Who Do You Think You Are?

Alicat

New series just started on BBC1 at 9pm on Wednesdays. I have seen the previous series and found it absolutely fascinating. Line-up looks good this season!

I just thought anyone interested in heritage/geneology might enjoy it

I have only found this forum so apologies if this post is not deemed appropriate

HalloweenJack

I was just wondering if anyone here was ever actually traced their genealogy.

I've had a lot done on my mother's side going back to the late 18th century. I think my mother's father has been able to trace his family as far back as the 14th century, iirc.

sweet-rasmus

Yeah, it's a good show. I caugh the first two with Patsy Kensit and Boris Johnson. Last night's show was a bit too depressing; I had to turn it off.

They make it look so easy, but we have to remember that lots of people are paid to do research here.

Noopti

sweet-rasmus wrote: »

Last night's show was a bit too depressing; I had to turn it off.

That's a shame, especially as he met a relative from Israel which kind of gave it a happy ending.

sweet-rasmus

ah good

ejmaztec

Anyone catch the "Armstrong & Miller" sketch sending up the programme? I found it hilarious.

FiSe

It is very interesting although, it is a show, so nobody from the 'celebs' really do the reaserch...
The frase 'XY from WZ archive found interesting file on...' and 'We have contacted XY who found file...' is a bit of a give away.

Last night with J. Springer, again interesting, but seems to me that he's a caricature of his own show, that cry beside 'Radegast' station monument was, well, how to say it, Jerry Springer-ish?

As well, just out of curiosity, I was wondering what would the original name be, Sprünger ?
Anyway, looking forward to next part. I enjoyed it a lot.

jos28

RTE have commissioned a series for the Autumn schedule. 'Celebrities' include Joe Duffy, Charlie Bird and Ardal O'Hanlon. It will be interesting to see how difficult researching in Ireland is compared to the UK. The only on-line records we have is the 1911 census and thats only the Dublin records. It took me months and months to get back to 1832 and now I'm stuck !

anonymous_joe

jos28 wrote: »

RTE have commissioned a series for the Autumn schedule. 'Celebrities' include Joe Duffy, Charlie Bird and Ardal O'Hanlon. It will be interesting to see how difficult researching in Ireland is compared to the UK. The only on-line records we have is the 1911 census and thats only the Dublin records. It took me months and months to get back to 1832 and now I'm stuck !

Weren't the vast majority of our records lost in either 1916 or 1921 or the Civil War? One of 'em I think...

Besides, large amounts of our aristocracy left in the 16th to 18th centuries, and that would take a large amount of our genealogical history with it. Just us peasants left. :pac:

sweet-rasmus

it was 1921.

i wonder what the RTE show is going to be like. where did you hear about it?

ChocolateSauce

My last name is traced to a minor Norman house, so I presume I'm of distant mixed Gallic/Latin/Viking origin. But it means nothing to me, we're all from Africa at the end of the day.

Hagar

If that's true how come all our languages originate from India?
Did we march in silence from Africa to India?
Even the wimmins? That's stretching it a bit.

Lizzykins

I'm stuck in 1819! Of course all we have to look up is the parish registers and the priests then only recorded the names of those getting married and not their ages or parents names. Likewise with deaths all I've seen are names and dates so how could you ever know if the person you're looking up is the right one? Maddening.

Red Hand

Hagar wrote: »

If that's true how come all our languages originate from India?
Did we march in silence from Africa to India?
Even the wimmins? That's stretching it a bit.

Who says that our languages originate in India?

Hagar

Many sources. Some more believable than others but try this link and see where it leads.

jos28

sweet-rasmus wrote: »

it was 1921.

i wonder what the RTE show is going to be like. where did you hear about it?

I saw a trailer on RTE for the autumn schedule. Should be good.

Irish state records only started in 1864 so as Lizzykins points out we are reliant on parish records prior to that. In my case the parish records have only partially survived but it helps if you have an unusual surname.

sweet-rasmus

Saw a billboard up about it today. 9.30pm rte1. Mondays. It doesn't start today anyhow...

ChocolateSauce

Hagar wrote: »

If that's true how come all our languages originate from India?
Did we march in silence from Africa to India?
Even the wimmins? That's stretching it a bit.

Don't be stupid or condescending, of course we didn't march in silence from Africa to India.

Assuming for the sake of argument your statement is true (it isn't), the people from India could have come from Africa, and then branched out to other regions.

