dy, this is where I believe the English le Duc family originated ..crucially this is an important factor in the search for our progenitors.
During the late 10th and early11th centuries bastards of the Dukes of Normandy were no longer recognized and afforded the benefits of lands and titles they had aquired
in the previous century... of course they were retained at the ducal court and many were drafted in to the vast Norman administration machine...so post conquest, when we first find le Duc's in England, they are mostly court administrators,later the Plantagenet kings still thought very highly of them... Roger le Duc was High Sheriff of London in the 1190s his son and possibly grandson also followed in his footsteps as Sheriff.
The Duke family of Northern England well, at least a good proportion of them are descended from the Maelmadoc clan...The Marmadukes of popular literature!...these were Gaelic
not Norman families..also some of the european Duke families have different genetic markers from the English families.. quite possibly because the ducal families in other parts of France had
their own bastards doing the same administrative work in their courts too
The Richardides...dukes Richard the first and second of Normandy are possibly are the ancestors of The Dukes of southern England
as we all know Robert the Magnificents son conquered England...but his minority in Normandy was tenuous to say the least.
....of course
Duke Robert Curthose is another possible candidate...but I believe the le Duc's were already established in England either during or
close to 1066...Rogers family are very likely to be the ancestors of the Dukes in London,Kent,Essex,Sussex,Hampshire,Dorset,Devon...Norfolk, Suffolk, Bucks, Berks,Oxon and Surrey.all these counties show Dukes in abundance in the records.....also as I have mentioned earlier.. there are a few Duke families in the north of England who originate from the Roger family group.
The Duke as a nickname theorists.. who claim people with the surnames Duke,Bishop,Lord and Earle etc are descended from Mummers or individuals who had 'airs and graces' thus earning their epithet from this source, I don't hold with.. medieval life was pretty brutal and anyone saddled with these surnames under those circumstances would probably end up having to appear before the local dignitary to explain himself...likewise those who christened him....with dire consequences!
No, as I have already outlined the explanation is far simpler....
Thus the Dukes were one of the ancient families of England and of Ireland. They are among the earliest recorded by Burke in his pedigrees of the nobility and of the landed gentry. The first mention made of them by this authority was the aforementioned Roger le Duc, sheriff of London. The names of Duke and Dukes have been well-established in the Americas, with one of the earliest arrivals to New England being one Captain Edward Duke in 1634. Humphrey Dukes sailed to Barbados with his wife and servants in 1680.
The other main family spread itself in the South of England, and claim descent from the first Mayor of London, commonly called Henry Fitz Alwynne, but by John Ross, Henry Duke, or Dewke; they settled first at Sherborne in Dorset: an early marriage with Cicely, daughter of Roger le Poer of Poerhayes, Devon, brought that barton into the family; the lineal descendant of this marriage, wedded Julian, daughter and co-heiress of Thomas Cossington, be whom the estate of Cossington in Kent came into their possession, whose eldest son George Duke sold the Barton of Poerhayes to his kinsman Richard Duke, whose father had held civic office at Exeter; the lineal descendants of George Duke continued at Cossington and Maidstone till the close of the 18th century.…
This has been quite a week! Over the weekend my aunt visited and she lent me some photos and documents, which I scanned. She has the most amazing collection of family information. I still can't…
Added by Beth Gatlin at 10:33am on October 20, 2009
National Institute for Genealogical Studies Announces Acquisition of GenealogyWise
(Toronto, February 7, 2011)
Louise St. Denis, Managing Director of the National Institute for Genealogical Studies,…
onunciation of his Surname was well noted as ''Drizzle''
http://www.genealogywise.com/group/drysdalearchives/forum/topics/james-drysdale-first-came-to-america-in-1665
John Pollock,was banished to the North American colonies w John Drysdale, James Wharrey, and John Anderson on 11 October, 1680
