I Joined my clan society

[Mike1]

YThe first step in tracing your family's history is going to the oldest people in your family and asking them what they remember about their parents, grandparents, and other ancestors. Then one goes to the public records to verify and flesh out these stories, ALWAYS working backward one generation at a time, without skipping any.

And your evidence he did not follow this exact procedure is...?

Quit being so argumentative with those trying to learn their own family's history. Every time one of these posts shows up, you're pishing all over it and it has become more than tiresome.

[Monkey@Arms]

And your evidence he did not follow this exact procedure is...?

Quit being so argumentative with those trying to learn their own family's history. Every time one of these posts shows up, you're pishing all over it and it has become more than tiresome.

I find Gilmore's posts on these forums to be cogent and well reasoned. There's a lot of myth out there that passes for history, which isn't to say that I don't enjoy the myth sometimes.

I just joined a clan society that lists my wife's family as a sept. Now my wife's family's name is a Gaelic trade name, and thanks to posts by Gilmore, and articles by Matt, and others I do so fully realizing that its unlikely that her ancestors were members of that clan. That doesn't matter to me all that much. As has been pointed out in the past, the clan system is in fact no more, and all the rest of this is something else.

Joining the clan society gives my family a place to hang their hat at the games, and a sense of belonging, and that's well worth the price of the dues. But a shared last name does not an ancestor make.

Best regards,

Jake

[gilmore]

And your evidence he did not follow this exact procedure is...?

Quit being so argumentative with those trying to learn their own family's history. Every time one of these posts shows up, you're pishing all over it and it has become more than tiresome.

I have no idea what procedures the poster followed.

I don't see how pointing out a few well-accepted facts is being argumentative.

It is a fact that many lists of clan septs are wildly inaccurate. It is a fact that tartan merchants use these lists to sell merchandise.

My problem is with the statement "if you are interested in your family history I would say the first step to a larger world would be to join your clan society," which is quite unrealistic. The standard and accepted practice of genealogical research is starting with one's immediate family and working backward, generation by generation. Trying to take short cuts almost always leads to trouble at some point in the future. (The one exception is the possibility of DNA testing's being helpful.)

Nor do I have problems with people joining clan societies. I once joined one myself. But face it, they are simply organizations for people who happen to bear the same surname, through accidents of birth and history.

I don't have problems with people making claims to their friends and others about their clans, their ancestry, their relatives, their right to wear certain tartans, etc, if it makes them feel good.

My problem is with these claims and methodologies being taken seriously, passed on to those of us doing serious genealogical work, and wasting our time.

If I wanted to be argumentative and puncture a few Brigadoonish fantasies, I would insist that the vast majority of Scots were Lowlanders descended from Anglo-Saxon-Jute Northumbrians who never spoke a word of Gaelic, were never part of the clan system, whose surnames were never associated with a clan, and looked down on the Highland clans as uncouth barbarians. But I wont.

[Mike1]

My problem is with the statement "if you are interested in your family history I would say the first step to a larger world would be to join your clan society," which is quite unrealistic. The standard and accepted practice of genealogical research is starting with one's immediate family and working backward, generation by generation. Trying to take short cuts almost always leads to trouble at some point in the future. (The one exception is the possibility of DNA testing's being helpful.)

And you know if McMurdo has, in fact, started with his immediate family and worked backward, generation by generation, to discover his connection to the Grahams is quite real, then his statement would make a lot of sense. If the Clan Graham Society is, indeed, 'his clan society', then he has just uncovered an exciting new way to learn about his family.

Nor do I have problems with people joining clan societies. I once joined one myself. But face it, they are simply organizations for people who happen to bear the same surname, through accidents of birth and history.

No doubt joined on a drunken dare, eh?

For someone who is so insistent on careful research and study, you are certainly quick to group all clan societies under one umbrella. Although I would agree that most people are accidents of birth, although there will be those that were carefully planned out and conceived at just the precise moment specified.

My problem is with these claims and methodologies being taken seriously, passed on to those of us doing serious genealogical work, and wasting our time.

Ahhhh, so now I understand. You are a Graham descendant, yourself. And rather than asking how McMurdo came to his genealogical conclusions, you're just assuming he is wasting your time. Now I understand your motive. you're bound to lose years of research by taking the time to prove or disprove McMurdo's genealogy, aren't you?

If I wanted to be argumentative and puncture a few Brigadoonish fantasies, I would insist that the vast majority of Scots were Lowlanders descended from Anglo-Saxon-Jute Northumbrians who never spoke a word of Gaelic, were never part of the clan system, whose surnames were never associated with a clan, and looked down on the Highland clans as uncouth barbarians. But I wont.

That would not be argumentative, that would be historically accurate.

Spouting off about McMurdo's comments without having any proof or evidence of how extensively he has examined his own lineage? Now that was being argumentative. And you are finished being argumentative, aren't you? Begging your pardon, I just realized I phrased that as a question. Let me try again. You are finished being argumentative.

[gilmore]

And you know if McMurdo has, in fact, started with his immediate family and worked backward, generation by generation, to discover his connection to the Grahams is quite real, then his statement would make a lot of sense. If the Clan Graham Society is, indeed, 'his clan society', then he has just uncovered an exciting new way to learn about his family....

No doubt joined on a drunken dare, eh?

