The fun of adoption...

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

What is the source for your assertion that in 85% of NEPs[sic] the actual father is known?

Personal observation in having examined literally hundreds of parish records in both Scotland and Ireland.

I did not suggest that at all. Go back and read my post carefully. Perhaps earlier in the day.

Okay, here's what you wrote:

"The notion that only genetic connections are normative and worthy of genealogical research is no longer applicable."

That's what you wrote, and that's merely your opinion, one that seems to be pretty much out there all by itself. You immediately followed it with:

"In fact, it never was the case."

Again, this is mere opinion, and an extreme minority one at that. No matter what hour of the day one may choose to read it.

This last is just silly. There all sorts of descents that aren't genetically based. Perhaps the most famous in Western civilization is the caesars of Rome, who often adopted their chosen heir in order to ensure that he would indeed succeed them. There are many others, more germaine to our discussion.

You are right this is silly-- silly to confuse the continuation of a political office (succeeding as the ruler of the Roman empire) with the continuation of a blood related family.

But as Scotus and Todd have pointed out, this forum is about kilts, not genealogy although it may stray there from time to time. If you want to continue the debate (at whatever hour suits you) you can PM those of us you feel are interested.

As for me, unless there is some further question regarding adoption and the descent of armorial insignia, I think this topic has been well addressed and really have nothing further to say on the matter.

[gilmore]

...
"The notion that only genetic connections are normative and worthy of genealogical research is no longer applicable."

That's what you wrote, and that's merely your opinion, one that seems to be pretty much out there all by itself. ....

Not at all. See post number 20 above in this thread, in which facts are set out supporting the position I stated.

The rest of your post doesn't, IMHO, merit a response. It is quite possible to disagree without being disagreeable.