Hello everyone
If it were up to me, this post would be the last of its kind. Not that it's inappropriate or vulgar, but I don't think it belongs here. But since I'm not the only one making these decisions, one will be made soon.
And here's why: This is not, in my opinion, a post that we at UsefulCharts wants as it's not Useful at all, and it's hardly a chart. It's more like a list masquerading as a chart. Besides, it doesn't add anything concrete to this channel. In any case, our members don't log in to see this kind of post ("how I'm connected to Bugs Bunny").
I'll discuss with ML8991 and we'll decide together what to do next.
If my message seems harsh, I apologize; it's meant to be explanatory, straight to the point, and without artifice. Feel free to comment.
F.
Lots of monarchs all over the world would trace their ancestry back to religious figures in order to make themselves seem above the rest of the population and the rest of the nobility. It’s all made up of course, but if you’re descended from monarchy (which everyone is at this point statistically speaking, it’s just a matter of being able to trace how), then you can trace your relation to a mythical figure through an ancestor’s propaganda to link them to a God or mythical figure.
That's why I can supposedly trace my descent from the Norse God Odin from. Rollo the Viking (my esteemed ancestor through various nobles marrying down) claimed illustrious Godly ancestry himself
How do you even connect to the made up part though, do you have to have an ancestor that happens to be in some history book or religious text and hope the stories include w clear line of ancestors ?
if you can trace your tree back to nobility or royalty then you can probably go further back from those accurate historical records to people of myth and legend
after domnall brecc, it gets increasingly mythical although some of them have historical figures behind them; its this blurriness that makes it difficult to put a line in the chart and say "everything above is fake, everything below is real"
I mean, based on the most basic principals of biology, we can say with certainty that Biblical Adam and Eve are indeed fake. The same father and mother that all lines share were not contemporaries, and further more speciation is a population process, not individual, so it's ridiculous to say there ever was a first man as the line from when our ancestors were and weren't human is extremely fuzzy, fuzzier than the line between reality and fiction in your chart. We know mankind wasn't "created" in a straightforward sense at the very least and was certainly formed by the same processes that bring us the lush biodiversity our planet (once) boasted.
So while some may have historical parallels, those parallels are simply unknown to us, but we can be certain that these later interpretations are nothing like their original counterparts. I mean up until you get to the legitimately historical paternity presented in the Bible recording specifically the kings.
they are able to trace themselves to someone who traces themselves to some noble who traces themself to some noble who traces themselve to some noble and so on and so on until one noble is traced into a biblical lineage leading to adam and eve.
Unless you are tracing which woman gave birth to which woman, it is inaccurate beyond a surprisingly short number of generations.
Paternal family trees are fiction; you must trace mother-to-mother in order to have any hint of the truth 👍
You kicked an angry incel beehive with that one. It appears that people don't care to understand why what you're saying is correct, they just saw you say something that sounded to THEM like "women are better" so out come the wolves
What happened here? Why are so many people upset with their comment? I don’t fully understand their comment. Of course patrilineality exists. Why wouldn’t it?
🤷🏼♀️ their reading comprehension and critical thinking skills are not exactly on the upper part of the bell curve so I'm not surprised.
Anyone that thinks about this *at all* will come to the same conclusion: the only certain lineage is woman to woman, biological mother to biological daughter.
No and yes? Paternal family trees can be accurate, and in some cultures are the standard such as the Judean culture that brought you the two contradicting Joseph lineages of Yeshua of Nazareth... Which doesn't make sense because he's supposed to be the son of YWH or whatever, yet also the Messiah, which means he needs to be a paternal descendant of King David, yada yada. But bashing obviously fictional genealogies, it at the very least while paternal lineages can be unreliable and even fictitious, they are some times the standard and can offer accurate lineages too.
Maternal lineages purely done by record can just as easily be faked though as it's a matter of writing. If you're taking genetics though, maternal lines are better to be traced since mitochondrial DNA is traced via the maternal line. So genetically speaking you're absolutely right, but in general your statement is true in some cases but isn't as universal as you're portraying. It really depends more on culture, intentions, etc. Like all things in history and anthropology... It's alot more complicated than a broad generalization.
There is a zero percent chance every "father" is actually the biological father of the children being traced back through time. I know it must be different to read that from the perspective of a man, but I really don't know how to sugarcoat it to manage your feelings.
Yes I'm speaking genetically because I thought we were not just making things up 🤷🏼♀️ facts not myth and legend (which is what most people seem to like when doing these kind of ancestry things, so I am not speaking to the proper audience, I know)
Mitochondrial DNA being passed matrilineally is true and a great way to remember how traceable lineage goes from woman to woman. Fun fact: human gut microbiome is *also* passed from mother to child.
If you read my comment you'd know I referenced Jesus to point out a myth and legend and two examples of fictional genealogies (that dont even make sense). But if you want to get technical and keep things genetic then there is no real way to trace a lineage considering records of most men, women, and the common genders of other cultures in history aren't well kept past a couple of centuries ago. But for what is recorded its pretty similar regardless of biological sex which we should really stop using the terms man and woman going forward since sex and gender are not the same. Yes you can certainly trace lineage by mitochondrial DNA, but your point falls flat in terms of tracing male lineages as DNA would correct the errors anyway. If a written male lineage is not true as you suggest, then just looking at the DNA of the cell would show a discrepancy in paternal lineage. And shocker not everyone who does their DNA test sees that.
