Re: Theos-World Do you have royal blood? Maybe.
Apr 07, 2002 02:14 PM
by Larry F Kolts
That idea has more viability than you think.
As a former Mormon, I was deeply involved in Genealogy. The basic concept
is correct, that as we go back in time, the number of ancesters we have
exceeds the number of people alive during that timeframe.
I don't think that was meant to be world wide. The idea is that all
Europeans share common ancesters. I don't know that EVERYONE is from the
exact same bloodlines but there IS a high probability that you as an
individual are linked to a certain historical figure. The further back
one goes, the greater the probability.
I found that I was linked to Charlemagne. My first royal tie in was
through John of Gaunt.
Here's what I think is really going on. I think the probability is near
100% that at some point each individual will tie in to some royal figure.
Then as you have noted, since the royalty is very interrelated, you end
up being related to all of them. All those bloodlines tie in to
So how does one tie in to royalty if its such a closed system? Easier
than you think. It works like this. Large families. The eldest becomes
king. But what of the others? Many become dukes and such. But in most
royal familes back then, at least one will enter the priesthood. Not just
any parish priest mind you, but someone who will become a bishop at
least. They can't marry. But that never stopped them from having
mistresses! And without modern birth control and abortion, these clerics
sired a healthy progeny, justt like everyone else. So John of Gaunt had
a son who was a bishop and fathered an illigetimate girl who is my
ancester. These royal bastards were treated well. She was married off to
a knightly family, and so it goes.
I think there is a higher probability of being from some royal blood line
than tying into a given commoner line. At least thats my take from 30
years of genealogy research.
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002 10:20:20 -0700 (PDT) Steve Stubbs
> There is an article in THE ATLANTIC about a fellow in
> Ireland named Mark Humphrys who has an interesting
> theory about genealogy that may amuse someone. The
> article said he has a web site, but the author was not
> good enough to tell us what its URL is.
> The theory begins with the fact of geometric
> progression and the fact that a family tree is one.
> You, for example, have two parents who are your direct
> ancestors, and each of them have two parents, for a
> total of six. Go back another generation and each of
> your grandparents have two parents, for a total of
> fourteen, and so on. Within a surprisingly small
> number of generations there are more people in your
> family tree than have ever lived on earth.
> Given that we know everyone must have had two parents,
> and given that the geometric progression leaves us
> with a number of ancestors which is clearly
> impossible, Humphrys comes to the conclusion that some
> of the people in these large numbers must have been
> counted multiple times. In other words, both of your
> parents shared some of the same ancestors if you go
> back far enough in time, else there is no way to
> explain the numbers. Having said that, he concludes
> further that everybody is the direct descendant of
> everybody who lived in ancient times. Or even
> medieval times.
> That conclusion is a little harder for me to swallow.
> He is saying, in effect, that one of your ancestors
> was Muhammad, no matter who you are, and another of
> your ancestors was Confucius, no matter who you are.
> I am flattered, but the geographical realities seem to
> make this unlikely. One of his conclusions which is
> not unlikely at all, though, is that if you are of
> European ancestry you are the direct descendant of
> Charlemagne and numerous other nobles, and therefore
> that you have royal blood. This is true because you
> are the direct descendant of EVERYONE who lived in
> Europe during Charlemagne's time. That includes horse
> thieves, murderers, burglars, Sabbath breakers,
> sidewalk spitter on'ers, and scoundrels of every
> description as well as people who were not members of
> royal families. So the blue in your blood may be
> diluted a wee mite. But it is surely there.
> Before deciding you are a modern Tess d'Urbeville it
> might be well to consider that royal families (and
> aristocracies in general) are really nothing but just
> incestuous extended families. The idea of an
> aristocracy is to be sure no one marries outside the
> extended family and dissipates the family's inherited
> wealth into the profane world. That is the reason not
> a single person who has ever married into the British
> royal family has ever been treated decently by their
> relatives. One of them, who became too much of a
> pain, died in a convenient car wreck in Paris a few
> years ago. The vehicle that struck her Mercedes not
> only was driven by an expert driver, who did not lose
> control even after a violent collision at 120 mph, but
> who had the means to immediately dispose of the car he
> was using so that it was never found. Probably in a
> crusher which had already been arranged before the
> collision. But royal families rise and fall. Once
> princes turn into paupers they marry pauperettes. Go
> back far enough and thay royal blood has been spilled
> all over the place. So the theory goes.
> I don't believe a word of it, but I am contemplating a
> trip to Europe anyway to inspect some medieval
> castles. I want to see where my direct ancestors
> lived during their days of glory. As for salutations,
> I don't stand on protocol. "Highness" will do.
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application