If we came from Africa then obviously our languages ultimately came from there too. Indo-European languages and our languages being of eastern descent merely refers to the recent evolution.

Hagar

I'm neither stupid nor condescending.

Don't we all know that the multitude of languages we speak didn't evolve at all but were visited upon mankind all at once by Holy God as punishment for having the audacity to try to reach Heaven by building the Tower of Babel.

Taking that just a step further since everyone except Noah and his chosen crew were wiped out by the Great Flood anything that happend before that was washed away. So we are all descended from Mt Arrarat which is located in Eastern Turkey on the borders of Iran, Armenia (formerly U.S.S.R.), and Nakchivan. So we are still not African, Asian would be more accurate.

But of course you already knew this as a Church Member.

ChocolateSauce

Hagar wrote: »

I'm neither stupid nor condescending.

You sure were acting like it. But I'm willing to give you a second chance. As I write this, I haven't read the rest of your post....

Hagar wrote: »

Don't we all know that the multitude of languages we speak didn't evolve at all but were visited upon mankind all at once by Holy God as punishment for having the audacity to try to reach Heaven by building the Tower of Babel.

Taking that just a step further since everyone except Noah and his chosen crew were wiped out by the Great Flood anything that happend before that was washed away. So we are all descended from Mt Arrarat which is located in Eastern Turkey on the borders of Iran, Armenia (formerly U.S.S.R.), and Nakchivan. So we are still not African, Asian would be more accurate.

You're...serious? No, seriously, sarcasm and irony are hard to interpret via text.

Well we know we came from Africa. We know it. We've found million year old bones of our ancestors, and can trace the DNA back.

Hagar wrote: »

But of course you already knew this as a Church Member.

Ah...about the church. It isn't a theistic church, it's one of earthly (and fleshy) pleasures. The first sacrament is chocolate sauce. :cool:

Hagar

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

You sure were acting like it. But I'm willing to give you a second chance.

Jolly civil of you old girl.

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

You're...serious? No, seriously, sarcasm and irony are hard to interpret via text.

Have you looked left at all?

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Well we know we came from Africa. We know it. We've found million year old bones of our ancestors, and can trace the DNA back.

I'm not from Africa, I'm a Dub. Seriously, you don't know, you think you know. Scientists postulate theories, but going back that far who really knows?

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Ah...about the church. It isn't a theistic church, it's one of earthly (and fleshy) pleasures. The first sacrament is chocolate sauce. :cool:

At last your talking my language.

ChocolateSauce

Hagar wrote: »

I'm not from Africa, I'm a Dub. Seriously, you don't know, you think you know. Scientists postulate theories, but going back that far who really knows?

You're from Dublin, but go back about 25,000 years and you'll find your ancestors in Africa. Scientists don't make large claims without large evidence.

You'll also find everyone was black. White skin is a recent adaption to cold climates.

jmayo

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

You're from Dublin, but go back about 25,000 years and you'll find your ancestors in Africa. Scientists don't make large claims without large evidence.

You'll also find everyone was black. White skin is a recent adaption to cold climates.

Why, did people develop pale skin for camouflage in the snow or was it jsut because we in northern northern hemisphere didn't see the sun for years at a time

sweet-rasmus

jos28 wrote: »

I saw a trailer on RTE for the autumn schedule. Should be good.

Irish state records only started in 1864 so as Lizzykins points out we are reliant on parish records prior to that. In my case the parish records have only partially survived but it helps if you have an unusual surname.

starts this monday, the 15th.

Clare Bear

It always has me hooked, just really interested in tracing back. Wish it was as easy to do it here as it is in the UK.

ejmaztec

Was I hallucinating when I thought I saw Dana in the programme trailer? :eek:

Snickers Man

I think the difficulty with Irish records is that there were no centralised records before the mid 19th century and then all the 19th century censuses were destroyed in the Troubles of the 1920s. So the only birth records going back to that time are church ones.

There was an interesting story in the Phoenix this month of the problems being encountered by the National Library in its attempt to collect, digitise and centralise church records so that genealogy searches back to the 19th century and even earlier can be facilitated. Some dioceses are refusing to hand over the records en masse. The Phoenix speculates that this is largely because of the Mormon factor.

Apparently, and this was confirmed to me by a professional genealogist, Mormons are the great unsung unpaid workhorses of the genealogy industry. If you need masses of photocopying or digitising or other such work which is hugely labour intensive, the people to call are the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) and they will do it all for free. How great is that?

