Best genealogy books according to redditors

We found 48 Reddit comments discussing the best genealogy books. We ranked the 23 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top Reddit comments about Genealogy:

u/Paul-ish · 8 pointsr/TrueReddit

There are stereotypical Jewish names such as Goldberg. My father actually owns a pair of books called the Unbroken Chain that catalogs the majority of Jewish families (including mine) between the 15th and 20th centuries. There really aren't a lot of Jewish lineages.

u/mayonesa · 7 pointsr/Republican

>can you please clarify your ideological position

Sure.

I'm a paleoconservative deep ecologist. This means I adhere to the oldest values of American conservatism and pair them with an interest in environmentalism through a more wholesome design of society.

I moderate /r/new_right because the new right ideas are closest to paleoconservatism in some ways. I tried to write a description of new_right that encompassed all of the ideas that the movement has tossed around.

Beyond that, I think politics is a matter of strategies and not collectivist moral decisions, am fond of libertarian-style free market strategies, and take interest in many things, hence the wide diversity of stuff that I post.

I've learned that on Reddit it's important to ask for people to clarify definitions before ever addressing any question using those terms. If you want me to answer any specific questions, we need a clear definition first agreed on by all parties.

I recommend the following books for anyone interesting in post-1970s conservatism beyond the neoconservative sphere:

u/CurlyHairedBoyo · 6 pointsr/fireemblem

This is from the Fire Emblem TREASURE artbook, exclusively released in Japan. Here's a link to those who can afford it

u/[deleted] · 6 pointsr/Military

ಠ_ಠ


Anyway, per UShistory.org:

  • Gold fringe can be found on ceremonial flags used indoors and for outdoor ceremonies. The fringe is considered completely within the guidelines of proper flag etiquette. There is nothing in the Flag Code about the fringe being for federal government flags only. The Internet contains many sites that claim that the fringe indicates martial law or that the Constitution does not apply in that area. These are entirely unfounded (usually citing Executive Order 10834 and inventing text that is not part of the order) and should be dismissed as urban legends. Others ascribe meanings of spiritual authority. Gold fringes on flags goes back long before the United States. Flags in ancient India had gold fringe, as did those in France, England, and throughout Europe.

    and per So Proudly We Hail: History of the United States Flag:

  • The placing of a fringe on Our Flag is optional with the person of organization, and no Act of Congress or Executive Order either prohibits the practice, according to the Institute of Hearaldry. Fringe is used on indoor flags only, as fringe on flags on outdoor flags would deteriorate rapidly. The fringe on a Flag is considered and 'honorable enrichment only', and its official use by the US Army dates from 1895.. A 1925 Attorney General's Opinion states: 'the fringe does not appear to be regarded as an integral part of the Flag, and its presence cannot be said to constitute an unauthorized addition to the design prescribed by statute. An external fringe is to be distinguished from letters, words, or emblematic designs printed or superimposed upon the body of the flag itself. Under law, such additions might be open to objection as unauthorized; but the same is not necessarily true of the fringe.

    Related:

  • Institute of Heraldry Flag Etiquette
  • Army Study Guide "Gold fringe is used on the National flag as an honorable enrichment only"



u/fdeckert · 5 pointsr/changemyview

>Race...Whites

First define "Race" science science says no such thing exists, and these are made-up, culturally-dependent, arbitrary and inconsistent classifications based on arbitrary and meaningless superficial characteristics

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/

http://physanth.org/about/position-statements/biological-aspects-race/



What is "White"?

"Hispanic" means someone who speaks Spanish, not a "race". The rest of your classifications are equally meaningless

Here is a chart of human skin tones, show me where "white" is:
https://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-vector-skin-tone-color-infographic-729953146.jpg

Here lets do some math:

You already know that everyone has two parents, and we get half of our genes from each parent.
So, basic math applies:

Lets just go back 10 generations -- that's 250 years. That means that there are about 1025 people between you and your ancestor of 250 years ago (2 to the power of 10).

That in turn means you only share 1/1025th or 0.092% of your genes with an ancestor of just 250 years ago, which in effect means you're about as related to him, as everyone else.

Read:

A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived
https://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Everyone-Ever-Lived/dp/1615194045/

u/twohoundogs · 5 pointsr/Genealogy

I've been doing genealogy research for over 30 years, to me this book will be about the best thing to have in your library.

Red Book

u/novalayne · 4 pointsr/femalefashionadvice

So I'm really into genealogy myself, so I just went through my very-long book wishlist and pulled out a couple that might be of interest.

