It's time to compare John Dudley Y DNA to His son Ambrose and Robert Dudley 1532 my 2nd cousins x 15 removed

Cheley, may all the sweet kindness from that huge, passionate heart of yours return to you ten-fold. Always, Debra

This is cracking me up today. Since I “claim” Robert Royce as some sort of great uncle, I decided to walk the links and verify the connection. (Cleanup ensued, of course.)

This is what gave me a panic attack though:

Willis Elson Jerome, (Twin)

1850 census says he’s born PA
1860 census says he’s born CT
1870 census says he’s born CT
Daughter’s death certificate says he’s born ENGLAND

(Freaking out now ...)

Inconsistencies in written records, now that's a shock :D

Ms. Brennan: I complaied as late as 10 days ago and aparantly it's been corrected so I am corrected. I am very glad that his been dealt with. I salute the curator of Katherine Howard ap Rice. DCR

I disconnected the extra child in January. And she is Katherine Howard, not Katherine ap Rice. She was never Katherine ap Rice. She wasn’t even Katherine ap Rhys. Or Katherine ap Gruffudd, for that matter. Howard. She was a Howard.

So who do we believe and why?

At the moment I am “choosing” to believe the DAR:

https://services.dar.org/public/dar_research/search_descendants/?ac...

Because their records are never, ever wrong (sarcasm).

Actually, I think the Geni tree is likely pretty correct (no doubt plenty of little errors), because we’re now into living memory, family bibles, correspondence, multiple vital records, lots of descendants doing their genealogy, DNA studies, etc.

But if I can find doubt in “my own” tree on someone born 1845, how much “more” doubt do we have going back further and more obscurely than Idaho?

“Trust, but verify.”

Thomas Henry and Rice and Henry Thomas Rice were brothers born 1552 and 1554 respectively to Henry Rice of Newton son of Griffeth 1508 and Thomasine wife of John Rice his 1/2 brother (aparatly when William was quite young age 14 or 15) Oh yes it's Thomasine Minn-Mayall. The Henry Rice of Newton is an Inheritor of the Dynvor estate but only because Sir Walter Rice daughtered out and married captain Button. Henry Rice of Newton is the legitimate son of William Rice 1522 and Thomasine Minn Myall or the daughter of Mr. ? Lattimer (meaning Latin translator). I know someone addressed this issue of John Rice and Thomasine Minn/Myall as being the Parents of William but the linkage was Griffeth ap Gruffed 1508 and the baroncy of Dynvor passing to his son....William and then Henry Rice of Newton. Kindly cut me some slack here as I have not been on that site for several years except to note Thomas could not be the son of Katherein Howard ap Rice. Please take a look and let's talk about what you see. There would be no reason to claim Henry Rice of Newton as the son of WALTER, because he was not his son. DCR

The secondary sources should be believed Ms Howton on Thomas Henry being the father of EDMUND. That is exactly the kind of smoke which should draw every serious investigator to the relationship between brothers when they share the same woman as wife. IE Margaaret Baker. To leave Edmund Rice without a father when we know exactly who his line is and does in fact connect to Ancient Wales and Royalty is just so much puffery trying to avoid the Brother's wife issue. Margaret married Henry Thomas but ended up with Thomas Henry Rice because of a Preference no doubt. The Rice's of Dynvore go back back to Ancient Welsh Rulers and thus the writer of by the Name of Rice may have had some facts wrong but the bloodline was correct leading back to Rhys ap Gruffed 1508 inheritor of the Dynvore title and estates. Edmund 1594 came out of the sky? Where did he come from? We have all we need in that I am his 6th maternal cousin so triangulate away. May the best investigator win. I don't care what the outcome is legitimate or not....that's all about land inheritance rights...not his personhood. All Human beings are legitimate as far as I can tell and only traditon separates right to inherit over a piece of Paper and church ceremony. Someone in that branch of the family has to come to terms with his HUMANITY not his legitimacy: But then I hold a minority view around here. DCR

The only worthwhile secondary sources are the ones that cite *primary* sources, or at least tell you where you can find primary information.

Secondary sources that don't give *their* sources aren't worth a hill of moldy beans.

Well, let’s see.

