Author Topic: 33 generation tree  (Read 2757 times)

Offline xinia

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,982
    • View Profile
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #18 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 16:23 GMT (UK) »
I used to use PAF file that can print out trees...

its a heck of a lot of work adding 33 gens to any ged to enable the production of a tree.

xinI have a twig ... if you stick it in the ground it may root, but then it may not.  Sometimes I look at the trees and see the tangled web of branches and wonder.
Then I sit and concentrate on that one delicate branch and follow it all the way to the top, but then it is so delicate that it often snaps.. breaks or twists..

Sutherland, Himsley, Finnie, Robertson Edgar Short  Patrick  Creighton, McCallum,Brown, Henderson, Stark Green, Draycott, Clarke, Yorke, Norris, Haywood, Moore, Argyle, Patrick,Tallack, Hellyar, Pope, Raven, Lobb.. Hook -Smeeton - Heafford - Freeman -Craddock - Crane - Smalley -Ashton Spriggs Swingler cotton riddington York gilbert mattock and more :)





One of the most difficult things to give away is kindness, it is usually returned.

UK Census info. Crown Copyright, from www.nation

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Online Erato

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,317
  • MEP - Life of the party
    • View Profile
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #19 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 16:52 GMT (UK) »
"A tree descending through motherís male lineage stating in circa 1450 is 13 generations to my grandchildren"

That gives a generation time of about 43 years - not impossible but certainly extremely long.

Many years ago, when I took a population statistics course, average human generation time was considered to be 28.5 years.  That means, using definition #2 [difference in age between parent and offspring], that the average child is born when its mother is 28.5 years old.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_time
Wiltshire:  Banks, Taylor
Somerset:  Duddridge, Richards, Barnard, Pillinger
Gloucestershire:  Barnard, Marsh, Crossman
Bristol:  Banks, Duddridge, Barnard
Down:  Ennis, McGee
Wicklow:  Chapman, Pepper
Wigtownshire:  Logan, Conning
Wisconsin:  Ennis, Chapman, Logan, Ware
Maine:  Ware, Mitchell, Tarr

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline KGarrad

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,990
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #20 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 17:12 GMT (UK) »
My tree goes back to 1540/1550 - 16 generations on paternal line; 18 generations on maternal line.

As a reference point, the Vikings ruled the Isle of Man from 1079 (Godred Crovan) until 1265 (Magnus Olafsson). So, Vikings aren't very far back ;D
(The Isle of Man is where I live!)
Garrad (Suffolk, Essex, Somerset), Crocker (Somerset), Vanstone (Devon, Jersey), Sims (Wiltshire), Bridger (Kent)

Offline Rena

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,132
  • Crown Copyright: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #21 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 17:17 GMT (UK) »
Many years ago, when I took a population statistics course, average human generation time was considered to be 28.5 years.  That means, using definition #2 [difference in age between parent and offspring], that the average child is born when its mother is 28.5 years old.


Circa 1948 and I was a youngster in a classroom of 39 pupils learning about graphs and averages.  We were told there were three generations per century.  The lesson regarding averages required us each to give the age of our mothers when they married and I thought about lying about my mother's age because she was absolutely ancient compared to the other ages being quoted.  My mother married the month after her 20th birthday, whereas most of my classmates mothers married when they were eighteen years old.  :)
Aberdeen: Findlay-Shirras,McCarthy
MidLothian: Mason,Telford,Darling,Cruikshanks,Bennett,Sime, Bell
Lanarks:Crum, Brown, MacKenzie,Cameron, Glen, Millar
Ross, Urray:Mackenzie
Moray: Findlay; Marshall/Marischell
Perthshire: Brown Ferguson
Wales: McCarthy, Thomas
England: Almond, Askin, Dodson, Harrison, Maw, McCarthy, Munford, Pye, Shearing, Smith, Smythe, Speight, Strike, Wallis/Wallace, Ward, Wells
Germany: Flamme,Ehlers, Bielstein, Germer, Mohlm, Reupke

Online lizdb

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 24,509
    • View Profile
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #22 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 17:32 GMT (UK) »
Rena, that reminds me of when I was about 8, and had a conversation with my little friends about how old our mums were.   My mum was 33 when she had me, so she had by then turned 40. My friends' mums had had them whilst aged 20/21 ish, so were still in their 20's!   
I felt as if my mum was absolutely ancient.

(Sorry, off topic!)
Edmonds/Edmunds - mainly Sussex
DeBoo - London
Green - Suffolk
Parker - Sussex
Kemp - Essex
Farrington - Essex
Boniface - West Sussex

census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline jim1

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,259
  • ain't life grand
    • View Profile
    • cliffordclan
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #23 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 17:33 GMT (UK) »
Looking at one of my charts a 33 gen. tree would be roughly 6' x 18' long.
Laterally mine stops C.1400 & then goes up.
Depending on when you get onto the greasy pole of Nobility you might be looking at a tree 30' long.
Warks:Ashford;Cadby;Clarke;Clifford;Cooke Copage;Easthope;
Edmonds;Felton;Colledge;Lutwyche;Mander(s);May;Poole;Withers.
Staffs.Edmonds;Addison;Duffield;Webb;Fisher;Archer
Salop:Easthope,Eddowes,Hoorde,Oteley,Vernon,Talbot,De Neville.
Notts.Clarke;Redfearne;Treece.
Som.May;Perriman;Cox
India Kane;Felton;Cadby
London.Haysom.
Lancs.Gay.
Worcs.Coley;Mander;Sawyer.
Kings of Wessex & Scotland
Census information is Crown copyright,from
www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/

Online rosie99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 23,630
    • View Profile
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #24 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 17:59 GMT (UK) »
Depending on when you get onto the greasy pole of Nobility you might be looking at a tree 30' long.

You would need to live in a Mansion to hang it on the wall  :)


Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Guy Etchells

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,401
    • View Profile
    • Anguline Research Archives
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #25 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 18:55 GMT (UK) »
Looking at one of my charts a 33 gen. tree would be roughly 6' x 18' long.
Laterally mine stops C.1400 & then goes up.
Depending on when you get onto the greasy pole of Nobility you might be looking at a tree 30' long.

I suggest your calculations are out somewhat.
My full tree held on 3 maximum size 200 inch pdf files if printed would be 50 feet wide not sure of the height, but that is not really a concern as it is the width for the generations to fit side by side that is the controlling factor.
I have an outbuilding with three walls with no doors or windows in them that could display the tree if I ever got it printed but I don't really think it justifies the cost when I can display it on my computer monitor.

Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline Andrew Tarr

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,024
  • Wanted: Charles Percy Liversidge
    • View Profile
Re: 33 generation tree
« Reply #26 on: Tuesday 02 January 18 23:28 GMT (UK) »
The intriguing mathematical point is that (as has been pointed out) going back 10 generations leads to 1024 ancestors; another ten should lead to just over a million.  Using the suggested average period of 28.5 years per generation, that is 570 years, or around 1450 AD.  The population of the British Isles then was only a few million.  So even allowing for possible ancestors from all over Europe, almost all of them could be in anyone's tree in 1300 or so.  So we are all related !  :D

Of course in reality that means the tree contains a lot of overlaps, so laying it out will be rather difficult ....  :(
Tarr, Tydeman, Liversidge, Bartlett, Young