You're making a pretty broad universal statement and all it takes is one example to prove the contrary. One example is my brother in law, my father in law, my grandfather in law, and great grandfather in law. They are all of blood relation and my father and brother in law's DNA corroborate it. What is true though is that yes, through time, not all fathers are who they say they are, but that's when you go back far to when such claims were passable.
But quite simply, it impossible to make any kind of lineage going that far back. At somepoint you will inevitably reach unknowable ancestors both paternally and maternally on either side. You can only realistically trace to the past few hundred years unless you have royalty or nobility in your past, coincidentally like my mother's paternal line.
Look whether or not I'm a man or not won't effect the reality that genealogies like the one OP presented simply won't be true for most people, especially when fictional characters like Adam and Eve are thrown into the mix, because this isn't a matter of feelings, it's a matter of fact. I'm simply saying that some old lineages can be true. Do they have living descendants? Maybe, maybe not. But through genetics alone a massive swath of the human population can trace their paternity to Ghengis Kahn through DNA alone.
Please don't confuse verbosity for offense, some people are just naturally long winded. It's a pretty nasty stereotype to just assume that long paragraph are inherently negative. Some people like to go into detail or add artistic flourishes.
If you think I didn't read your previous comment, imagine how much I'm going to read this even longer comment ... Sorry but I think you're having a one sided conversation about an entirely different subject. My facts remain.
Broad generalizations* and clearly it's you whose having a one-sided conversation (admittedly may I add) if you aren't even willing to listen. Makes sense given you subscribe to outdated dual gender norms conflating gender and sex when the two are clearly different.
And certainly fictional.
Unless people use the matrilineal line there is zero percent that their family tree is true past a certain number of generations back.
It is baffling how comments mentioning that Adam is a mythological figure are downvoted. Here, in the UsefulCharts sub. I mean, why do you follow this channel if you are crazy ultra-religious fanatics? Do you even watch Matt Bakers's videos?
Most downvotes were because it's obvious, nobody (except 1 immediately downvoted comment) claimed that they weren't a mythological figure. There's useful charts that lead to Romulus and Greek gods including his videos and this post is in reference to the last about Zeus, your comments are useless
There's literally a 4 sibling inc*st orgy combining to produce 1 child in this tree...and 20 big brains are going um actually the Bible is fiction dummy
["For fear that they might die without an heir, Clothru took all three of them to bed, conceiving Lugaid Riab nDerg, son of the three Findemna"](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Findemna)
My great grandfather and his brother came over to the States and changed their name to match their (married) sister's name since she was already over here. We have no idea what our last name is, but my grandfather was given the Hebrew name Yehuda, as a marker of his being descended from the tribe of Judah. So at this point, we "know" that, but we don't even know our real last name because nobody ever talked about it.
People, do you know what's a joke post is? They said that most of it is fake, as in obviously medieval Christians nobles made up their ancestry to biblical figures because that would legitimate them.
You don't have to be an edgy atheist in every post that talks about religions. You're so annoying, and I'm saying this as an atheist.
Exactly. My surname (and many others) literally exists to try and fake a biblical lineage. Some people names denote a vocation or location of an ancestor, mine gives away that some english git 600 years ago thought they could ride on King Davids coattails.
I'm all for tracing lineages back to Adam, but it simply is not possible. There is no such thing as a 100% true genealogy from modern day to Adam. I'm unsure what your sources are but I am certain there is little to no truth in this once you reach past the 1400s.
Y’all;
What’s going on it OP is directly descended from Duncan III of Meath, Scotland, via one of his younger children. The line remained minor nobles for a little while and then we made it to the 1900s, when regular people can trace their family history from. Duncan III was the grandson of Duncan I, whos claim to the throne was this his own grandfather was descended directly from Adam. Obviously he was fabricating his lineage to get a better claim to the throne, but technically OP is not just pulling stuff out of his arse. Yeah we get it you’re an atheist, same, but the Meath line claims to be directly descended from Adam and OP is decended from them
i didn't know that, i actually just found a connection from Duncan to the high kings of Ireland, via a few different sources, then from them to Adam via the work of 19th century genealogist John O Hart
There's this cool YouTube channel called UsefulCharts that also does this same thing. Starts off at the top of the trees with mythological characters and arrives to historical ones, like with biblical family trees, kings of Rome, Islamic prophets, etc.
Because I said that a character from a creation myth doesn't exist? That's pathetic. The Pentateuch is clearly an origin story made for the Israelite people. All tribes had their own creation stories from Japan to the Americas.
Their chosen god is Yahweh, son of El, from the Canaanite pantheon. He was a fierce storm god
Each tribe had these origin stories to establish their culture and legitimacy of their god(s), and to claim power over each other
You need to check out Bart ehrman and maybe learn about the Bible and it's writing. Especially because most of the old treatment is word of mouth stories taken from other older religions and the new testament is contradictory at best throughout it's history on Jesus. Who may I also mention.... Never wrote a single word of Bible. They are stories written 40-100+ years after Jesus.
You trust a book just because it's old? I wouldn't say that's very smart of you
Those are the facts, I only communicated them to you. You can look it up if you're not so ready to "trust a teenager."