  • Forensic Genealogy by Colleen Fitzpatrick and Andrew Yesier. Written by a Forensic Genealogist, it's supposed to go into a lot of novel techniques for analysis.

  • The Lost: The Search for Six of Six Million by Daniel Mendelsohn, it's all about this man's search for more information about his families history and their fate during WWII.

  • The Family Gene: A Mission to Turn My Deadly Inheritance into a Hopeful Future by Joselin Linder, this is a memoir about a woman who searches through her family history to understand the health issues in her family.

    Generally, you might want to look for books on history that was happening in the time and place that your ancestors were living. It's hard to give recommendations without knowing your family, but an example would be something like books on the irish potato famine or holomodor if your family lived through them.
u/Sintari · 4 pointsr/Genealogy

First of all, you need to look at the actual record. People who transcribe this information make errors sometimes, so the actual record may be different from the information listed here.

This record is great, but you will need to do some double checking. If you go and look at the original record, I would be pretty certain that the names, the marriage and the marriage date and place are correct, but there is - of course - always room for error.

What's on your side is that this information is a marriage record, so it was most likely provided by the people listed in the record themselves. Unless they had any reason to lie (and people sometimes did!) then it's most likely true to the best of their knowledge. People still sometimes get information wrong, so it's always best to verify. But this record is full of information and clues so have fun with it!

For more info, I suggest you check out the book Genealogical Proof Standard and read about building a solid case.

u/Sweeetydarling · 3 pointsr/blogsnark

I’m excited that I’ve already found gifts for my parents! Ancient Graffiti Lily Cup Rain Chain, Copper Plated https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BSNFU0S/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_0gCaAbR6VY1MP
For my mom and this: A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived: The Human Story Retold Through Our Genes https://www.amazon.com/dp/1615194045/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_IhCaAbCXRVDSY for my dad.

My husband is obsessed this these giant inflatable lounger chair air sofa couch AMAZING Beach & pool float Perfect for outdoor picnic camping eazy to inflate lazy bag hammock with carry bag orange by FUNJOYA https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0719DSM39/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_DiCaAb1HBJN6G so he’s getting one for our beach trip.

Kids are late teens so money money money. My son asked for a gym membership for the month he will be home from school. My daughter is going to France for spring break so she is getting a passport holder thingie as well.

u/abritinthebay · 3 pointsr/Genealogy

Best way is to pick a goal! I know that sounds silly but doing it helps.

The best way to start is to just concentrate on the direct line from you/the home person. That way you can just skip worrying about the 5th/6th cousins trees and just work solidly backwards. When you hit a brick wall go back to the start and start working in records that match your info and build up more detail.

Key is to actually make sure the records back up all your info - birth, death, who their parents were, marriage, etc.

Don't trust the other people's Trees on Ancestry!! Too many people just spam "add, add, add" and it's junk data. Only add trees that match with information you already know - then verify the data they add to your tree.

That way you'll have a great, and well researched tree.

I would STRONGLY recommend this book to help you get on the right track of what genealogical "proof" actually is.

u/moreLytes · 3 pointsr/DebateReligion

At the outset, please note that this topic is exceedingly slippery. I am convinced that the most efficient way to understand these issues is through the study of philosophy of ethics.

> Where do atheists get their [sense of] morality?

Nature, nurture, and the phenomenological self-model.

> What defines the "good" and "bad" that has
permeated much of human society?

Easy: notice that personal definitions of morality between individuals immersed in the same culture tend to strongly overlap (e.g., most moderns consider rape to be "bad").

From this considerable volume of data, it is fairly simple to construct principles that adequately generalize these working definitions, such as "promote happiness", and "mitigate pain".

> [If you're not caught, why not murder? Why donate to charity? Does might make right?]

These questions appear to have both practical and intuitive solutions.

What are you trying to understand?

> How do atheists tend to reconcile moral relativism?

What do you mean?

> Barring the above deconstructions, how do atheists account for morality?

Moral theories largely attempt to bridge the gap between descriptive facts and normative commands:

  • Kant argued that norms are not discovered via our senses, but are simply axiomatic principles.
  • Rawls argued that norms are the product of a hypothetical agreement in which all ideally rational humans would affirm certain values (Social Contract) if they didn't know their fate in advance (Veil Of Ignorance).
  • Mill argued that norms are best expressed through the need to increase pleasure and decrease pain.
  • Parfit argued that these three approaches don't really contradict one another.
  • Nietzsche argued that norms and artistic tastes are the same.
  • Mackie argued that norms are human inventions that include social welfare considerations.

u/Nom-de-Clavier · 3 pointsr/Genealogy

Henry VIII most likely has no living descendants, unless you accept the theory that Henry VIII was the father of Mary Boleyn's son Henry Carey.

