Adam Stewart - Monumental Inscription in St. Magnus Cathedral, Kirkwall / Adam Stewart Coat-of-Arms

Mikko,

See the previous discussion:

https://www.geni.com/discussions/166899

There appears to be enough doubt about the connection to keep it from being enshrined as an established fact.

Yeah, Neil thinks the CoA is a rampant lion. So he believes what has been written, which is a grave mistake. Justin, what do YOU think about the CoA?

Adam Stewart has not been disconnected from his father, James V. The coat of arms on his monument is therefore not the issue.

Since you were in on the discussion concerning Marie last year, which Justin linked to, you know, Mikko, the issues regarding her parentage. There was extensive discussion about it; to say that there was no particular reason to detach her is disingenuous, given that you knew the discussion very well.

It is obvious from the surviving evidence that Marie was connected to the royal Stewart family. The coat of arms may or may not be part of that evidence; certainly they look the same, and I'm fine with saying they're the same, but even should we accept that, what it would show is a connection to the line. It doesn't show exactly who anybody's parents were. But we don't need the coat of arms to connect her to the family.

The documentation makes it clear that she is related to Robert Stewart. The terms "brother's daughter" and "cousin" are both used, for the same woman. The issue is that both of those terms are ambiguous.

so yes. She is connected.

But we haven't seen solid evidence yet as to what the connection is, exactly.

Quoting from the other discussion for clarity. Neil wrote:

"A flat tombstone belonging to Adam Stewart is preserved in St. Magnus Cathedral in Kirkwall, Orkney. The inscription, with others, was the subject of a report published by the Society of Antiquaries in 1919 http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload?t=arc... A brief description follows:

"A coat of arms, which has the appearance of being identical to the arms of the King of Scots, i.e. a lion rampant within a tressure flory and counterflory, is carved upon a monumental preserved in St. Magnus Catherdral. At the top and sides of the shield the letters L A S are inscribed (which may be an abbreviation for Lord Adam Stewart) and round the margin of the slab runs the following inscription: "adamus . steuardus . filius . illustrisimi . principis . Jacobi . quinti . scotorum . regis . qui . obit . vicesimo . die . junii . anno . domini . iii . v . lxxv" A second incomplete inscription along one edge reads: "domina . de . halcro . filia . ejusdem . fieri . fecit . hoc . sepelchrum . et ………."

"From this inscription, it would appear that Lord Adam Stewart was a son of James V, King of Scots, and that he died in 1575. He had a daughter who married Halcro of that Ilk. She raised this monument to her father’s memory."

This is all I know about the coat of arms. Someone thinks it's the same coat of arms. The inscription says Robert was the illegitimate son of James V, so the coat of arms would normally be at at least similar to the king's.

But Robert's paternity is not the question here. The question is Marie's relationship to Robert.

The coat of arms isn't something that calls for an opinion.

Why don't you just put in a locked fully explain emergency solution; X-Stewart, as a father, and a N.N. as mother, then set up this created X-Stewart as a son of James V, King of Scots ,
then at least the grandfathers lines upwards should be correct to Mary Stewart the brother's daughter of Robert Stewart, feuar of Orkney and Shetland (afterwards Earl of Orkney and Lord of Shetland, Robert Stewart, 1st Earl of Orkney , or am I missing something?

https://www.geni.com/projects/Workshop-Using-the-Genealogical-Proof...

https://www.familysearch.org/blog/en/genealogicalproofstandardpart1...

Before an "emergency solutions" is started we should read about the project "Using the Genealogical Proof Standard".
And also read the discussion about Marie. Marie does not meet the GPS and there is not any proof of Marie beeing a daughter of Adam.
Marie Stewart might as well be daughter of Lord Blantyre (Stewart) "brother in arms" of Robert Stewart, earl of Orkney.

Coats of arms similarities are no proof. And I also think that Adam Stewart and the Folkunga family are two different stories.

However - Mikko, please check your relationship with Barbro Halcro.

Private User that would work if we were sure that Marie was a granddaughter of James. But we don’t know that she was. We know that she was connected to the Stewarts somehow. But so far the line isn’t clear enough to establish, even with N.N. connections.

There had been a discussion with Mikko about Marie Stewart before during August 2017. Unfortunately it was not documented in “discussions” – it was documented in “messages”.

John Sinclair of Toab

Mary Stewart

John Sinclair of Toab, husband of Marie Stewart, lived in 1608 and in the testament of his father Magnus Sinclair all siblings are mentioned.

Magnus Sinclair of Skaill

"Magnus Sinclair died at Brabister in March 1608. His testament dative and the invemtory of his goods and gear was given up by his son John Sinclair, for himself and in name and behalf of his younger siblings, viz: Henry Sinclair, Janet Sinclair, Marion Sinclair, and Elspeth Sinclair. [National Records of Scotland, Orkney and Shetland Testaments, Testament Dative of Magnus Sinclair in Brabister, reference CC17/2/1, page 49] ."