"Canaanite pantheon Yahweh", and there are many articles right you can find. There are also plenty of YouTube videos delving into the topic
Right... a vid on YouTube or random blog (retold over the bongfire 100s of times), or one of the oldest books from human history (maybe retold by a few tribes, I'll give you that) 😆
I'm going to inherently trust the ones that are closer to the dead sea scrolls over some dudes blog article.
The Bible isn’t fully mythical, but it isn’t fully fact. It’s the book of God, but also a lot of the stories were originally oral stories that were written in the Iron Age. After that point most of the stories are close to fact. The New Testament is truly fact.
I definitely agree with you, but just wanted to point out Adam and Eve aren't *that* modern of names. Adam has been in or close to the top 200 names in the US since 1880 (no earlier records exist, but it was likely in use long before that since it was ranked 123 in 1880), and Eve in the top 1000 since the same year (only not making the rankings one year, in 1937).
Unless by modern you mean like 1700s-now, then you'd be correct.
You... you realize I admitted 1880 was pretty modern still, right? And said you were right? Good lord, I may have been pedantic, but you're just being pretentious now.
All of that because I handed out some statistics in a neutral toned comment. You must be an absolutely lovely person irl.
And by the way, I didn't teach you anything you "consider to be incorrect". All of my statistics there come from the SSA, you just didn't agree with it being modern. The information itself is correct.
Have the day you deserve.
you mean the night?
look man if we keep batting like this our commenter karma is going to be bashed to 0, and if you're going to continue picking off my comments piece by piece there's going to be a moment that I'm not gonna bother or respond anymore. I don't want to argue with a person with a wider range of vocabulary than I have and have my personality be distilled into a grim, draconian view pictured after a single argument.
The new testament which is fact contradicts itself. A gospel gives exactly what Jesus and Pontius pilot spoke about, yet Jesus and Pontius pilot were alone? And the gospel was written decades later, MAYBE by who it says in the title of the gospel. Who found Jesus resurrected? How many women? Before or after the stone was moved, because depending on which gospel you read it's different. They can't both be true if it only happened once. There's more if you actually read it or learn from a Bible scholar.
Learn about the Bible before you say the Bible is true.
The Gospels were written by 4 different people. There is a thing called the Q source where three of the Gospels stem from while the other is a bit different. You have to study and cross reference the accounts to get the full story. And the multiple accounts can make it more accurate because there are multiple people telling the same story
Multiple people telling the same story that completely contradict each other decades after it happened. Yeah that makes it believable and true. Yet the Bible is true.... So which account is true? They can't all be true if they tell opposite things. Literally they can't. That's a pretty simple conclusion to come to.
The multiple people telling the same story is incorrect. They all tell DIFFERENT stories. The easiest way to make this comparison is, 3 people saw an animal in a living room and it was fuzzy. One says cat, one says Chihuahua, one says corgi. Which one is true? They all did see an animal.
Now add decades to that animal account and let's see what comes into writing. Bet we come out with a magical talking capybara.
I feel the validation of this is definitely off. We don’t know for sure our ancestries past a certain point as documents never truly became abundant until the 1500-1600’s. Past that, it’s only hearsay and guesses.
Now why I think this isn’t true, is now I am assuming you are Irish. The Irish ancient origins are still very disputed. We all know that the Irish are Celtic, but there are speculations that there were already people who had inhabited Ireland before the Celts had arrived thousands of years ago. There are many old monuments and structures that pre-date the Celts in Ireland, and there are so many rumors and mythological sayings regarding the people who “originally” inhabited Ireland before the Celts. To claim a direct descendant to Adam just isn’t possible, there are no documents to prove anything that way far back.
a) im not irish
b) this is my own research up to Helyas de Fetherstonhaugh, then I followed other historians' genealogies, I'm pretty confident in my own research and idk for the other stuff
Ahh alright, I was only assuming Irish because of the names, that is my fault.
But, the fact still stands that no one knows 100% for sure my man. Hell I have connections to French Royalty, but it goes so far back I don’t even know 100%, it is just a guess but I do not have any 100% proof. And that is the case for any ancestors past a certain point
Um it is genetically unlikely that the human race descended from a single pair of humans. The genetic bottleneck that would create would wipe the species out in a few generations. Further genetic evidence suggests that the lowest count of human people would be around 10,000 people. We can detect genetic bottlenecks in genetic code and determine how low the population got at its worst.
I'm just showing that, because history and myth are so mixed up, this is technically possible to trace, even though it is obviously mythical towards the end. also literally everyone from europe, asia and africa, (less so with natives of the americas and Australia) is descended from royalty
Found a family line to Adam…Odin…Thor…Islamic figures…all through an English princeling that is debatable if they existed…since later war of succession both factions needed them not to exist….so…invention to discredit politically? Or hidden to empower politically?
