GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2001-07 > 0994100047


From: "Allan S. Gleason" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Wells Surname DNA Project
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 11:54:07 -0700
References: <2449F3F867FBD211936600C04F68569EA3C392@smhrimsx.mhri.med.u mich.edu> <3.0.6.32.20010702090456.007a1b80@pop.nbnet.nb.ca>


Actually, in the case of the Stewarts vs Stuarts, I do know the answer - as I
said, the names are or at least were interchangeable. Siblings in the Royal
family used the different spellings by choice. Stuart is the Frenchified version
of the name and the one to use to put on airs.

My real questions was how come the name Stuart/Stewart still exists since all of
the Stewart/Stuart males died without male heirs? Theoretically, there can be no
more Stewart/Stuarts. The name really was single sourced in recorded history and
thus modern day Stewarts are either copycats or as I've mentioned twice before,
they were followers.

I actually knew a copycat Stewart who was a scientist working in our laboratory.
He was actually of Polish descent but was so enamored by the Scottish traditions
that he had his name legally changed to Stewart and wore the full regalia, kilts
and all to work. In the place of his dirk, he carried a slide rule! I'm not
making this up!

I asked the same question about genealogists ending up with royalty and it was
pointed out that it was the royalty who were the first to adopt surnames, keep
records and genealogies in order to establish rights of succession. The rest of
our ancestors were buried anonymously in the garden. In the case of my Stuarts,
I have not yet been able to find the parents of my gg grandmother who was born in
Castletown, Scotland, April 11, 1796. She married well, however, and when they
immigrated to the U.S. they bought a 1000 acre farm in south eastern Wisconsin.

In the case of our Gleason/Leeson DNA research I'm trying to prove that we
Gleasons may be Leesons but are NOT directly related to the Leesons of Sulgrave,
who had a manor next door to the Washingtons, ancestors of our George. The
problem here is that all of the literature, books, LDS, CD's claim that
relationship which allows our family genealogists to go up what I believe to be a
false trail for many generations more - up that royalty path you deplore. If I
am proven correct, the problem then becomes how does one retract that which is
universally accepted?
Allan Stuart Gleason




"Peter A. Kincaid" wrote:

> At 11:49 PM 7/1/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >At 01:59 AM 7/2/01 -0400, Bonner, Gregg wrote:
> >
> >>I would like to know how one knows there is a non-paternity event arising
> >in the 1500s.<<
> >
> >If records exist, sometimes this is revealed in the Parish records. I have
> >seen this.
>
> There are lots of references in Scottish records to them (ie. precepts
> of legitimation to x, bastard; of echeat of x, bastard). From my
> perspective,
> the things seemed to go in cycles like fashions. The early-mid 1500s were
> looser than the 1600s which were stricter than the 1700s (for that matter
> perhaps all time) which were looser than the Victorian 1800s, which carried
> forward a bit in the 1900s. And then there is now.
>
> Regarding the question of Stuart vesus Stewart; illegitimate children aside,
> the answer is quite obvious. We have Kincaid, Kinkead, Kincade, Kincaide,
> Kinkaid, Kinkade, etc. because of illiterate ancestors going by what was put
> in the records. Stewart is a common name so similar spelling changes
> occured.
> Some even probably took Stuart to differentiate themselves from the less well
> off local Stewarts. Finally, my biggest hurdle with this hobby is trying
> to steer
> around all the American genealogies made to have one descend from royalty.
> Given this point alone it is easy to see how we have so many Stuarts versus
> Stewarts.
>
> Best wishes!
>
> Peter A. Kincaid
> Fredericton, NB, Canada
>
> ==============================
> Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1
> Source for Family History Online. Go to:
> http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB

This thread: