Thursday, January 10, 2013

My Purported Line Back to Adam and Eve -- 140 Generations from Adam to Randy!

The topic of Biblical genealogy and lines of descent from Adam and Eve came up yesterday in the Chula Vista Genealogical Society Research Group.  Several of us tried to dissuade the guest who was expounding on his line... and then today Nathan Murphy posted the article "I Have My Tree Back to Adam and Eve" on the FamilySearch Blog.

I recall finding a line in a book published about 100 years ago:

George Edward Congden, One hundred thirty-eight generations from Adam : being a pedigree traced from Adam to the present time (Hiawatha, Kan. : E. Herbert, printer, 1910).

Fortunately, the line from Adam hooked into one of my royal lines and so I grafted my own ancestry onto the line (names from the Congden book (which has limited information about almost all of these Biblical to medieval persons) in purple, names from Frederick Lewis Weis' book Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists) in green, my own research in red):

The Biblical line (see Genesis):
1. ADAM
2. SETH
3. ENOS
4. CAINAN
5. MAHALALEEL
6. JARED
 7. ENOCH 
8. METHUSELAH
9. LAMECH
10. NOAH
 11. JAPHETH
 12. MAGOG

The Scythian line: 
 13. BAATH
 14. FEINIUS FARSAIDH 
 15. NIUL
16. GAEDHEAL
17. EASRU
18. SRU
 19. EIBHEAR SCOT
20. BEODHAMAN
21. AGHNANAN
22. TAT
23. AGHNON
 24. LAIMHFHIONN

The Getulian line (where Carthage was):
25. EIBHEAR GLUINFHIONN
26. AGHNONFHIONN
27. EIBRIC
 28. NEANUL
29. NUADHA
 30. EALLOIT
 31. EARCHAIDH
32. DEAGHAIDH 
 33. BRATHA
34. BREOGHAN
35. BILE

The Ireland line:
36. GALAMH or MILIDH 
 37. HEREMON (about 1700 BC)
38. IRIAL FAIDH
 39. EITHRAIL
 40. FOLLACH
 41. TIGHERNMAS
42. EANBHOTH
 43. SMIORGHULL
 44. FIACHA LANBHRAINNE
45. AENGUS OLMUCADHA
46. MAEN
 47. RAITHEACHTAIGH
48. DIAN
 49. SIRNA
 50. OILIOLL OLLCHAIN
51. GAILLCHAIDH
 52. NUADHAT FINNFAIL
53. AEDHAN GLAS
54. SIMON BREAC
 55. MUIREADHACH BOLGRACH 
 56. FIACHA TOLGRACH
57. DUACH LADHGRACH
58. EOCHAIDH BUADCHAH
59. UGAINE MOR
60. COBHTHACH CAEL BREADH 
 61. MELGHE MOLBTHACH 
 62. IREREO
63. CONNLA CAEMH
 64. OILOLL CAISFHIACLACH
65. EOCHAIDH AILTLEATHAN
66. AENGHUS TUIRMHEACH TEAMHRACH
67. ENNA AIGHNEACH
68. EASAMAN EAMHNA
69. ROIGNEN RUADH
 70. FIONNLOGH
 71. FIONN
72. EOCHAIDH FEIBHLACH
73. BRESS-NAR-LOTHAR
74. LUGHAIDH SRIABH-NDEARG
75. CRIMHTHANN NIADHNAIR (100th Monarch of Ireland, ca. AD 9)
76. FEARADHACH FINNFEACHTNACH 
 77. FIACHA FINNFOLAIDH 
 78. TUATHAL TEACHTMHAR
79. FEIDHLIMIDH RECHTMHAR
80. CONN CEDEATHACH (Conn of the 100 Battles, 110th Monarch, AD 123-157)
81. AIRT-EAN-FHEAR
 82. CORMAC ULFHADA
83. CAIRBRE LIFFEACHAIR
 84. FIACHA SRAIBHTINE
85. MUIREADHACH TIREACH
86. EOCHAIDH MUIGHMHEADHOIN
87. NIALL NAOIGHIALLACH (Niall of the 9 Hostages, 126th Monarch of Ireland, AD 379-405) 
 88. EOGHAN
 89. MUIREADHACH

Scotland line: 
 90. FERGUS MOR MAC EARCA
91. DONGARDUS
92. EOCHY
93. GABHRAN
 94. AIDAN
 95. EUGENIUS IV
96. DONEWALDUS
97. DONGARUS
98. ETHFYN
 99. ACHAIUS
 100. ALPIN
101. KENNETH I 
 102. CONSTANTINE I
103. DONALD
 104. MALCOLM I
105. KENNETH II
106. MALCOLM II
107. BETHOC
 108. DUNCAN I
109. MALCOLM III
110. MATILDA OF SCOTLAND, married Henry I, King of England (1070-1135)

English line:
111. ROBERT Of Caen
112. MAUD
113. HUGH of Kevelioc
114. AGNES of Chester
115. WILLIAM DE FERRERS
116. MAUD DE FERRERS
117. JOAN DE VIVONIA
118. PETER FITZ REGINALD
119. ROGER FITZ PETER
120. HENRY FITZ ROGER
121. JOHN FITZ ROGER
122. ELIZABETH
123. HUGH STUCKLEY
124. NICHOLAS STUCKLEY
125. SIR THOMAS STUCKLEY
126. MARGERY STUCKLEY
127. ANN FARRINGDON
128. GRACE DOWRISH (1540-1604)

American Line: 
 128. MARY GYE (1580-1666)
 129. MOSES MAVERICK (1611-1686)
130. SARAH MAVERICK (1659-1723)
131. EUNICE NORMAN (1686-1743)
132. EUNICE RAYMENT (1707-1773)
133. NORMAN SEAVER (1734-1787)
134. BENJAMIN SEAVER (1757-1816)
135. BENJAMIN SEAVER (1791-1825)
136. ISAAC SEAVER (1823-1901)
 137. FRANK W. SEAVER (1852-1922)
138. FRED WALTON SEAVER (1876-1942)
139.  FREDERICK WALTON SEAVER (1911-1983)
140.  RANDALL JEFFREY SEAVER (1943-....)