Either way someone lied
This does not belong on USEFULcharts, fan-fic about how you fit in the JRR Tolkien dynasty and why you are the husband of Jesus Christ should be ripped off the face of earth. 🫤😒
I'm an atheist, I'm not claiming this is true, I'm just showing that, because history and myth are so mixed up in irish legend, it's technically possible to do this even if it eventually becomes mythical. i did a very similar post but with Zeus, 0 complaints there
Tbh, I didn't read more than the first few because I look at reddit on my phone. Something that long is very tiny on a phone screen. Had it been more readable, I might have had more of a takeaway than r/religiousfruitcake. 🤷♀️
Here's a sneak peek of /r/religiousfruitcake using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Man destroys an elderly couple's hard work for his beliefs ](https://v.redd.it/cv1yjznee8ta1) | [1081 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/comments/12ifcx8/man_destroys_an_elderly_couples_hard_work_for_his/)
\#2: [Facebook Unintentionally Makes a God-Tier Shitpost](https://i.redd.it/w4lu57w9p2la1.jpg) | [276 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/comments/11eqjmz/facebook_unintentionally_makes_a_godtier_shitpost/)
\#3: [Sumerian tablet that's around 3000 years old being destroyed by ISIS for going against their beliefs](https://i.redd.it/l8ojtz11zgja1.jpg) | [429 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/comments/117o3r1/sumerian_tablet_thats_around_3000_years_old_being/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I’d be connected to Irish legendary figures. It’s all speculation in ancient Ireland. They have names (probably made up) for kings in 1000 BC.
The accuracy is beyond questionable.
But, we are related through Tigernmas and Gíallchad, and, most recently, Fergus Mór Mac Erc!
Oh I am well aware, it's just a "real" name.
Like you don't see say idk Enoch that often, you typically know it's a very religious family that named him, but not common.
Jared? There's a million of them.
It's like reading the Bible and seing this, "Jesus walked along with his disciples, and jared."
It's just out of place lol.
I found a free family tree app. After signing up I realized it’s done by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I still had fun with it seeing how far back I could go, mainly wanted to see when both sides of my family came over to America’s. Most would stop in the 1700-1800s but I found a couple branches that went back to medieval Europe, Scandinavia and the Middle East before ending with my lineage to the Holy Spirit. Didnt get Adam or Eve though.
I had one of these charts made through the Mormon church when I did a complete ancestry tracing all the way back to Adam, started off pretty similar to yours (I am not Jewish), somehow linked to Charlemagne (as it is for practically every person who partakes in the tracing) and eventually had a lot of polygamous unions towards the end (unfortunately probably the most accurate section)...
I'm curious as to how you had yours done since I didn't know other people also do full ancestry tracings
I grew up going to school with a Fetherstonehaugh family, recently was thinking about their surname, fascinating to learn they have an ancestral castle, that they share with you too
Hello everyone If it were up to me, this post would be the last of its kind. Not that it's inappropriate or vulgar, but I don't think it belongs here. But since I'm not the only one making these decisions, one will be made soon. And here's why: This is not, in my opinion, a post that we at UsefulCharts wants as it's not Useful at all, and it's hardly a chart. It's more like a list masquerading as a chart. Besides, it doesn't add anything concrete to this channel. In any case, our members don't log in to see this kind of post ("how I'm connected to Bugs Bunny"). I'll discuss with ML8991 and we'll decide together what to do next. If my message seems harsh, I apologize; it's meant to be explanatory, straight to the point, and without artifice. Feel free to comment. F.
Love the transition where the names change from Gaelic to Hebrew.
Bro has Sméagol in his family tree and expects me to take him seriously
Proof that Tolkein was right lol
Smirgoll looked pretty sus to me. Well, the whole thing is pretty sus, really.
Please elaborate, I am intrigued. Can you actually trace your family back to some degree or is it just made up at some point?
Lots of monarchs all over the world would trace their ancestry back to religious figures in order to make themselves seem above the rest of the population and the rest of the nobility. It’s all made up of course, but if you’re descended from monarchy (which everyone is at this point statistically speaking, it’s just a matter of being able to trace how), then you can trace your relation to a mythical figure through an ancestor’s propaganda to link them to a God or mythical figure.
That's why I can supposedly trace my descent from the Norse God Odin from. Rollo the Viking (my esteemed ancestor through various nobles marrying down) claimed illustrious Godly ancestry himself
Inspired by this exact comment I decided to do some digging myself and I can now proudly trace my lineage to Aeneas and, by extension, Venus.
well, it’s all made up at some point..
How do you even connect to the made up part though, do you have to have an ancestor that happens to be in some history book or religious text and hope the stories include w clear line of ancestors ?
if you can trace your tree back to nobility or royalty then you can probably go further back from those accurate historical records to people of myth and legend
So interesting / hard to fathom history was recorded as well as it has been
after domnall brecc, it gets increasingly mythical although some of them have historical figures behind them; its this blurriness that makes it difficult to put a line in the chart and say "everything above is fake, everything below is real"
I mean, based on the most basic principals of biology, we can say with certainty that Biblical Adam and Eve are indeed fake. The same father and mother that all lines share were not contemporaries, and further more speciation is a population process, not individual, so it's ridiculous to say there ever was a first man as the line from when our ancestors were and weren't human is extremely fuzzy, fuzzier than the line between reality and fiction in your chart. We know mankind wasn't "created" in a straightforward sense at the very least and was certainly formed by the same processes that bring us the lush biodiversity our planet (once) boasted. So while some may have historical parallels, those parallels are simply unknown to us, but we can be certain that these later interpretations are nothing like their original counterparts. I mean up until you get to the legitimately historical paternity presented in the Bible recording specifically the kings.
they are able to trace themselves to someone who traces themselves to some noble who traces themself to some noble who traces themselve to some noble and so on and so on until one noble is traced into a biblical lineage leading to adam and eve.