For someone who is so insistent on careful research and study, you are certainly quick to group all clan societies under one umbrella. Although I would agree that most people are accidents of birth, although there will be those that were carefully planned out and conceived at just the precise moment specified.

Ahhhh, so now I understand. You are a Graham descendant, yourself. And rather than asking how McMurdo came to his genealogical conclusions, you're just assuming he is wasting your time. Now I understand your motive. you're bound to lose years of research by taking the time to prove or disprove McMurdo's genealogy, aren't you?

That would not be argumentative, that would be historically accurate.

Spouting off about McMurdo's comments without having any proof or evidence of how extensively he has examined his own lineage? Now that was being argumentative. And you are finished being argumentative, aren't you? Begging your pardon, I just realized I phrased that as a question. Let me try again. You are finished being argumentative.

I didn't join the clan society in question on a drunken dare. I joined it through relying on unsound, ficticious information that a relative was fond of proclaiming as truth.

I am not concerned with McMurdo wasting my time. In fact I am happy for him. I am, however, greatly concerned generally with those who pass on unsound methodology and the information gained through it as if it were reliable. You see, the pool of genealogical information is relied upon by many researchers. If it is polluted, bad info is passed on and on, and it takes longer and longer to clear up. I feel that those of us who do genealogy have a responsibility to other researchers and to our families to exercise prudence and use the best methodologies we can.

My point is simply as you quoted it above: "My problem is with the statement "if you are interested in your family history I would say the first step to a larger world would be to join your clan society," which is quite unrealistic. The standard and accepted practice of genealogical research is starting with one's immediate family and working backward, generation by generation. Trying to take short cuts almost always leads to trouble at some point in the future. (The one exception is the possibility of DNA testing's being helpful.)"

[McMurdo]

My point is simply as you quoted it above: "My problem is with the statement "if you are interested in your family history I would say the first step to a larger world would be to join your clan society,"

Gilmore, Please read this again You are saying you have a problem with my opinion, read it again, I said "I would say" meaning it is my opinion, last time I checked I was still allowed my own opinion, now stop beating a dead horse, we all know how you feel.

I did not intend this post to be a pi$$ing contest, I was just very excited about joining up with my Clan society, and yes have no fear I have gone back through the people in my family and have joined the correct Clan Society. There have also been other members of my family who have done quite a bit of research on our history, I think every family has at least one my family has a few. I will send in my information to the society and see what they come up with.

[Monkey@Arms]

Spouting off about McMurdo's comments without having any proof or evidence of how extensively he has examined his own lineage? Now that was being argumentative. And you are finished being argumentative, aren't you? Begging your pardon, I just realized I phrased that as a question. Let me try again. You are finished being argumentative.

Actually, Gilmore didn't say anything about McMurdo's research or clan affiliation. He only gave an informed opinion about the advice in the first post about what a good "first step" about learning about your greater family would be.

And you are finished being argumentative, aren't you? Begging your pardon, I just realized I phrased that as a question. Let me try again. You are finished being argumentative.

Does that mean you're done brow-beating contributing members of this forum whose views differ from your own?

Best regards,

Jake

[Mike1]

Does that mean you're done brow-beating contributing members of this forum whose views differ from your own?

Jake, let me ask - do you have a dog in this hunt?

I chuckle at how some of you for stand back and allow 'well-reasoned' statements to be made that make a mockery of others, yet when someone points that out, they are brow-beating.

Call it what you like, gilmore's (entirely predictable) comments to McMurdo's original post were completely unnecessary. He jumped to a conclusion about McMurdo's research or lack thereof. (Rather interesting that he can make that leap, all the while chastising people for their presumed lack of research.)

If, by pointing that out, I am brow-beating, then my answer to you is "no, I am not finished". And if that response doesn't meet your expectations, just try to learn to live with it anyway, OK?

[Bryan]

I chuckle at how some of you for stand back and allow 'well-reasoned' statements to be made that make a mockery of others..

Call it what you like, gilmore's (entirely predictable) comments to McMurdo's original post were completely unnecessary. He jumped to a conclusion about McMurdo's research or lack thereof. (Rather interesting that he can make that leap, all the while chastising people for their presumed lack of research.)

Actually, Gilmore's original comment did no such thing. He never once questioned McMurdo's research nor did he mock him for joining his clan society. And if you don't believe me, read it again:

"There is much misinformation in many of the lists of septs and families that are claimed to be associated with the various clans. These bogus lists are perpetrated by tartan merchants who want to sell as much of their product to as many people as possible, and by clan associations who want to attract as many members as possible. Some common names appear on several of these lists.

The first step in tracing your family's history is going to the oldest people in your family and asking them what they remember about their parents, grandparents, and other ancestors. Then one goes to the public records to verify and flesh out these stories, ALWAYS working backward one generation at a time, without skipping any."

Now you tell me where he mocked him or questioned his research. Mike1, if you find it offensive to offer a bit of truth or a differing opinion than your own, then that's your problem. I was given the same info by some prominent members of this great group of guys (and girls) when trying to determine whether my family had any connection to a clan and no one got all up-in-arms then.

McMurdo, congrats on joining your clan's society!

[sirdaniel1975]

Actually most clan societies today are suggesting to their members to take part in the Scottish DNA Genealogy project. It pinpoints to the actual area of a country your DNA comes from. They wish to weed out all the non-clan descendants.

By the way... it is wee bit $$ for most.