Dale Rice “does not” descend from Edmund Rice, that is Y DNA testing proven.

http://www.edmund-rice.org/haplotype.htm

Deacon Edmund Rice Shows over 10,000 descendants on Geni (the Max it can show) and 158 profile managers.

The Edmund Rice Association does not have parents for him.

Given that the “authority” does not agree with Dale, “nor” has there been a descendant or profile manager or volunteer curator (several, including a descendant) agreeing with Dale’s position (on someone “not” his ancestor), what do we think Geni should do?

I know my answer. Dale is welcome to have a personal site, but Geni strives to meet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

PS a known descendant & profile manager - DNA proven - was queried years ago on this issue. She said NO.

BTW, Deacon Edmund Rice is my second great uncle's 6th great grandfather. So it’s another great uncle for me, and I want a fact based tree, as we all do.

The thing is, we went through all of this years ago. I realize it’s new to some so I’m happy to revisit and try to explain Geni profiles (that I can explain) but man! This is “really” time consuming. And takes us away from improving the Geni tree ... or our “own” genealogy.

"Sticking up for someone" is not a crime. PUBLICLY posting PRIVATE messages is, AT BEST, a gross violation of trust - and *should be* a violation of Geni's Terms of Service. (How would *you* like it if someone blabbed a private message of *yours* all over Twitter?)

Dale has been posting his genealogical fantasies here for seven years. They have been debated, rebutted, debunked and disproved over and over and over again. He just keeps spinning them wider and wilder, paying *no* attention to the rebuttals.

He has been told for seven long years that 1) he is not a descendant of Deacon Edmund Rice (which he has been inconsistent in accepting) and 2) the Edmund Rice Association takes the firm position that Deacon Rice's parents, and therefore ancestry, are unknown and quite possibly undiscoverable. Yet here he is once again insisting that Deacon Rice "Is So" a descendant of Rhys ap Gruffyd though there is not one scintilla of evidence in that direction.

Cheley, of course we have relationship paths - multiple ways (and they may change as we all “clean & verify”).

Geni says: Cheley Hokanson is your third great grandfather's wife's third cousin five times removed. https://www.geni.com/path/Erica-Howton+is+related+to+Cheley-Hokanso...

Geni says: Cheley Hokanson is your 11th cousin twice removed. https://www.geni.com/path/Erica-Howton+is+related+to+Cheley-Hokanso...

The more distant, the more likely there’s a bad link “between.” That’s why I “walk the links” and examine, first & foremost for “common sense.”

There’s something I wanted to share, it’s one of my bibles for common sense in genealogy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albion%27s_Seed

Colonial Massachusetts was settled (mostly) by dissidents to the established Church of England; and at the very least, if they complied with the Church of England, they were “anti Papists.” In other words, practicing Catholics were not welcome. They went to Maryland.

Yet the Rhys family of the pedigree was very Catholic.

So - common sense. Were they going to Puritan New England?

"As you know you and I share some lines! " Nothing special about that, actually. Most of us here are somewhere between 8th and 18th cousins. That's just what happens when you have the kind of bottleneck that Colonial immigrations were.

Look at this connection.

Henry Franklin, Sr. is Cheley Hokanson's 6th great grandfather.

Henry Franklin, Sr.

And the notes in the profile:

“"I'm not certain at this point of the identity of Henry's parents. Some researchers claim that his father was Lawrence Franklin, some claim Edward Franklin, and some believe the line was actually Henry, son of Lawrence, son of Edward. And to really muddy the waters, John Franklin and Susan Wells have been suggested. Then there's the confusion over his maternal line. Once again, Miss Mathis, possible daughter of Benjamin Mathis, vies with Mary Payne, and it may be that Lawrence Franklin had two wives, a Mathis and a Payne. I can't claim to have researched this question, but as Lawrence and Edward resided in VA well before 1700, it may be that sufficient records establishing familial connections simply don't exist. "(3)

Are you comfortable that the parents showing on Geni are the best we know?

Erica, I know you're really fond of "Albion's Seed", but I have to view it a bit askance for a number of reasons. I find he uses an excessively broad and sloppy brush when painting his picture, and leaves out whole sections of England in his drive to oversimplify (for instance, not word one about the West Country contributions, which were fairly extensive).