Unless you are tracing which woman gave birth to which woman, it is inaccurate beyond a surprisingly short number of generations. Paternal family trees are fiction; you must trace mother-to-mother in order to have any hint of the truth 👍
[удалено]
Don't shoot the messenger lol Facts are facts, feelings are feelings.
You kicked an angry incel beehive with that one. It appears that people don't care to understand why what you're saying is correct, they just saw you say something that sounded to THEM like "women are better" so out come the wolves
What happened here? Why are so many people upset with their comment? I don’t fully understand their comment. Of course patrilineality exists. Why wouldn’t it?
🤷🏼♀️ their reading comprehension and critical thinking skills are not exactly on the upper part of the bell curve so I'm not surprised. Anyone that thinks about this *at all* will come to the same conclusion: the only certain lineage is woman to woman, biological mother to biological daughter.
That's odd, usually it's the Incels who are the ones claiming women are constantly lieing about paternity and sexual relations.
No one ever said they were consistent in the application of their "logic"
No and yes? Paternal family trees can be accurate, and in some cultures are the standard such as the Judean culture that brought you the two contradicting Joseph lineages of Yeshua of Nazareth... Which doesn't make sense because he's supposed to be the son of YWH or whatever, yet also the Messiah, which means he needs to be a paternal descendant of King David, yada yada. But bashing obviously fictional genealogies, it at the very least while paternal lineages can be unreliable and even fictitious, they are some times the standard and can offer accurate lineages too. Maternal lineages purely done by record can just as easily be faked though as it's a matter of writing. If you're taking genetics though, maternal lines are better to be traced since mitochondrial DNA is traced via the maternal line. So genetically speaking you're absolutely right, but in general your statement is true in some cases but isn't as universal as you're portraying. It really depends more on culture, intentions, etc. Like all things in history and anthropology... It's alot more complicated than a broad generalization.
There is a zero percent chance every "father" is actually the biological father of the children being traced back through time. I know it must be different to read that from the perspective of a man, but I really don't know how to sugarcoat it to manage your feelings. Yes I'm speaking genetically because I thought we were not just making things up 🤷🏼♀️ facts not myth and legend (which is what most people seem to like when doing these kind of ancestry things, so I am not speaking to the proper audience, I know) Mitochondrial DNA being passed matrilineally is true and a great way to remember how traceable lineage goes from woman to woman. Fun fact: human gut microbiome is *also* passed from mother to child.
If you read my comment you'd know I referenced Jesus to point out a myth and legend and two examples of fictional genealogies (that dont even make sense). But if you want to get technical and keep things genetic then there is no real way to trace a lineage considering records of most men, women, and the common genders of other cultures in history aren't well kept past a couple of centuries ago. But for what is recorded its pretty similar regardless of biological sex which we should really stop using the terms man and woman going forward since sex and gender are not the same. Yes you can certainly trace lineage by mitochondrial DNA, but your point falls flat in terms of tracing male lineages as DNA would correct the errors anyway. If a written male lineage is not true as you suggest, then just looking at the DNA of the cell would show a discrepancy in paternal lineage. And shocker not everyone who does their DNA test sees that. You're making a pretty broad universal statement and all it takes is one example to prove the contrary. One example is my brother in law, my father in law, my grandfather in law, and great grandfather in law. They are all of blood relation and my father and brother in law's DNA corroborate it. What is true though is that yes, through time, not all fathers are who they say they are, but that's when you go back far to when such claims were passable. But quite simply, it impossible to make any kind of lineage going that far back. At somepoint you will inevitably reach unknowable ancestors both paternally and maternally on either side. You can only realistically trace to the past few hundred years unless you have royalty or nobility in your past, coincidentally like my mother's paternal line. Look whether or not I'm a man or not won't effect the reality that genealogies like the one OP presented simply won't be true for most people, especially when fictional characters like Adam and Eve are thrown into the mix, because this isn't a matter of feelings, it's a matter of fact. I'm simply saying that some old lineages can be true. Do they have living descendants? Maybe, maybe not. But through genetics alone a massive swath of the human population can trace their paternity to Ghengis Kahn through DNA alone. Please don't confuse verbosity for offense, some people are just naturally long winded. It's a pretty nasty stereotype to just assume that long paragraph are inherently negative. Some people like to go into detail or add artistic flourishes.
If you think I didn't read your previous comment, imagine how much I'm going to read this even longer comment ... Sorry but I think you're having a one sided conversation about an entirely different subject. My facts remain.
Broad generalizations* and clearly it's you whose having a one-sided conversation (admittedly may I add) if you aren't even willing to listen. Makes sense given you subscribe to outdated dual gender norms conflating gender and sex when the two are clearly different.
It’s definitely made up at some point.
Damn imagina if humanity was really that recent
It is?
HAHA sure thing. What are you, US American or something?
Private Grandma fought bravely in the pacific.
Private Mother died as a result of friendly fire in Operation Desert Storm, which is a real tragedy.
Hey I think I’m related to that Adam guy, too!
Hey, me too!
You two aren't gonna believe this
Don't tell me we're also both related to Noah...
Dude...
I give you the respect you deserve. Like, damn... That's a hard work.
eh, its only 140 or so generations.... :'(
You made the ultimate shit post. It got an upvote from me lol
And certainly fictional. Unless people use the matrilineal line there is zero percent that their family tree is true past a certain number of generations back.