Janet Ruthven

When Janet Ruthven, wife of Adam Stewart died in 1606 only the daughter Elspeth was mentioned in the testament. I guess that Barbara Halcro and other possible children must have been dead.
“Janet Ruthven died intestate on 20 January 1606. Her testament dative and the inventory of her goods and gear was given up by her daughter Elspeth Stewart. At the time of her death Jonet and her daughter Elspeth appear to have been indwellers in Perth. No other children are mentioned. [National Records of Scotland, Commissary Records of Edinburgh, Testament Dative of Jonet Ruthwen, relict of Adame Stewart prior of Charterhous, reference CC8/8/41 folios 333-34]”

Mary Stewart

David King of Warbuster

David King, husband of Marie Stewart, who died after 1622 (?) had a son Lieutenant General James King who was born in 1589. His life is rather well documented.

Lt. Gen. James King, Lord Eythin

“The Scots Peerage” unfortunately – without any proof – told the story about David King who was married with Marie Stewart, daughter of Adam Stewart and – I guess - after she had been married with John Sinclair.

What is the conclusion? Was General James King an illegitimate child? John Sinclair lived in 1608 while his wife Marie Stewart had a child with David King in 1589?
There ought to be two different Marie Stewarts in order to make sense and be consistent.

I want to increase the confusion and include some of the original copies of documents where Marie Stewart is mentioned as wife of John Sinclair and David King. She is both brother’s daughter and Robert Stewart’s cousin.

• “Instrument of Resignation and Sasine under the hand of William Fermoir, notary public, 17 May 1580, narrating that Magnus Sinclair in Skaill, within the close of the Yairdis in the town of Kirkwall, for fulfilling of the Contract of Marriage between Johne Sinclair, his eldest son and Marie Stweartt, brother's daughter to Lord Robertt Stewartt feaur of Orknay and Zetland, resigned to said lord, as superior, all his heritable lands as well conquest as pertaining to him of old heritage, either in Orknay or Zetland”

• “Gift, Robert Stewart, Earl of Orkney, to his cousin, Marie Stewart, of lands in St. Andrews and Deerness escheated from Magnus Sinclair of Tohop. Kirkwall August 21st, 1584.
Be it kend till all men be this present vrett, us Robert Erle off Orknay…to have frelic gevin and grantit, and be the tennour heiroff frelie gevis and grantis, for the luiff and favour we bair towaardis our cusinges Marie Stewart, all and haill the fyve penny land……,,,,and aganis Magnus Sinclair, father to John Sinclair, spous to our said cusingnes Marie Stewart…..”

https://archive.org/stream/publicationsofsc27scot#page/304/mode/1up

• “Discharge by David King and Marie Stewart, his spouse, in favour of Wm. Sinclair, son of said Marie, of 10 meills malt and £3:6:8d in respect of assignation thereof to Jas. Baikie, merchant in Kirkwall. 28 May 1618”

"The Saint Clairs of the Isles" by Roland William Saint-Clair written 1898 .
In this book on page 317 about "Nobles in Sweden and Alcace" is written:
John Sinclair, Master of Seba and Brobster, who married Marie, daughter of
the Lord B.. . .ng. . . . [Blantyre]

Addition to above: Assume that there is only one Marie Stewart married with John Sinclair and after his dead after 1608 with David King ("Discharge by David King and Marie Stewart, his spouse, in favour of Wm. Sinclair, son of said Marie") then the trees of King and Sinclair in geni are not right. General James King would not be daughter of Marie Stewart and King. King must have had a marriage before.
But we still do not know the parents of Marie Stewart. Some more digging in the testaments is required.

Anne, Justin, Neil, Mikko

After another study of the discussions and the messages I came to the following conclusions:

Mary Stewart

Mary Stewart

The two profiles are identical and Neil had found the evidence.

“Obligation by Mr Wm. Sinclair of Tullope narrating that whereas James Bishop of Glasgow and afterward Bishop of Orkney did by Charter of Feufarm dated (blank) sett to him and Jeane Gordoun, his spouse, the lands of Cowbister and Smowgrow in parish of Orphir, without reservation of liferent of either of the said two roumes to Marie Stewart, mother of said Wm., nevertheless he obliges himself to submit to arbitration with his mother and David King of Worbister, her spouse, anent what right, title or security he should give to them of the said lands. 18.10.1615 Edinburg”

http://catalogue.nrscotland.gov.uk/nrsonlinecatalogue/details.aspx?...

“Discharge by David King and Marie Stewart, his spouse, in favour of Wm. Sinclair, son of said Marie, of 10 meills malt and £3:6:8d in respect of assignation thereof to Jas. Baikie, merchant in Kirkwall. 28.5.1618“

http://catalogue.nrscotland.gov.uk/nrsonlinecatalogue/details.aspx?...