Of course they have their own agenda. They believe in baptising not just their own living church members but retrospectively all of their ancestors as well. So they are very keen to get their hands on genealogy data. Many state bodies around the world are only too pleased to co-operate with the Mormons because it's a cheap way of getting your old paper-based data into computers. But of course, their very peculiar agenda is resented by people who take this sort of thing seriously.

Like Catholic Bishops. Several bishops in Ireland are resisting the drive to digitisation.

The professional genealogist also told me that the church has more prosaic reasons for wanting to restrict universal access to registration forms. It would seem that the gossiping of our ancestors was every bit as "tabloid" as our own generations and many birth records contain derogatory ad lib comments, usually written in Latin, alleging such tittle tattle that the name of the father on the birth cert is not that of the natural father of the child etc etc

All good clean fun.

ejmaztec

Snickers Man wrote: »

I think the difficulty with Irish records is that there were no centralised records before the mid 19th century and then all the 19th century censuses were destroyed in the Troubles of the 1920s. So the only birth records going back to that time are church ones.

There was an interesting story in the Phoenix this month of the problems being encountered by the National Library in its attempt to collect, digitise and centralise church records so that genealogy searches back to the 19th century and even earlier can be facilitated. Some dioceses are refusing to hand over the records en masse. The Phoenix speculates that this is largely because of the Mormon factor.

Apparently, and this was confirmed to me by a professional genealogist, Mormons are the great unsung unpaid workhorses of the genealogy industry. If you need masses of photocopying or digitising or other such work which is hugely labour intensive, the people to call are the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) and they will do it all for free. How great is that?

Of course they have their own agenda. They believe in baptising not just their own living church members but retrospectively all of their ancestors as well. So they are very keen to get their hands on genealogy data. Many state bodies around the world are only too pleased to co-operate with the Mormons because it's a cheap way of getting your old paper-based data into computers. But of course, their very peculiar agenda is resented by people who take this sort of thing seriously.

Like Catholic Bishops. Several bishops in Ireland are resisting the drive to digitisation.

The professional genealogist also told me that the church has more prosaic reasons for wanting to restrict universal access to registration forms. It would seem that the gossiping of our ancestors was every bit as "tabloid" as our own generations and many birth records contain derogatory ad lib comments, usually written in Latin, alleging such tittle tattle that the name of the father on the birth cert is not that of the natural father of the child etc etc

All good clean fun.

The Bishop of Kerry, being one of these people holding up my own research.

I understood from a genealogist that the Mormons already had the required information, this having been collected a few years ago, when a crowd of them descended upon various places with their laptops. I don't know how much info they collected, but they are supposed to be a good source.

Howevever, when I tried their website, I didn't find any information relative to my search, and can only assume that, if they did have a lot of details, the bulk of them must be offline.

Given the lack of records, I'm always amazed that American presidents, or potential presidents, have Irish genealogists tracing their family back three or four hundred (or more) years, when most of us have a problem finding anything beyond the 19th century.

A UCD professor told me several years ago that the Clinton one was "fudged" because they couldn't find a missing link, or two. Whether this is true or not, I don't know.

Another problem with old records is supposed to be down to that old religious stuff, where Catholics were supposed to be treated like livestock, so records weren't all that important.

Affable

sweet-rasmus wrote: »

Yeah, it's a good show. I caugh the first two with Patsy Kensit and Boris Johnson. Last night's show was a bit too depressing; I had to turn it off.

They make it look so easy, but we have to remember that lots of people are paid to do research here.

It depends heavily on the person. Esther Rantzen's one was boring as hell but the Patsy Kensit one was quite moving.

LordSutch

Regarding the RTE version of 'Who do you think you are' it will be interesting to see how 'Irish' the celebs are (whatever 'Irish' means).

I read in the RTE guide that Newsman Charlie traces his roots back to Portsmouth, Linda Martin goes back to Italy, with Pamela Flood being the only one who keeps her family tree here in Ireland ......

I have always been curious as to where we all came from, and can our origins be traced back according to our Family Surnames? So recently I made a list of about fifteen surnames from the Office, from Friends, & from Family, I then entered them into some of the various 'on-line' (Surname Heraldry) websites to see what would happen, and apparently nearly all the fifteen are of Norman, Scandenavian, German, English, Welsh or Scottish origin!

Does'nt proove anything really - but interesting & a bit of fun to me none the less, as I presumed that nearly all the surnames would be of Irish origin!!! - Not so.

ejmaztec

Camelot wrote: »

Regarding the RTE version of 'Who do you think you are' it will be interesting to see how 'Irish' the celebs are (whatever 'Irish' means).