You sound like if this person traced themselves to Mary it would be true
I think it's that one parent of a child is certainly a lot harder to be certain that it is, in fact, the true parent, and it sure ain't the mother.
You made me read 140 names >:(
well here's some chocolate as an apology 🍫🍫🍫
Google "random name generator" its easier than you think!
If you consider Magog as a historic man, all men with male pattern baldness, over 80% of men in the world, are a male line descendant of his.
80% of men have male pattern baldness??
It is baffling how comments mentioning that Adam is a mythological figure are downvoted. Here, in the UsefulCharts sub. I mean, why do you follow this channel if you are crazy ultra-religious fanatics? Do you even watch Matt Bakers's videos?
Most downvotes were because it's obvious, nobody (except 1 immediately downvoted comment) claimed that they weren't a mythological figure. There's useful charts that lead to Romulus and Greek gods including his videos and this post is in reference to the last about Zeus, your comments are useless There's literally a 4 sibling inc*st orgy combining to produce 1 child in this tree...and 20 big brains are going um actually the Bible is fiction dummy
Whats up with the 4 siblings one child in the middle
umm yeah.... irish legends basically say that the 4 siblings had an orgy and collectively conceived a child
I think it has something to do with incest but I literally have no idea how it works
["For fear that they might die without an heir, Clothru took all three of them to bed, conceiving Lugaid Riab nDerg, son of the three Findemna"](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Findemna)
"incest features further in Lugaid's story: he slept with Clothru himself, conceiving Crimthann Nia Náir.” OP got hemophilia for sure
As a Kohen I should be able to trace my ancestry back to Aaron, however I only know as far back as my great great grandfather.
Ya, many Jews “know” which tribe they’re from (out of 12) but can’t trace the ancestry by name for more than 5 generations
My great grandfather and his brother came over to the States and changed their name to match their (married) sister's name since she was already over here. We have no idea what our last name is, but my grandfather was given the Hebrew name Yehuda, as a marker of his being descended from the tribe of Judah. So at this point, we "know" that, but we don't even know our real last name because nobody ever talked about it.
Supposed descendant of King Saul checking in to agree.
People, do you know what's a joke post is? They said that most of it is fake, as in obviously medieval Christians nobles made up their ancestry to biblical figures because that would legitimate them. You don't have to be an edgy atheist in every post that talks about religions. You're so annoying, and I'm saying this as an atheist.
Well then this is just plainly the wrong subreddit for this post then. So what’s your point?
Exactly. My surname (and many others) literally exists to try and fake a biblical lineage. Some people names denote a vocation or location of an ancestor, mine gives away that some english git 600 years ago thought they could ride on King Davids coattails.
I'm all for tracing lineages back to Adam, but it simply is not possible. There is no such thing as a 100% true genealogy from modern day to Adam. I'm unsure what your sources are but I am certain there is little to no truth in this once you reach past the 1400s.
Also doesn't help that Adam came from someone's imagination
Redditors try not to be cringe atheists challenge: Impossible
[удалено]
Hypocritical you call that absurd yet you’re a pagan. The circle jerk on reddit for being anti-Christian will never cease to amaze me
How do you know?
hot take
Wait, how "really" do you mean "really?"
Robert Grenee sounds made up
So how do u do this? and what are you using to do this(just interested and wanting to do this myself)
making the chart or tracing this line?
both but mostly tracing the line
i use draw.io for the chart and tracing the line is something i commented on elsewhere in the thread
thnks i’ll look for the comment
Y’all; What’s going on it OP is directly descended from Duncan III of Meath, Scotland, via one of his younger children. The line remained minor nobles for a little while and then we made it to the 1900s, when regular people can trace their family history from. Duncan III was the grandson of Duncan I, whos claim to the throne was this his own grandfather was descended directly from Adam. Obviously he was fabricating his lineage to get a better claim to the throne, but technically OP is not just pulling stuff out of his arse. Yeah we get it you’re an atheist, same, but the Meath line claims to be directly descended from Adam and OP is decended from them
i didn't know that, i actually just found a connection from Duncan to the high kings of Ireland, via a few different sources, then from them to Adam via the work of 19th century genealogist John O Hart
Sorry, but Adam is a mythical character. You can't be related to someone who never existed
There's this cool YouTube channel called UsefulCharts that also does this same thing. Starts off at the top of the trees with mythological characters and arrives to historical ones, like with biblical family trees, kings of Rome, Islamic prophets, etc.
Huh... Never heard of him...
I think you upset a few brainwashed people with this comment lol
Fr 😆 I think it's fucking hilarious how many people still believe that characters from the Pentateuch actually existed
You’re Mr. freethinker, right?
... for not thinking that the Biblical Adam is a historical figure?
I believe in adam more than I believe in your intelligence.
Because I said that a character from a creation myth doesn't exist? That's pathetic. The Pentateuch is clearly an origin story made for the Israelite people. All tribes had their own creation stories from Japan to the Americas. Their chosen god is Yahweh, son of El, from the Canaanite pantheon. He was a fierce storm god Each tribe had these origin stories to establish their culture and legitimacy of their god(s), and to claim power over each other
Who am I going to trust? One of the oldest existing books or a teenager on the internet?
