Are there limits to genealogical research?

Several recent conversations concerning genealogy have ended rathersuddenly, on my part, when the person claimed to have his or hergenealogy "back to Adam." I really don't have any polite way to respondto that conclusion. I have written before about the physicalimpossibility of obtaining such a lengthy pedigree, but recentconversations have caused me to return to the subject. The real questionis where does genealogical research end as a practical and reasonableendeavor?

Part of the complication of a discussion in this area, is the issue ofthe infamous genealogical "brick wall." Anytime further research ischaracterized as a brick wall, there is an unspoken assumption that somekind of further research involving hitherto unavailable records, willcontinue to extend the pedigree. The literature is replete withanecdotal examples of researchers finding the long lost relative. I haveno reason to doubt that there are circumstances when additional recordsbecome available or a different research approach leads to an extensionof an existing line. Often, the brick wall situations involve lookingfor the wrong person, or in the wrong place or at the wrong time.However, by looking at research as always open ended, you could arguethat given the proper circumstances, someone really could extend theirfamily line all the way back to Adam.

Read more...

A sword, apparently originating from the 14th century, commemorating an event in 1330, was sold at auction yesterday. It appears to have been in the family throughout that time, and was purchased by a Douglas. So, in some families it is possible to track back over many generations.

OK, the 14th century is rather more recent than Adam, but I can trace my line back to Ghengis Khan (as can many others). Again, Ghengis Khan is rather more recent than Adam. But my point is that this is just down one line.

Are we happy if we can trace just one line back? I think not.

I have been wondering how many ancestors I might have...
Two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents... If I continue this series back at 3 generations per century, I find I have over a billion Viking-era ancestors. And 10^18 in the Roman era.

I think it might have been yourself that mentioned the 10 generation challenge? Certainly, it has given me a target - to get all lines back to my 8x great grandparents.

Whichever target I give myself, there are still a lot of people to find - even if I do not actually have a billion Viking ancestors!

You need to be a member of Genealogy Social to add comments!

Join Genealogy Social

Comments

William S Dean July 30, 2010 at 11:12am

I have said many times in discussions of genealogy that anything beyond the 17th century becomes extremely sketchy, to say the least. So many documents were lost in the periods before that -- not to mention the fact that many simply never existed in the first place -- that I find dubious any linkages that claim Viking, Spanish Moor, Irish/Scots kings, etc in the line. Adam is simply laughable, I agree. On what basis can people track lineages before surnames were used, for example? There are tentative and certainly speculative "possibilities" but -- on the whole -- I cannot agree to any circumstances wherein historically accurate lineages can connect the genealogical dots to periods where no records were kept.
William Douglas July 30, 2010 at 7:14am

A sword, apparently originating from the 14th century, commemorating an event in 1330, was sold at auction yesterday. It appears to have been in the family throughout that time, and was purchased by a Douglas. So, in some families it is possible to track back over many generations.

OK, the 14th century is rather more recent than Adam, but I can trace my line back to Ghengis Khan (as can many others). Again, Ghengis Khan is rather more recent than Adam. But my point is that this is just down one line.

Are we happy if we can trace just one line back? I think not.

I have been wondering how many ancestors I might have...
Two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents... If I continue this series back at 3 generations per century, I find I have over a billion Viking-era ancestors. And 10^18 in the Roman era.

I think it might have been yourself that mentioned the 10 generation challenge? Certainly, it has given me a target - to get all lines back to my 8x great grandparents.

Whichever target I give myself, there are still a lot of people to find - even if I do not actually have a billion Viking ancestors!

This reply was deleted.