w Bruce of] Earlshall. We were horsed, civilly used by them on the way, and brought to Edinburgh, about four in the afternoon, and carried about the north side of the town to the foot of the Canongate, where the town magistrates were, who received us; and setting me on a horse with my face backward, and the other three bound on a goad of iron, and Mr [Richard] Cameron’s head carried on a halbert before me, and another head in a sack, whose I knew not, on a lad’s back, we were so carried up the street to the Parliament Close, where I was taken down, and the rest loosed. All was done by the hangman.’ (Thompson (ed.), CW, 47.)On 28 July, 1680, Lord Fountainhall recorded that ‘One of the prisoners brought in from [Airdsmoss in] Moorkirk with Rathillot, wer Cameron the feild-preacher was killed, was this day, at Privy Councell, tortured in the boots, he having been a chapman, and carried their letters. The Bishops at this, as a sanquinary case, retired furth of the Councell.’ (Lauder, Historical Notices of Scottish Affairs, 1661-1683, 269.)Wodrow confirms that the prisoner tortured in the boots was John Pollock: ‘I find another in prison with them, John Pollock, who was put in the boots, and endured the torture with much firmness and cheerfulness. I find no more about him.’ (Wodrow, History, III, 221.)As a chapman, a small-scale travelling merchant, Pollock was a useful conduit for Cameron and Rathillet’s correspondence with their militant brethren. Obviously, the authorities were keen to discover with whom they had been in correspondence. No details of his interrogation in the boots survive. It appears that Pollock refused to talk:Wodrow stated that he could find ‘no more about him’. However, John Pollock was banished to the North American colonies with John Drysdale, James Wharrey, and John Anderson on 11 October, 1681. Wodrow recorded him as ‘James’ Pollock by mistake. (RPCS, VII, 219; Wodrow, History, III, 269.)John Drysdale, a weaver in Bo’ness, had attempted to kill one of the King’s Lifeguards after the execution of three militants in December, 1680.‘John Anderson in Comerhead’ appears on a list of prisoners suspected of attending conventicles on 25 August, 1681. ‘Comerhead’ is Cumberhead in Lesmahagow parish, the home of a leading activist in the United Societies, David Steel. (RPCS, VII, 189-90.)
Hats off and a big Thank you to : https://drmarkjardine.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/the-capture-torture-and-banishment-of-john-pollock-in-1680/
…
4d. You should try entering your FTDNA results to search the SMGF database using 523d and 523d instead of 522- and 523-. Let me know if it works.
2. SMGF does not report haplogroup information as they are not relevant for matching purposes in the two databases currently available on their website. However, SMGF has provided www.GENETREE.com with all the tools and information about haplogroups (descriptions, distribution, predictions, world migrations, world phylogenetic trees, etc.). All you have to do is to create a free account with www.GENETREE.com and upload your mtDNA data from FTDNA. Remember to use 523d and 524d for the double deletion. You will be able to enjoy a number of tools to help you understand your mtDNA haplotype.
Joan Foster said:To start my discussion, I have two questions I hope someone can answer:
1. I tested mtDNA with both FTDNA and SMGF (about two years ago). I cannot seem to find my SMGF results on its page. (Probably I just don't know how....) If I input FTDNA's results I am there, pedigree and all. Two purple non-matches show up in the area of FTDNA's 522- and 523- even for my own pedigree result, and I cannot find myself with fewer than those two "mismatches." I don't know how to input anything that will show SMGF's own results. A search on my surname(s) brings up the pedigree record I submitted, but all the squares are purple mismatches. The pedigree is mine and there are no matches, whereas the other search inputting FTDNA's results shows a few with those "minus-2" matches. I hope they are actually matches and that SMGF's nomenclature for these markers is just different. If I could find SMGF's markers, or nomenclature for their markers, maybe I could be sure.
2. Where on SMGF's pages is the haplogroup of the submitted result displayed? I've searched around with the difficulty noted above, but nowhere do I find where the haplogroup of my sample (or my minus-2 matches) is shown.
According to FTDNA I am:
HVR1: 16287T
HVR2: 73G, 146C, 263G, 315.1C, 522-, 523-
Haplogroup H4 (relatively quite rare, I believe)
I must really be missing something with my exploration of SMGF's pages. Any help out there?
…
ready out there) at familysearch.org. If you haven't already done this, you can search the database by person's name. There are digital images of some records attached to the index, but it always tells you the film # from which the info came, so you can get to the original record on film if you find an ancestor in the index.
American death records may give the name of the town of birthplace. On the other hand, they may just say "Germany," but it is always worth a look. Look for death records for all your ancestors because families often lived near each other and it may be a third cousin, twice removed who gives you the lead to the town.
Geneanet.com is a European site where people put their family trees. The family tree part is free to use. You might get a lead here if someone researching your family.
It will be somewhat tedious to do, but you could work through all the different links on https://www.familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/Germany#New_portal_for_German_Church_Records_on_the_Internet_.C2.A0. Some of these links on this page will lead to other links, some of which are searchable databases of state records, etc.