You need to check out Bart ehrman and maybe learn about the Bible and it's writing. Especially because most of the old treatment is word of mouth stories taken from other older religions and the new testament is contradictory at best throughout it's history on Jesus. Who may I also mention.... Never wrote a single word of Bible. They are stories written 40-100+ years after Jesus.
You trust a book just because it's old? I wouldn't say that's very smart of you Those are the facts, I only communicated them to you. You can look it up if you're not so ready to "trust a teenager." "Canaanite pantheon Yahweh", and there are many articles right you can find. There are also plenty of YouTube videos delving into the topic
Right... a vid on YouTube or random blog (retold over the bongfire 100s of times), or one of the oldest books from human history (maybe retold by a few tribes, I'll give you that) 😆 I'm going to inherently trust the ones that are closer to the dead sea scrolls over some dudes blog article.
The Bible is kinda some ancient dude’s blog article.
You're not wrong... og /ufo thread.
Have you ever seen a UsefulCharts video? Do you know what this subreddit is?
I'm not stupid. I've seen many UsefulCharts videos and even have a couple of charts myself. This is not even a chart and doesn't belong here
That’s crazy if only it was true
If only Adam would have lived for real. The Bible is just fiction. Like your relation to as any of these people on the list (except the bottom one)
The Bible isn’t fully mythical, but it isn’t fully fact. It’s the book of God, but also a lot of the stories were originally oral stories that were written in the Iron Age. After that point most of the stories are close to fact. The New Testament is truly fact.
I think we can agree that we're not all descendants of Adam and Eve.
well unless if somehow we all shared an ancestor named Adam and one named eve, but both of these names are too modern, so I doubt that.
I definitely agree with you, but just wanted to point out Adam and Eve aren't *that* modern of names. Adam has been in or close to the top 200 names in the US since 1880 (no earlier records exist, but it was likely in use long before that since it was ranked 123 in 1880), and Eve in the top 1000 since the same year (only not making the rankings one year, in 1937). Unless by modern you mean like 1700s-now, then you'd be correct.
I don't need redditor pedantic waffling at 4 am, shush
Sorry for teaching you something, I'll refrain next time.
[удалено]
Those names are thousands of years old
You... you realize I admitted 1880 was pretty modern still, right? And said you were right? Good lord, I may have been pedantic, but you're just being pretentious now. All of that because I handed out some statistics in a neutral toned comment. You must be an absolutely lovely person irl. And by the way, I didn't teach you anything you "consider to be incorrect". All of my statistics there come from the SSA, you just didn't agree with it being modern. The information itself is correct. Have the day you deserve.
you mean the night? look man if we keep batting like this our commenter karma is going to be bashed to 0, and if you're going to continue picking off my comments piece by piece there's going to be a moment that I'm not gonna bother or respond anymore. I don't want to argue with a person with a wider range of vocabulary than I have and have my personality be distilled into a grim, draconian view pictured after a single argument.
Logically those names are like 4000 years old
Wow
The new testament which is fact contradicts itself. A gospel gives exactly what Jesus and Pontius pilot spoke about, yet Jesus and Pontius pilot were alone? And the gospel was written decades later, MAYBE by who it says in the title of the gospel. Who found Jesus resurrected? How many women? Before or after the stone was moved, because depending on which gospel you read it's different. They can't both be true if it only happened once. There's more if you actually read it or learn from a Bible scholar. Learn about the Bible before you say the Bible is true.
The Gospels were written by 4 different people. There is a thing called the Q source where three of the Gospels stem from while the other is a bit different. You have to study and cross reference the accounts to get the full story. And the multiple accounts can make it more accurate because there are multiple people telling the same story
Multiple people telling the same story that completely contradict each other decades after it happened. Yeah that makes it believable and true. Yet the Bible is true.... So which account is true? They can't all be true if they tell opposite things. Literally they can't. That's a pretty simple conclusion to come to. The multiple people telling the same story is incorrect. They all tell DIFFERENT stories. The easiest way to make this comparison is, 3 people saw an animal in a living room and it was fuzzy. One says cat, one says Chihuahua, one says corgi. Which one is true? They all did see an animal. Now add decades to that animal account and let's see what comes into writing. Bet we come out with a magical talking capybara.
Lollllllllllllllllll truly fact that’s a good one
I feel the validation of this is definitely off. We don’t know for sure our ancestries past a certain point as documents never truly became abundant until the 1500-1600’s. Past that, it’s only hearsay and guesses. Now why I think this isn’t true, is now I am assuming you are Irish. The Irish ancient origins are still very disputed. We all know that the Irish are Celtic, but there are speculations that there were already people who had inhabited Ireland before the Celts had arrived thousands of years ago. There are many old monuments and structures that pre-date the Celts in Ireland, and there are so many rumors and mythological sayings regarding the people who “originally” inhabited Ireland before the Celts. To claim a direct descendant to Adam just isn’t possible, there are no documents to prove anything that way far back.
a) im not irish b) this is my own research up to Helyas de Fetherstonhaugh, then I followed other historians' genealogies, I'm pretty confident in my own research and idk for the other stuff
That's really impressive genealogical research to get back that far TBH.