I read in the RTE guide that Newsman Charlie traces his roots back to Portsmouth, Linda Martin goes back to Italy, with Pamela Flood being the only one who keeps her family tree here in Ireland ......

I have always been curious as to where we all came from, and can our origins be traced back according to our Family Surnames? So recently I made a list of about fifteen surnames from the Office, from Friends, & from Family, I then entered them into some of the various 'on-line' (Surname Heraldry) websites to see what would happen, and apparently nearly all the fifteen are of Norman, Scandenavian, German, English, Welsh or Scottish origin!

Does'nt proove anything really - but interesting & a bit of fun to me none the less, as I presumed that nearly all the surnames would be of Irish origin!!! - Not so.

I suppose that it wouldn't be very interesting if they could only tell the celebrities who their parents were.

My maternal grandfather, having the rare name of John Kelly, died in 1946, and no-one, not even his immediate family, knows where the hell he came from.

Snickers Man

ejmaztec wrote: »

Given the lack of records, I'm always amazed that American presidents, or potential presidents, have Irish genealogists tracing their family back three or four hundred (or more) years, when most of us have a problem finding anything beyond the 19th century.

A UCD professor told me several years ago that the Clinton one was "fudged" because they couldn't find a missing link, or two. Whether this is true or not, I don't know.

I hadn't heard that about Clinton.

I certainly heard it about Ronald Reagan though.

When Reagan visited Ireland back in 1983/84 as part of his re-election drive, his genealogy was produced showing how his direct ancestor (I believe his great grandfather) Thomas Regan came from Ballyporeen, Tipperary.

(As an aside, has anyone ever met an Irish person who spells their surname "Reagan"? I sure haven't. Lots of Regans though.)

However Magill magazine, back when it was a good read, took the opportunity to reproduce a photostat of the recorded entry in their pages. They alleged, and used the picture to show they had a point, that the entry actually said Thomas Ryan, not Regan. They also pointed out that it looked suspiciously as if somebody had tried to write in an extra "e" between the "R" and "g" to turn Ryan into Regan.

The picture certainly looked suspicious.

Remember too that most American presidents with Irish ancestry came from the "Scots Irish" or presbyterian tradition. So their records would not have been driven underground in the 18th century as catholic ones would have to have been during the Penal Laws.

LordSutch

ejmaztec wrote: »

I suppose that it wouldn't be very interesting if they could only tell the celebrities who their parents were.

Agreed, it wouldnt be very interesting if they just told them who their parents were

ejmaztec

Camelot wrote: »

Agreed, it wouldnt be very interesting if they just told them who their parents were

Perhaps I'm being too subtle, or my wavelength is out of sync.

LordSutch

Um err - no - sorry ejmaztec, your 'parents' comment is still lost on me.

Anyway, the Irish version of 'who do you think you are' starts tonight (Monday 15th/Oct) - 9:35 RTE One.

ejmaztec

Camelot wrote: »

Um err - no - sorry ejmaztec, your 'parents' comment is still lost on me.

One day it will come to you in a flash.

jmayo

Camelot wrote: »

...
I have always been curious as to where we all came from, and can our origins be traced back according to our Family Surnames? So recently I made a list of about fifteen surnames from the Office, from Friends, & from Family, I then entered them into some of the various 'on-line' (Surname Heraldry) websites to see what would happen, and apparently nearly all the fifteen are of Norman, Scandenavian, German, English, Welsh or Scottish origin!

Does'nt proove anything really - but interesting & a bit of fun to me none the less, as I presumed that nearly all the surnames would be of Irish origin!!! - Not so.

Bloody blow ins the lot of ye

pjproby

does anyone recall reagan's visit to ballyporeen when he met his irish relative, a man who looked the spitting image of him.

Mushy

So what ye think of Charlies yellow house? Live in the same estate as him, dont think anyone noticed the RTE trucks outside it.

Is there a few variations on this sort of show going around now? Dont the BBC have their own, and possibly some other station?

Alicat

Aww yay I'm glad I started this thread, I'm delighted to see so many others are interested in family geneology. I've loved the UK version of the show for quite a while, and I'm hoping the Irish version might give us a few hints and tips on how to find the most information about our family trees.

My Nana was an "orphan" in Roscommon but we have our suspicions as the priest who's care she was under in her early years had the same last name as her. We'd all love to find out more about it but she doesn't really talk about that part of her life.

