Playing MY dynasty!

[unmerged(18023)]

Well thats kinda cool.

I suppose I can pretend Im descended from one of the peasants or burghers on the province view.

Even if I had a noble line to lay claim to(well my mother's family claim we are vaguely descended from some pe-norman irish princes, but thats true of most irish people) I doubt my great-grandfather the anarchist political refugee would approve of it.

 

[unmerged(28815)]

Well, I think I can beat all the above - my direct male ancestors were bandit leaders!!
...which is the noblest thing a christian could be in the turkish-occupied Balkans.

Of course, there were no records kept for christians in the Ottoman Empire (and especially not for bandits), so this is mostly family hearsay. o

 

[Sgt Bash]

I am in a bit of a dilemma which I will explain. I am a direct descendent of William the Conqueror through his son Henry I and then through Henry's bastard son, Robert de Caen. Needeless to say, I like you am keen to play 'my dynasty'.

The trick is that Henry was William's 10th and last child. In my game William is up to daughter Constance (real life child number 8) and now he is ill. If the game follows history, I still have Matilda and then Henry to get to before William dies. If he dies too soon, I will be playing my dynasty which will not include me and that is too weird to contemplate.

Anyway for those who are interested, the historical succession after William the Conqueror bypassed Robert and went to William (Rufus) and then to his brother (my guy), Henry I. You can see why Robert and Richard were bypassed in favour of William, by looking at their respective stats. Henry was the youngest and therefore had the best education of the bunch, which should give him superb stats, if he ever happens.

 

[VPeric]

I envy you guys. The furtherest I can trace my dynasty is some 200 years, when the first person who actually used my surname appeared. Here, people used to change surnames, so that makes things very, very, very difficult, if not impossible to find out your ancestors. On the other hand, it might also be connected to the fact that we were ruled by Turks for 500 years, so I doubt anybody from here can trace their lineage much further then me.

 

[unmerged(26165)]

Isn't this a cozy little thread we've developed here?
I guess I'm just a sucker for this kind of thing, but I have to admit this is my favorite CK thread so far. Reading your family histories (be they detailed or scant) is truly a pleasure. Thank you for sharing your stories with us all.

 

[Bismarck]

I started a little project to facilitate this little venture.... so that all of us with familial connections in the period can coordinate our efforts and create a much richer gaming experience.

here's the thread link:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=145306

M

 

[unmerged(27106)]

I was told my family history once, but I've forgotten most of it. I do remember that some of my ancestors were landsknechten, but I think I only remembered that fact because I thought the sword that they described was cool.

I could tell you about my great, great grandmother getting off the train at the wrong time (in Cincinatti, OH), and, not finding anyone who could speak German, just kept walking down the train tracks until she reached a part of southern Indiana where they did. The helpful Germans there was able to point her to Greensburg, IN, where mt g-g-granny's relatives owned a farm. I always liked that story.

 

[Garuda]

You know, the longer you go back, the more heirs a guy has, it is just a matter of generation. If each children has 2 children that effectively live up to breed(not counting priests or young dead), that can make up to 134,217,728 heirs after 27 generations, quite an approximation for 9 centuries.....

Of course, crossed marriages do reduce that amount, but having ancestors of that caliber is not really surprising

el_slapper,

I've been thinking about this for the last 24 hours. If you carry on this sum for 40 generations based on one child to 2 parents, to 4 grandparents etc etc to get back roughly 1,000 years we all end up with 549,755,813,888 or 549 billion great (x37) grandparents :wacko: . Obviously the logic must be wrong but I can't work out why.

But I think I now have the answer.... We're all living in the Matrix and the world is an illusion. History is nothing more than a neural implant. .

 

[Orm]

el_slapper,

I've been thinking about this for the last 24 hours. If you carry on this sum for 40 generations based on one child to 2 parents, to 4 grandparents etc etc to get back roughly 1,000 years we all end up with 549,755,813,888 or 549 billion great (x37) grandparents :wacko: . Obviously the logic must be wrong but I can't work out why.

Mathematically it's right, but the assumption made is that all of your ancestral lines are independant of each other, which in real life they never are.

 

[Frontenac]

Well, my own ancestors left Saintonge, in France, in 1668 and settled in Lachine which was more or less the limit of civilization when Montréal, less than 15 km away on the same island as still a fragile outpost. The family went into farming (and trade with he Hurons in winter time) and survived the infamous "Lachine Massacre" committed by the Iroquois in 1689.

Then, each generation of farmers sought land a bit further west. The family reached the small Perrot island (between the island of Montréal and the western shore) by the end of the 18th century and established itself in Vaudreuil, on the other side of the river, in the first years of the 19th century. A whopping 30 km migration in 150 years!

My father was born on the prosperous farm in Vaudreuil, where some of his brothers still own the land.

The history is bit more complicated on my mother's side, with a norman family settling in 1653 on Orléans Island (near Québec City) a franco-american grandfather, some unsupported claims of family links to Saint Louis (yup, the King of France who died while crusading in Tunis), a greatgreatgrandmother of Irish, then ultimately French ascent and also some austrian general who supposedly fought Napoleon at Waterloo (never found any proof of this either).

I almost married a Russian girl whose mother was very closely related to the famous Rachmaninov composer.

What dynasty do you think I should play?

 

[MacRobert]

Related to a Cuban hero, but that's alittle diffrent time frame.

 

[unmerged(2456)]

Mathematically it's right, but the assumption made is that all of your ancestral lines are independant of each other, which in real life they never are.

You're also assuming that every one of them married outside the family.

 

[Orm]

You're also assuming that every one of them married outside the family.

I think that's covered by the "your ancestral lines are independant of each other" bit.

 

[Conrad]

We're all quite inbred. But hey, considering all the possible ancestors we we all have royal blood somewhere in the family tree, logically.