He also seems to assume that migrations that don't fit his neat patterns are of no importance. This particularly irks me with regard to the Scarburghs (East Anglia to London to Accomack County, Virginia), Custises (Gloucestershire, i.e. West Country, to the Netherlands to Accomack County), Hanbys (Lincolnshire to London to Northampton County, Virginia), etc.

It's particularly disquieting that *the author himself* describes his work as "a modified Teutonic germ theory within the framework of the Frontier Thesis and the migration model". If you look up "Teutonic germ theory", you'll find a lot of negative, if not actually toxic, associations.

It’s dated, of course (1989). And incomplete: a lot missing, such as the recent demographic data on the West counties. But it’s the handiest “quick reference” I know. I especially like the “folkways” orientation. Have you read https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11140803-american-nations ?

Unknown Profile

I’m saying his ancestry seems murky.

open up the profile and read it. Study the sources. It’s up to you to tell me if it’s acceptable to you or not. Your tree !

Oh so THAT'S what you're holding a grudge about. YOU asked if Elizabeth Pendleton was "the same person" as Elizabeth Willett. She was not, she could not have been, she was misplaced in the tree, and the matter has been set to rights. Erica placed her - with chronological accuracy - as Lt. Col. Edward Douglas's sister, not daughter, end of story.

As it happens, Erica and I are 8th cousins, and we know exactly how: descended from two different daughters of Thomas Plummer of Anne Arundel County, Maryland. Old Mr. Plummer had at least 10,000 descendants.

The Elizabeth Pendleton / Elizabeth Willett thing started with an offered (but WRONG) Tree Match. I refused it, and then started this Discussion: https://www.geni.com/discussions/201386

YOU have somehow distorted that into an accusation that *I* was messing around with your tree - when I *never touched it*.

Most of the criticism and ALL of the adjustments on the profile came from *ERICA*.

It's really too too too too bad that this Discussion wasn't closed when Erica requested it. It's just gone down the rabbit hole.

Cheley, I think I often write quickly and in a kind of shorthand.

This was my post:

https://www.geni.com/discussions/201174?msg=1334856

Willis Elson Jerome, (Twin)

1850 census says he’s born PA
1860 census says he’s born CT
1870 census says he’s born CT
Daughter’s death certificate says he’s born ENGLAND

(Freaking out now ...)

——

So I was saying - wait, wait, did I get his parents wrong, because PA is not CT is not England?

But ... it’s census records, and they can be wrong. So hopefully it’s OK. I hope.

The way to solve it for sure is find his birth record, which is often times easier said than done.

So that was the point of the story.

——

On your 6th gg, the DAR !!! Yay! There’s a comment in the profile expressing a question about his parentage. I don’t know if the comment is valid or not, so that’s why I was asking you.

If you don’t know, that’s fine. It’s not a mistake; it’s someone saying “I’m not sure.”

I was referring to Henry Franklin, Sr. which is an intersection point for mine & Cheley’s Trees.

Henry Franklin, Sr. is Dorcas (Franklin) Howton's great uncle, and she’s my 4th great aunt.

My surname is an exception to the rule. Apparently just about all Howton’s in America are related. This is unusual and I take advantage of it.

Cheley Hokanson is Henry Franklin, Sr.'s 6th great granddaughter.

Henry Franklin, Sr.

Open up the profile - he has a DAR Ancestor Number. That means you could join the DAR if you demonstrate your descent.

If you click the link to the DAR database from within the profile you’ll get some more details of their records and his service to this country.

https://services.dar.org/public/dar_research/search_adb/default.cfm...

Unknown Profile There was never a mistake in the profile for Willis Jerome. Different records have different birth locations. Oh well, that’s the census; only as good as what the census taker recorded.

Whats the real problem in this ?

That dudley had descent ? That elizabeth the 1st could have descent ? That the throne could be disputed if dudley had descent ?

There is an arthur dudley who claimed to be his son with Ellie, and an Elizabeth born into the governess's family at the same time Ellie was taken away after the seymour story..that Elizabeth was then married to a Seymour, officially giving her the seymour name.

Of course the throne of england is in dispute.

There are a few people in here who are unable to keep this discussion civil. I'm closing it and deleting some messages but there's some very good information here that needs to be kept on record so I won't be deleting the discussion completely.