names then. In those 80 years
that it takes with this extra work, there could be another 4 or so new
generations to add.

The largest Quebec databases available in genealogical societies,
all made by many persons, have :

PRDH - 700 000 records, 2 M names
BSQ - 5 M records, over 7.5 names
BMS2000 - 5 M records, perhaps 15 to 20 M names

I think the largest French database has 40 M marriages

None of these databases is maintained with a general purpose genealogy
software...


Denis

--
0 Denis Beauregard -
/\/ Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/
|\ French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/
/ | Maintenant sur cédérom, début à 1770 (Version 2008)
oo oo Now on CD-ROM, beginnings to 1770 (2008 Release)

[[email protected]]

On Jan 25, 8:30 pm, Denis Beauregard <denis.b-at-
[email protected]> wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:29:54 -0600, "John Foster"
[email protected]> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:

genealogy software, even. Can it store 50 million names in the future? The
way computer storage is going now, probably. I'm looking at a terabyte right

I know someone having a set of 3 millions of images of records
(not names, but a complete image).  If the average is only 5
records/image and 3 names/record, then he has names of 45 M
people on those records on one disk.

Now, if you have only the data, even with a not very efficient
database (let's say 1000 characters/name), on a 250 gigabyte disk
(which is now standard on a desk computer), you could have
250 M names on the computer.

here at home now. Can the software genealogy database handle that many
names? I'm only going with a "maybe". Besides, I and my own additional set,
along with the research of half of the people in the world would have to be
added in there somewhere. Figure 800 million names then. In those 80 years
that it takes with this extra work, there could be another 4 or so new
generations to add.

The largest Quebec databases available in genealogical societies,
all made by many persons, have :

PRDH - 700 000 records, 2 M names
BSQ - 5 M records, over 7.5 names
BMS2000 - 5 M records, perhaps 15 to 20 M names

I think the largest French database has 40 M marriages

None of these databases is maintained with a general purpose genealogy
software...

Denis

--
    0    Denis Beauregard -
   /\/   Les Français d'Amérique du Nord -www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/
  |\     French in North America before 1722 -www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/
 /  |    Maintenant sur cédérom, début à 1770 (Version 2008)
oo  oo   Now on CD-ROM, beginnings to 1770 (2008 Release)

Perhaps a more managable group would be better to start with...

Let's say anyone who meets all the following criteria:

1). Arrived on the Mayflower or Fortune.
2). Is of Royal Descent
3). Is descended from one of the Magna Carta surities.

Now- anyone have any indea how large that group would be?
I lack Mr. Richardson's bhooks to do a cross reference.

[Nathaniel Taylor]

In article
<c6a8c895-eeb3-4b5a-b25a-df624ffe4535@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

Perhaps a more managable group would be better to start with...

Let's say anyone who meets all the following criteria:

1). Arrived on the Mayflower or Fortune.
2). Is of Royal Descent
3). Is descended from one of the Magna Carta surities.

Now- anyone have any indea how large that group would be?
I lack Mr. Richardson's bhooks to do a cross reference.

All tongue in cheek of course. But I believe there's only one family of
_Mayflower_ passengers with fully established medieval descents (with
royal and/or Magna Carta ancestry): the More children, of whom only
Richard survived to reproduce.

Richard More: that's a small Venn diagram indeed.

Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/

[John Foster]

My wife is descended from all of those (#1 from Edward Fuller, not "arrived
on" herself). Paths to #2 and #3 are different since the more generations
removed, the more possibilities. The Veatch/Veach/Veitch line is fairly well
established.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathaniel Taylor" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: The Royal Descents Of 688 Immigrants

In article
c6a8c895-eeb3-4b5a-b25a-df624ffe4535@q3 ... groups.com>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

Perhaps a more managable group would be better to start with...

Let's say anyone who meets all the following criteria:

1). Arrived on the Mayflower or Fortune.
2). Is of Royal Descent
3). Is descended from one of the Magna Carta surities.

Now- anyone have any indea how large that group would be?
I lack Mr. Richardson's bhooks to do a cross reference.

All tongue in cheek of course. But I believe there's only one family of
_Mayflower_ passengers with fully established medieval descents (with
royal and/or Magna Carta ancestry): the More children, of whom only
Richard survived to reproduce.

Richard More: that's a small Venn diagram indeed.

Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.12/1163 - Release Date:
12/1/2007 12:05 PM