Assuming you're American, there are genealogical reference works that have lists of the 17th and 18th century American colonists and later immigrants who have traceable and reasonably well-documented royal ancestry: The Royal Descent of 900 Immigrants to the American Colonies, Quebec, or the United States by Gary Boyd Roberts, and Plantagenet Ancestry by Douglas Richardson; these are both reasonably reliable secondary sources. If one of your colonial or later immigrant ancestors is not included then your presumed royal line is probably bogus.

u/my_interests · 3 pointsr/Genealogy

I try to stay neutral about most people I'm researching.

As /u/nosleeptilwhiterun said in a different thread:
> I always say if you are going to be "proud" of your ancestors accomplishments, I hope you then feel shame for their misdeeds. I feel neither.

I agree with that.

Some people I'll find more interesting than others - because they're more active (newspapers) or because you can see them accomplishing or overcoming things in their lives or helping to change/improve their towns or cities where they live. I'm not sure I'd call that pride per se, but more like you're happy to watch them improve.

Quick example, a woman I was researching was the first woman elected to the town's board of education in 1889. She was a suffragette, very involved in local affairs and beat her opponent with nearly double the vote. Good for her.

***
I added this in the other thread, but I think it fits here too.

In The Researcher's Guide to American Genealogy by Val Greenwood, he writes:

> "If you are scared of skeletons then stay out of closets. And if you are ashamed of ancestors who do not meet your own social standards then stay away from genealogy." (pg 12) ...

> "Regardless of what you find, your first responsibility is to the truth." (pg. 12)

u/GermanGenealogist · 3 pointsr/Genealogy

I just stumbled over these two sources:

u/scdozer435 · 3 pointsr/askphilosophy

I wouldn't worry too much right now about knowing everything perfectly; you're still finding your foundations and areas of interests. Sophie's World is sorta where I started too, and I'd recommend maybe going back and seeing if there are any philosophers that you found particularly interesting. That would be one way to start.

If you want to go deeper into general philosophy, Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy is like a much (much much much) denser and more intense version of Sophie's World. If you're not sure where to go next, this will give you a much more in-depth view of even more philosophers (although he skips Kierkegaard, which is my main gripe with the book, but oh well, still would recommend it). One thing I personally loves about this book though was how he connected philosophy to history, art, science, poetry, and so many other fields. It's really made me want to switch my major to...Everything! Philosophy's still at my core, but this book really got me interested in other fields as well.

To go further in recommendation, Plato's dialogues are generally considered to be pretty important to a foundation of philosophical understanding. The Apology is a pretty easy one; it's less of a philosophical text in the traditional sense and more a sort of kick-off for the field, where Socrates explains why philosophy is important, and why he pursues it. The Republic is also pretty important for understanding Plato's political ideas. All his dialogues, though, are generally pretty good reading, and I'd recommend reading some.

To go past that, Aristotle's often a good read, primarily his Nichomachean Ethics is a pretty good introduction to his philosophy, much of which is a response to Plato.

To move onto modern philosophy, it tends to get a bit more technical and tricky, but a great and very easy-to-read modern philosopher is Descartes. I'd recommend Meditations on First Philosophy and Discourse on Method in Discerning Truth in the Sciences as good introductions to modern philosophy, which tends to focus on slightly more technical forms of logic, rather than conclusions drawn from more vague observations.

(NOTE: found a book that combines both the Descartes writing mentions into one here).

Another important thinker who might not be hard to understand but who will definitely shake you is Nietzsche. This documentary is a pretty good introduction to him, but if you want more, I'd recommend this collection as a good overview of his philosophy. His works are quick reads, but they will stick with you, and I consider him to be one of the most important thinkers to understand the modern age.

Eventually though, you'll need to start taking on more challenging texts. Hopefully though, you'll be well informed enough by that time to have found a niche that you personally are interested in, which will make it much more interesting and fun! Never hesitate to come here with questions. Good luck!

u/amazon-converter-bot · 2 pointsr/FreeEBOOKS

Here are all the local Amazon links I could find:


amazon.co.uk

amazon.ca

amazon.com.au

amazon.in

amazon.de

amazon.it

amazon.es

amazon.com.br

amazon.nl

amazon.co.jp

amazon.fr

Beep bloop. I'm a bot to convert Amazon ebook links to local Amazon sites.
I currently look here: amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.ca, amazon.com.au, amazon.in, amazon.com.mx, amazon.de, amazon.it, amazon.es, amazon.com.br, amazon.nl, amazon.co.jp, amazon.fr, if you would like your local version of Amazon adding please contact my creator.

u/gvillager · 2 pointsr/Genealogy
u/perane · 2 pointsr/Genealogy

If you're looking for a book for kids to start filling in and learning about their family tree then 'This is Me and This is My Family Tree' by Nicky May is a really good one to go for.