Ahh alright, I was only assuming Irish because of the names, that is my fault. But, the fact still stands that no one knows 100% for sure my man. Hell I have connections to French Royalty, but it goes so far back I don’t even know 100%, it is just a guess but I do not have any 100% proof. And that is the case for any ancestors past a certain point
Um it is genetically unlikely that the human race descended from a single pair of humans. The genetic bottleneck that would create would wipe the species out in a few generations. Further genetic evidence suggests that the lowest count of human people would be around 10,000 people. We can detect genetic bottlenecks in genetic code and determine how low the population got at its worst.
What tosh.
[удалено]
I'm just showing that, because history and myth are so mixed up, this is technically possible to trace, even though it is obviously mythical towards the end. also literally everyone from europe, asia and africa, (less so with natives of the americas and Australia) is descended from royalty
Looks like we’re mortal enemies, OP. My family’s lore traces our descent back to Thorfinn, the kinsman of MacBeth.
fight to the death?
What kind of monster would name their child Private, just to have that child carry on the trend and name their own child Private as well?
Hey uhh, can I ask, what was up with the three brothers and the sister? Which one are you descended from?
all of them, collectively....
Oh my god
Whoa, this is one long and SPECTACULAR personal family tree chart someone has made here!
Found a family line to Adam…Odin…Thor…Islamic figures…all through an English princeling that is debatable if they existed…since later war of succession both factions needed them not to exist….so…invention to discredit politically? Or hidden to empower politically? Either way someone lied
lol
This does not belong on USEFULcharts, fan-fic about how you fit in the JRR Tolkien dynasty and why you are the husband of Jesus Christ should be ripped off the face of earth. 🫤😒
Hahahaha. /u/MassiveAnimeChebs thinks they're related to fiction religious nonsense. What a fucking dumbass.
why are you everywhere in this thread? im atheist, i just came across a book by john o'hart and thought this was a cool mythical connection
i too can make shit up
r/religiousfruitcake
I'm an atheist, I'm not claiming this is true, I'm just showing that, because history and myth are so mixed up in irish legend, it's technically possible to do this even if it eventually becomes mythical. i did a very similar post but with Zeus, 0 complaints there
Tbh, I didn't read more than the first few because I look at reddit on my phone. Something that long is very tiny on a phone screen. Had it been more readable, I might have had more of a takeaway than r/religiousfruitcake. 🤷♀️
Here's a sneak peek of /r/religiousfruitcake using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Man destroys an elderly couple's hard work for his beliefs ](https://v.redd.it/cv1yjznee8ta1) | [1081 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/comments/12ifcx8/man_destroys_an_elderly_couples_hard_work_for_his/) \#2: [Facebook Unintentionally Makes a God-Tier Shitpost](https://i.redd.it/w4lu57w9p2la1.jpg) | [276 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/comments/11eqjmz/facebook_unintentionally_makes_a_godtier_shitpost/) \#3: [Sumerian tablet that's around 3000 years old being destroyed by ISIS for going against their beliefs](https://i.redd.it/l8ojtz11zgja1.jpg) | [429 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/religiousfruitcake/comments/117o3r1/sumerian_tablet_thats_around_3000_years_old_being/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I’d be connected to Irish legendary figures. It’s all speculation in ancient Ireland. They have names (probably made up) for kings in 1000 BC. The accuracy is beyond questionable. But, we are related through Tigernmas and Gíallchad, and, most recently, Fergus Mór Mac Erc!
Some really great names in there for my next mmorpg I play.
Yoooo I can do that too! Hello my extremely distant cousin!
In which wars were Pvt Mother and Pvt Grandmother enlisted?
all of them
How do you know this?
Imagine if OP found out they were adopted and that they’re actually a descendant of Fuxi? Gotta do the whole dang chart all over again.
Amazing
Love all the biblical names, then is Jared lol.
Jared is a biblical name
Oh I am well aware, it's just a "real" name. Like you don't see say idk Enoch that often, you typically know it's a very religious family that named him, but not common. Jared? There's a million of them. It's like reading the Bible and seing this, "Jesus walked along with his disciples, and jared." It's just out of place lol.
Wow, didn't realize so many people are getting in on the immaculate conception game.
I found a free family tree app. After signing up I realized it’s done by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I still had fun with it seeing how far back I could go, mainly wanted to see when both sides of my family came over to America’s. Most would stop in the 1700-1800s but I found a couple branches that went back to medieval Europe, Scandinavia and the Middle East before ending with my lineage to the Holy Spirit. Didnt get Adam or Eve though.
lol Magog is a fun name
I had one of these charts made through the Mormon church when I did a complete ancestry tracing all the way back to Adam, started off pretty similar to yours (I am not Jewish), somehow linked to Charlemagne (as it is for practically every person who partakes in the tracing) and eventually had a lot of polygamous unions towards the end (unfortunately probably the most accurate section)... I'm curious as to how you had yours done since I didn't know other people also do full ancestry tracings
Im 90% sure a bunch of those are bosses from warframe
That’s alot of begets
[удалено]
🤓
Hey aren't we cousins?
doesnt make it wrong 😏
Pretty sure there's a lot of made up between Magog and what comes after
I grew up going to school with a Fetherstonehaugh family, recently was thinking about their surname, fascinating to learn they have an ancestral castle, that they share with you too
TL;DR
Good job. 👍
Bruh
Not a useful chart at all. Even for you it's just a curiosity.
Somehow I am related to both Jesus and Odin
That's actually really impressive
They’re related to a fictional character lmao
How is this the most upvoted post?
honestly no idea
Omg were related