A bump-up of an entry here, "What Genealogists Know," brought a letter from a woman who will remain anonymous. Here it is...
*****
Hi Keith, I am a woman, born about 1975 in the midwestern United States. I read your blog entry...about consanguinamory, reproduction and the number of one's ancestors and thought that I would chime in with my own anonymized family history. There are 24 of us who live in this area who share three surnames, 21 of us trace our ancestry here back to my great-great-grandparents who came over the mountains and down the river from Virginia around 1885. That first generation consisted of three couples. Two of the three surnames came from a pair of Scot-Irish families. Mr. A married Miss B and Mr. B married Miss C (making their children double cousins) and a second Mr. A married the daughter of one of their freed household slaves. So the 24 of us are from one-quarter to one-sixteenth whatever percent of African heritage she was. In addition, 21 of us have Native American ancestry because the third surname came from an itinerant preacher of French Canadian ancestry whose wife was half English and half Seminole. This is advanced math, but I think I am thirteen-sixteenth Scot-Irish, a sixteenth each French Canadian and African and one thirty second each Seminole and English. But, as Arlo Guthrie said, “that is not what I came to tell you about. I came to talk about” consanguinamory, and in particular what the ill-informed refer to as “inbreeding.” Of the 24 people whom share three surnames here. Two are siblings. Twelve, including my pastor and my husband are my first-cousins. I am simultaneously second cousins with six of my twelve first cousins and have six other second cousins. All six of my second cousins are also simultaneously third cousins and the remaining six of the twenty four are my third cousins. I didn’t bother to chart fourth cousins, but we are probably all fourth cousins. So by your account, were there no “inbreeding” I should have two parents, four grandparents, eight grandparents and sixteen great-grandparents. Obviously I have two parents, and like in your model I have four grandparents. But there the similarity ends. I have six (rather than eight) great-grandparents and eight (rather than sixteen) great-great-grandparents. Those who’ve stayed, and many didn’t, are all farmers or they work in some field related to agriculture, education for, or ministering to farm families. Living in the unpolluted countryside, eating natural, mostly unprocessed foods and working at jobs where we get sunlight and exercise we are all pretty healthy. We also stay away from hospitals -- where grandpa says, “one goes to get sick” -- we live longer with fewer health complaints than the state or national average. As a law abiding taxpayer I am rather miffed that the State of ____ thinks that it has the authority to use my tax dollars to engage in poorly planned social engineering through its Education and Public Health Departments falsely denigrating some of its citizens. “Inbreeding” doesn’t create genetic issues, it simply helps pass ones that already exist. They don’t address the “real” issue at all, that certain persons in the population have genetic variations that can cause reproductive harm. That certain people have lifestyle behaviors or jobs that can expose them to genetic mutation or other reproductive harm. They don’t test anyone and they don’t assist anyone. It’s easier to espouse a disproven theory that fits their political agenda. My six great grandparents who lived here had ten children who reached adulthood. The next generation which included two newcomers produced twenty children who survived to adulthood, four of whom moved away. My parents' generation produced 30 children, all of whom lived to adulthood and 24 of whom currently live in the area. I know of five children in that extended family who died from disease or accident before reaching adulthood. All were in my grandparents and great-grandparents' generation, none since. But since 1860 nineteen children born to US presidents died of disease before their seventeenth birthdays, most recently two of John and Jackie Kennedy’s. I assume that all nineteen had the best medical care available. Things were just much more “iffy” in the past.
*****
Hi Keith, I am a woman, born about 1975 in the midwestern United States. I read your blog entry...about consanguinamory, reproduction and the number of one's ancestors and thought that I would chime in with my own anonymized family history. There are 24 of us who live in this area who share three surnames, 21 of us trace our ancestry here back to my great-great-grandparents who came over the mountains and down the river from Virginia around 1885. That first generation consisted of three couples. Two of the three surnames came from a pair of Scot-Irish families. Mr. A married Miss B and Mr. B married Miss C (making their children double cousins) and a second Mr. A married the daughter of one of their freed household slaves. So the 24 of us are from one-quarter to one-sixteenth whatever percent of African heritage she was. In addition, 21 of us have Native American ancestry because the third surname came from an itinerant preacher of French Canadian ancestry whose wife was half English and half Seminole. This is advanced math, but I think I am thirteen-sixteenth Scot-Irish, a sixteenth each French Canadian and African and one thirty second each Seminole and English. But, as Arlo Guthrie said, “that is not what I came to tell you about. I came to talk about” consanguinamory, and in particular what the ill-informed refer to as “inbreeding.” Of the 24 people whom share three surnames here. Two are siblings. Twelve, including my pastor and my husband are my first-cousins. I am simultaneously second cousins with six of my twelve first cousins and have six other second cousins. All six of my second cousins are also simultaneously third cousins and the remaining six of the twenty four are my third cousins. I didn’t bother to chart fourth cousins, but we are probably all fourth cousins. So by your account, were there no “inbreeding” I should have two parents, four grandparents, eight grandparents and sixteen great-grandparents. Obviously I have two parents, and like in your model I have four grandparents. But there the similarity ends. I have six (rather than eight) great-grandparents and eight (rather than sixteen) great-great-grandparents. Those who’ve stayed, and many didn’t, are all farmers or they work in some field related to agriculture, education for, or ministering to farm families. Living in the unpolluted countryside, eating natural, mostly unprocessed foods and working at jobs where we get sunlight and exercise we are all pretty healthy. We also stay away from hospitals -- where grandpa says, “one goes to get sick” -- we live longer with fewer health complaints than the state or national average. As a law abiding taxpayer I am rather miffed that the State of ____ thinks that it has the authority to use my tax dollars to engage in poorly planned social engineering through its Education and Public Health Departments falsely denigrating some of its citizens. “Inbreeding” doesn’t create genetic issues, it simply helps pass ones that already exist. They don’t address the “real” issue at all, that certain persons in the population have genetic variations that can cause reproductive harm. That certain people have lifestyle behaviors or jobs that can expose them to genetic mutation or other reproductive harm. They don’t test anyone and they don’t assist anyone. It’s easier to espouse a disproven theory that fits their political agenda. My six great grandparents who lived here had ten children who reached adulthood. The next generation which included two newcomers produced twenty children who survived to adulthood, four of whom moved away. My parents' generation produced 30 children, all of whom lived to adulthood and 24 of whom currently live in the area. I know of five children in that extended family who died from disease or accident before reaching adulthood. All were in my grandparents and great-grandparents' generation, none since. But since 1860 nineteen children born to US presidents died of disease before their seventeenth birthdays, most recently two of John and Jackie Kennedy’s. I assume that all nineteen had the best medical care available. Things were just much more “iffy” in the past.
*****
Interesting. Thanks for the letter, Anonymous!
If you want to comment on anything you see at this blog, you can comment, including anonymously, after most blog entries. You can also contact Keith.
great article by the way
ReplyDelete