You can find it on Amazon and it has great reviews: http://www.amazon.co.uk/this-family-tree-Multi-activity-Ragged/dp/1857143914/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1416822003&sr=8-1&keywords=this+is+me+and+this+is+my+family+tree

There's also 'My Family Tree Book' by Catherine Bruzzone, available here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Family-Tree-Book-First-Record/dp/1905710151/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1418136160&sr=8-1&keywords=kids+family+tree

I featured the top one on our blog post 'A Genealogy Book For Every Research Problem' if you want to see other useful genealogy books too :) http://blog.perane.co.uk/a-genealogy-book-for-every-research-problem

u/Polysomnia · 2 pointsr/booksuggestions
u/myohmymiketyson · 2 pointsr/Genealogy

I would get these two:

The Family Tree Guide to DNA Testing and Genetic Genealogy

And the workbook by the same author, which can give you some hands-on practice for how to use genetic genealogy.

u/Lillipout · 2 pointsr/pics

Go to your local library. They will have a lot of how-to books and online access to genealogy sites (like Ancestry). Some libraries even offer free classes.

Personally, I started with this book years ago, which is arguably the best text book ever written on the subject: The Researcher's Guide to American Genealogy. Your local library probably has a copy.

Reddit also has a /r/genealogy sub with lots of people willing to help.

u/chewingofthecud · 2 pointsr/CapitalismVSocialism

A conservative/reactionary reading list:

Jean Bodin - Six Books of the Commonwealth (1576)

Robert Filmer - Patriarcha, or The Natural Power of Kings (1680)

Edmund Burke - Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790)

Joseph de Maistre - Considerations on France (1797) and Essay on the Generative Principle of Political Constitutions and other Human Institutions (1809)

Thomas Carlyle - The French Revolution: A History (1837) and On Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History (1841)

Friedrich Nietzsche - Beyond Good and Evil (1886) and Genealogy of Morals (1887)

Oswald Spengler - Decline of the West (1918)

Ernst Jünger - Storm of Steel (1920)

Jose Ortega y Gassett - Revolt of the Masses (1929)

Julius Evola - Revolt Against the Modern World (1934) and Men Among the Ruins (1953)

Bertrand de Jouvenal - On Power: The Natural History of Its Growth (1949)

Leo Strauss - Natural Right and History (1953)

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn - The Menace of the Herd (1943) and Liberty or Equality (1952)

u/asthepenguinflies · 1 pointr/atheism

>You espouse nothing but poor reasoning

You can't espouse poor reasoning. You can however espouse an idea supported by poor reasoning. Assuming this is what you meant, I still haven't done it. You have no examples for how my arguments rely on poor reasoning, you just keep insisting that they do. This is due to your own reliance on specious reasoning.

>You're an apologist. You've chosen that position and it's an ugly one.

Sigh.... You know what an apologist is right? Lets use the term in a sentence... "The christian apologists tried to defend their beliefs using reason, thinking that belief in god could be found through logic." Hmm... Maybe a definition would still be useful.

Ya... I'm not an apologist. I'm not arguing in defense of a belief. I'm arguing against a belief in moral realism. You, my friend, function as the apologist in this debate. Please stop using words without knowing how to use them.

>My morals are quite measured and I do not follow them blindly, with faith. I quoted this because this is all you do. You make stupid and baseless attacks because you have no defense.

Watch this: "My belief in God is quite measured and I do not follow him blindly, with faith." Just because you use reason to justify things after the fact does not make the original assumption true, or any less "faithful."

You seem to have a complete lack of knowledge when it comes to moral theory and what is possible through moral theory. Sam Harris, while an interesting individual, and right about many things, is fundamentally wrong when it comes to what science can do with regard to morals. Not in the sense that his moral system is untenable, but rather in the sense that you can't get his moral system strictly through scientific study—which he claims we can. Assumptions must be made before you can even begin the study of well-being and suffering, and even more must be made in order to say that you should promote one and avoid the other.