Thought the Charlie Bird one was good tonight, they were able to go so far back! Helps having an unusual surname and out of Ireland, the records here are so shabby and full of holes. The Irish census website says that the 1926 Census Returns won't be released for public inspection until January 2027. It's crazy! I think we have a right to access that information. They released the 1901 and 1911 records after so many people kicked up a fuss about it so maybe we should do it again.

Alicat

Mushy wrote: »

Is there a few variations on this sort of show going around now? Dont the BBC have their own, and possibly some other station?

9pm on Wednesdays on BBC1 It's on it's 4th or 5th series now

Only two episodes left. Jodie Kidd is this week and the final one is 'Poirot' actor David Suchet. They normally leave the best one til last so it should be a good one!

hivizman

Mushy wrote: »

Is there a few variations on this sort of show going around now? Dont the BBC have their own, and possibly some other station?

There was an Australian version earlier in 2008 on the SBS channel. The six featured celebrities were (1) Jack Thompson, a film actor; (2) Kate Ceberano, a singer; (3) Geoffrey Robertson, a civil rights lawyer; (4) Cathy Freeman, the Olympic runner; (5) Dennis Cometti, a TV sports commentator (Aussie Rules); and (6) Ita Buttrose, a journalist and magazine editor (who was apparently the long-standing mistress of Kerry Packer).

newbie71

charlie bird's episode was great. I much prefer the episodes with the scandalous personal stories rather than the general involvement in big story like the holocaust or slave trade. Gas that his grandda was a bigamist and his mother illegally marrying the brother in law.

pinkypinky

Alicat wrote: »

The Irish census website says that the 1926 Census Returns won't be released for public inspection until January 2027. It's crazy! I think we have a right to access that information. They released the 1901 and 1911 records after so many people kicked up a fuss about it so maybe we should do it again.

There is a 100 year census rule. The 1901 and 1911 were given special status because of the lack of any 19th century returns and opened after 50 years.

There is a lobby to get the 1926 census open early - 82 years on and anyone still living who is on it would have been a small child. For all the good it will do, online petition for signature here:

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/1926C

Lizzykins

I wish we could go backwards and have the 1891 and 1881 census records for examination. Seemingly they were pulped for paper during WW1 after having had some stats extracted from them. I'm stuck with my father's family in 1819,my mother's in 1847 and in laws in about the 1830s on one side and the 1790s on the other. I know it's very far back but I've my teeth into it now and I can't let the trail go cold. I've been into the National Library and the microfilm records of parish registers are so difficult to go through. I thought in my ignorance that they would look like modern registers with everything filled in on lined ledgers in decent handwriting. Not a bit of it. They don't bother with ages or addresses in the deaths register, or ages or parents in the marriage register. The births one is ok if you can read the writing! When you see the Church of England registers in Who do You think You Are? it would make you mad that the church here couldn't have been arsed to keep proper records.

sweet-rasmus

Alicat wrote: »

The Irish census website says that the 1926 Census Returns won't be released for public inspection until January 2027. It's crazy! I think we have a right to access that information. They released the 1901 and 1911 records after so many people kicked up a fuss about it so maybe we should do it again.

Agreed! I want to see the 1926 census

Lizzykins

I looked at the 1901 census in the early 1980s and it had been available for a while at that time. I think the 100 year rule didn't apply then because as so many records had been lost in 1921 people approaching pension age could not prove their age. That's what I heard anyway.

LordSutch

What happened to the Irish records in 1921 ?

Lizzykins

A huge amount was destroyed in the Civil War when the Customs House was burned down.

jos28

Lizzykins wrote: »

When you see the Church of England registers in Who do You think You Are? it would make you mad that the church here couldn't have been arsed to keep proper records.

I asked a genealogist at the National Library the same question. She said that it was extremely difficult for priests to carry out sacraments in the 19th century let alone keep the paperwork up to date. Priests often did mercy dashes under the cover of darkness to do baptisms/marriages/burials. Some priests could be gone for days and it was not easy for them to remember all the names and details when they got back to base. Many of the registers were consfiscated by landlords. So I suppose it was a lot easier for the Church of England ministers to keep their records in order. That is why most of our records are incomplete apparently.

Lizzykins

Well Catholic Emancipation was in 1829 so I don't think there could have been too much undercover about the sacraments after that. I think it was just that the priests treated the people with a certain contempt because thay were educated and the ordinary folk weren't. Landlords and the gentry did the same too.