As far as I know, Germany as a nation--as opposed to the individual state databases that are listed on the above familysearch website--has no major search sites, although there is a site currently being built that may have church records in the future. I haven't spent enough time trying to translate it so am not sure if it will eventually give individual records or just be a list of the types of records each church has, but I think it says that digital images of individual records will eventually be available for a cost. http://www.kirchenbuchportal.de/inhalt.htm
You can also try looking in some of the online German phone directories to find if your surnames tend to hover around a certain area or areas. If so, these might be places to start since it may indicate that a family has been in an area for a long time. You might also want to contact one of the people you find in the phone book to see if they might know of the family for whom you are searching. Just type German phone directories into your brower's search routine.
…
he Netherlands. My Brown cousin's FTDNA matching DNA results show Fishers DNA linked to my Brown family, also McBrides are DNA linked to my Brown family. My cousin Arthur Fisher has traced his Fisher line back to John Fisher, b. 1872, Mauch Chunk, Carbon Co., PA.].
Two on my Brown related ancestors filed [rejected] Guion Mller applications, claiming their Cherokee blood came from their Fisher side of Robert Fisher Brown Sr. [1759-1840]. Robert Fisher's mother's side of the family, her Fisher father was [supposedly] part Cherokee. I haven't found any information to verify this claim. I did find out why Robert [who first used Fisher as his surname, then changed from Fisher to Brown] may have been living with the Cherokee early in his life [allies against the colonists?].
Robert's father was British soldier [under Capt. Johnston] James Brown. James is shown in British records as having been born in 1724, Schoonhoven, Zuid Holland, Netherlands. James maried Catharine/Katherine Fisher/Fischer in 1749 [same place as their marriage & her birth]. She was born in 1727 [may have died in 1776?]. My line of Browns are in brownsociety.org family [DNA] group #33. I believe the British ship Katherine came to the colonies on was the "Samuel", in 1732, port of daparture Rotterdam, and port of destination, Philadelphia.
Do you know anything more about this Dutch line of Fishers/Fischers to America? I may have a little Lock[e] information which is possibly connected to your Lockes? My grandmother was Nellie Lock, who married Marshall Marion Spencer, Catawba/Burke counties area of North Carolina, not far from Rowan Co. Nancy Ann Miller [same area] is also related to me, through my Spencers.
Can you tell m anything more about the Duch Fishers of the late 1600's & early 1700's who came to the colonies
Marshall A. Spencer
alien71121@netzer.com …
fe Got G.B.S. Autograph", G.B.S being George Bernard Shaw. He got the autograph by being a patient in the Canadian General Hospital in England situated on the Astor estate, Cliveden. GBS was a regular visitor to Lady Astor. This was in 1941 and the story was sent to me by the late Lloyd Duncalfe of Manitoba.
Laurie (Laurence) was, according to his obituary, best known as CFCN's "The Pelican Man" , the master of ceremonies for a popular radio amateur show during the 1940s. At the end of the 1993 article I wrote that I hoped I would discover from whom he was descended by the next issue (six months). It has taken me 16 years!
Yesterday I discovered the Candian Census returns on Ancestry. Henry G is in Stanstead, Quebec in 1891, 1901 and 1911. Laurence also appears in all three censuses. In the 1891 however, Henry G has a sister called Mary Brookhouse and a sister in law called Ann Meek living with him. I had already found Henry's marriage on Ancestry, at Georgeville, Sherbrooke, Quebec in 1884. Both Henry and his bride, Annie Elizabeth Sutherland Meek were "late of Manchester" and there were two witnesses, Mary and Newton Brookhouse.
Henry could not be found on any of the English censuses so I searched the 1881 census on just the forename Henry G, in Manchester, born c1856. I found a family with the surname Backhouse - son Henry G aged 25 and a daughter Mary 46, the correct ages. The mother, Sarah M W was a widow. In 1871 there was also a son Newton. However, in 1861 there was also a nephew Edward Becker, and this name began to ring bells. A Mary Duncuft had married Hanibal Leigh Becker, and Mary had a sister Sarah Maria Wroe Duncuft who, I discovered, married a Backhouse! It therefore seems that Henry G, on his emigration to Canada, adopted his mother's maiden name, but in the original form, Duncalf. The Duncuft variant came about when an Isaiah Duncalf moved his family to Oldham in Lancashire from Cheshire in the early 18th century and the name began to be spelt Duncuft, a spelling that has survived to this day.
Henry's second name was Gawaine, clearly written in his signature on the marriage entry. There has been one or more people of the name Gowen in this family since the 1500s.
I know that the late Lloyd Duncalfe was in touch with a descendant of Henry Gawaine Duncalf; perhaps that descendant will see this and know that his ancestry can now be traced back to the 16th century in Cheshire, England.…