A person's insistence on the existence of universal objective morals is best termed as a FAITH. There is no evidence of universal objective morals, and they are fundamentally unscientific entities in the same sense God is—even if we wanted to, we could never find evidence of them. At best they are commonly assumed entities—like God is for most people.

And I repeat, because you seem to think I am some sort of moral heathen, THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT MORALS ARE USELESS OR THAT WE SHOULD LET PEOPLE DO WHATEVER THEY WANT BECAUSE THERE ARE NO OBJECTIVE MORALS. Your feelings about me being somehow deficient are the same feelings a religious fundamentalist would have toward both of us due to our lack of belief.

That you think a bit of pop-science is somehow "important" for me to read is laughable. If what you know of morals comes from that book, I feel sorry for you. I understand that many atheists will praise anything that comes from the "canon" writers on atheism like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, however, being a fan of someone does not make all of their work good, or even relevant. At best, Sam Harris is simply endorsing the naturalistic fallacy. At worst, he's willfully ignorant of what the naturalistic fallacy is, and simply wishes to push his view as a "counterpoint" to religious morality.

Since you so kindly left me a link to a book, allow me to do the same, by linking you to the most important books in moral theory for you to read, some of which argue directly against me, but at this point the idea is to get you educated, not to get you to agree with me:

Alisdair MacIntyre — After Virtue

Nietzsche — Beyond Good and Evil

Nietzsche — The Genealogy of Morals

Kant — Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals

Aristotle — Nicomachean Ethics

G.E. Moore — Principia Ethica

I've done my best to find the best editions of these books available (I myself usually default to the Cambridge editions of works in the history of philosophy). You may also want to check out some Peter Singer, along with Bentham and Mill, if only to know what it means to be a utilitarian. After that, read John Rawls, because he'll tell you one reason why utilitarianism is so controversial in ethical theory.

I hope to hear back from you about the results of your studies. I figure you can easily find pdfs of these books (though perhaps not the same editions I linked) somewhere online. Given about a month or two to read them all (I'm not sure how much free time you have... maybe more like three months) you should be up to speed. Hopefully I'll hear back from you after the new year. At that point, I don't expect you to agree with my view on ethics, but I at least expect you will understand it, and be able to argue your own position somewhat more effectively than you are at the moment. If nothing else, think of this as a way to learn how to "stick it" to people like me.

Maybe by then you'll have gotten beyond the whole "I'm taking my ball and going home" disposition you seem to have when confronted with someone who's better than you at debating ethics. I can only hope.

If you take ethics seriously at all, do this for yourself: study the shit out of ethical theory.

u/yacksterqw · 1 pointr/AncestryDNA

Oh I see, so you're qualified to judge whether a bunch of scientists are accurate o r not huh

And thank you for the link to SNPs but I'm well aware of them, the idea that they can be used to determine your "ethnic heritage" or "ancestry" (race, lets face it) is nonsense.

But how are YOU qualified to judge what SNPs have to do with the claims of these companies, telling you that you're 48 percent Viking and 23 percent Italian or whatever?


DO you realize how irrational you sound
No, seriously, lets put the substance of the debate aside and look objectively at your position: scientists are wrong, you are right, because you know better, Just answer me one question: would you consider that a rational response, regardless of the subject matter, in any sort of debate?

I'm curious to know how your mind works

Here's an interesting book for you

A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived: The Human Story Retold Through Our Genes

https://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Everyone-Ever-Lived/dp/1615194045/

u/essari · 1 pointr/Genealogy

Fantastic website update--you're definitely moving in the right direction.

Some other off the cuff suggestions I have:

be even more transparent about the resources you have access to, or essentially, what makes you unique? From how you present yourself, it sounds like the bulk of your available research is on Ancestry or Familysearch (which is fine!). If so, why should a client choose you rather than just doing it herself? (This would be a good time to emphasize that history degree).

Have you given thought to how you will provide clients with citations/images of documents? If you're using online sources, you will need to consider their TOS.

For repository lists, also consider area colleges/universities, historical societies, genealogy societies, and even public libraries.

And while you're waiting for clients, purchase or ILL this book, as it is a helpful resource to understanding how a professional genealogist operates.

u/HoorayInternetDrama · -13 pointsr/ShitAmericansSay

> Okay, but how much Irish?

Sorry to rain on your parade here, but you can test yourself. I had my DNA analysed by 23andme for funsies and this is my genetic makeup.

There's a book on this subject called "Blood of the Isles" which talks about how a professor make a genetic map of the British isles.