Obviously, I don't know how accurate the line is before the American folks, but some of it, at least back to the Scottish line, is documented by the royal and noble ancestries published by experts in the field (and perhaps more recent research has shown some of the names or relationships above to be wrong).

I did note the expert opinion of Robert C. Gunderson in the FamilySearch blog post, who said:

"In thirty-five years of genealogical research, I have yet to see a pedigree back to Adam that can be documented. By assignment, I have reviewed hundreds of pedigrees over the years. I have not found one where each connection on the pedigree can be justified by evidence from contemporary documents. In my opinion it is not even possible to verify historically a connected European pedigree earlier than the time of the Merovingian Kings (c. a.d. 450–a.d. 752).

“Every pedigree I have seen which attempts to bridge the gap between that time and the biblical pedigree appears to be based on questionable tradition, or at worst, plain fabrication. Generally these pedigrees offer no evidence as to the origin of the information, or they cite a vague source.”

I'll take his word for it.  But I thought that it was interesting.  I can't help thinking that since Jesus of Nazareth was in the 42nd generation from Adam, that he and I are probably about 30th cousins 98 times removed!  

I offer this only in the interest of discussion.  When I composed my list in 1995, I shared it with my Seaver cousins.  It impressed them... but I doubt that it is accurate before about 1500.  Please don't write me about an error or here there.  I'm not a royal or noble or medieval or Biblical scholar.  I don't have these folks in my database, although I've been tempted to add them back through the English line.

The URL for this post is:   http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/01/my-purported-line-back-to-adam-and-eve.html

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

10 comments:

Mary Ellen Gorry said...

Obviously these Adam lineages can never be properly documented, but they can be fun to look at (sometimes genealogy can be stressful) and it's interesting from a historical tradition standpoint. I know I have one somewhere!

Anonymous said...

This is great and so funny.

My wife does trace back to #110 Matilda of Scotland too. So #110 to #1 are the same!

Keep up the great blogs!

Ed

QuiltinLibraryLady said...

I found a tree for my husband's great-grandfather's line that I know contains some of those names & purports to go back to Adam & Eve. The more recent parts of the tree seemed credible when compared to other data so I added the whole thing to my database even though I consider a lot of the earliest stuff to be questionable. It's just fun to think about. And after all, aren't we all descendents of Adam & Eve??

Tim Forsythe said...

Most experts agree that the best lines devolve into mythology about 400 to 500 A.D. Anyone interested in these early lines should consult the GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives for more details.

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/GEN-MEDIEVAL

I monitor the mailing list regularly because I connect to several of these lines and make a concerted effort to keep mythology in its place.

Geolover said...

Interesting that nearly all of the list are males, when the one certain parent is the one who gave birth. That's what makes the 'begats' hilarious, with scarce a woman ever mentioned.

Actually, very few English lineages can be traced before the late 16th century, when Henry VIII had so many church records destroyed.

Tim Forsythe said...

Randy, at the transition from your Scottish line to your Irish line, is Fergus Mor (http://timforsythe.com/tree/tjforsythe/profile_I3759#chart).

There are three early Irish sources that list the genealogies of Fergus. All three list Ercc, King of Dalriada as his father and Eochaid Muinremur, King of Dalriada as his grandfarther. Weis follows these lines.

Stewart Baldwin (author of The Henry Pages - http://sbaldw.home.mindspring.com/hproject/prov/fergu000.htm) says this is uncertain as Ercc may be legendary, and Eochaid Muinremur probably is.

Lauri said...

Love it. My husband also comes from English royalty, so I have a similar lineage for him that I keep in a separate tree. It is good for discussion, and a few laughs. Thanks for posting along with the article.

Love your articles. Keep up the good work.

Dick said...

Randy,

Unfortunately, I can only provide documentation of my ancestry back to the time of Noah. It seems all of the older certified copies were damaged in the Flood. I'm now trying to put them all in proper citation format (yeah, right).

I'm still trying to figure out who certified Adam's birth certificate.

Dick

P.S. I learn something new from almost everyone of your posts. Keep it up!

Tammy said...

Randy, thought you might be interested to see how this "works" in Jewish genealogy, where families claim descent from King David (and then use the Bible to get from King David to Adam):

http://b.treelines.com/these-people-can-trace-themselves-to-adam/

While the lineages I wrote about suffer from the same flaws as the non-Jewish trees you discussed, I learned afterwards from Schelley Dardashti about the Dayan family of Aleppo. Their documentation is viewable here, relying on 700+ year old parchments from the Cairo genizah:

http://www.malchut-israel.com/forum/Dayan.htm

http://www.dayanofaleppo.com/docs/manuscript.aspx

Heather Rojo said...

Isn't it fun! Don't worry about taking it seriously, the royal family of England has their pedigree back to Adam, too. If they can do it, I guess it must be more than just fashionable.