John Sinclair of Toab died after 1608 because he witnessed his fathers testament. John Sinclair of Toab had at least two sons: William Sinclair of Saba married with Jean Gordon and Barbara Halcro.

https://www.geni.com/family-tree/index/6000000000769973224#60000000...

After 1608 Marie Stewart married David Kingof Worbister.

https://www.geni.com/family-tree/index/6000000065117441851

https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefou02paulgoog#page/n611/mode...

Now the problem: “James King, of Birness and Dudwick, Aberdeenshire, afterwards Lord Eythin. He was the eldest son of David King of Warbester, and was born in 1589.”
No mention about his mother.

“David King took his degree at Edinburgh University before 1597. In 1597 he was in Orkney with his wife’s cousin Patrick, Earl of Orkney, and became Sheriff-depute. In 1590 he took part in the slaughter at Barra.”
Patrick is Robert Stewart’s son and as cousin Marie Stewart is meant.

Now, Marie’s first husband Sinclair lived in 1608. There are three options:
• General James King is son of NN,
• General James King is illegitimate,
• Marie got a divorce from Sinclair.
Divorce in Scotland was possible since 1560. “Divorce was allowed in Scotland on the grounds of adultery from 1560 and on the grounds of desertion from 1573.” There should be a document about this divorce.

In a Swedish magazine “Släkt & Hävd” 1-2 1978 Håkan Dackman made an investigation about “Sinclairs in Sweden”. He noticed several problems. Among others the problem with James King and his “mother” Marie Stewart. Her first husband, he writes, lived in 1593, when he sold property. James King – however – was born in 1589. Well, Dackman writes: the birth year of 1589 is not proven and most likely wrong.
Now we know that Sinclair lived in 1608 and Dackman was wrong.

Proposal for geni:
• Merge the two Marie Stewarts,
• Create a profile NN (unfortunately) maried with David King,
• The mother of David King’s children would be the NN,
• Marie Stewart is locked without parents.

Scots Peerage takes for granted that Marie Stewart is daughter of Adam Stewart and Janet Ruthven because of the “brother’s daughter”.
Now two issues have to be resolved:
• Why isn’t Marie Stewart mentioned in Jane Ruthven’s testament in 1606? “Janet Ruthven died intestate on 20 January 1606. Her testament dative and the inventory of her goods and gear was given up by her daughter Elspeth Stewart. At the time of her death Jonet and her daughter Elspeth appear to have been indwellers in Perth. No other children are mentioned. [National Records of Scotland, Commissary Records of Edinburgh, Testament Dative of Jonet Ruthwen, relict of Adame Stewart prior of Charterhous, reference CC8/8/41 folios 333-34]”
• “brother’s daughter” is a niece. Is a niece also a cousin (cuisingne) ? Is cuisigne another word for niece in Scotland or is it just another fault in the documents, uncertain and not proven?

In the “National Records of Scotland” internet database the first entrance of David King stems from 1615. And Marie Stewart is not mentioned as King’s spouse before 1615.

A niece is a brother or sisters child, hence also a cousin, I see no bigger problem to alter between the two words, it's equivalent. Marie Stewart's last name, suggest that she was a brothers daughter, unless she wasn't the sister of James VI King of Scots, James I King of England & Ireland

As I mentioned in the earlier discussion based off the profile of Marie Stewart, the terms "brother" and "cousin" were not, at this time, as clear as they are to us now.

Cousin means simply a relation. It doesn't tell us what exactly the relation is.

Brother does mean brother -- BUT it can be a full brother or a half brother, AND I have seen it mean "guild brother."

In this time period "brother" also often means brother-in-law.

Any comment about my proposal?

• Merge the two Marie Stewarts, (2 documents;evidence above)

• Create a profile NN (unfortunately) maried with David King, (Son J. King born
around 1589 could not have Marie as mother unless illegitimate - very unlikely;
King-Stewart marriage not mentioned before 1615 - unless new other documents
about divorce are found)

• The mother of David King’s children would be the NN,

• Marie Stewart is locked without parents. (kinship with Stewart ok; but why isn't
Marie mentioned in Ruthven's testament in 1606?)

Gerhard, that seems reasonable to me but I haven't had the time yet to consider all the implications.

Wouldn't she still be the stepmother to David's children, maybe that's all she was?

"Marie Stewart is locked without parents. (kinship with Stewart ok;" not so good, my first solution earlier in this post at least give her a grandfather, and yes, the N.N. child of James V could, (her parent) could be set up without a specific gender.

I am happy if Gerhard and Neil can come to an agreement about something, but that still would leave the question of Marie open, and that does not satisfy me.

As far as I understand, there is no issue of Marie Stewart being a Stewart. Previously, cloning (Bring in the Clones) of her was suggested, which I figured was a good idea. Even if it takes nine months.

But Marie was a Stewart, which is fair to assume from her marriage or marriages. She got married with a Toad and the King of Blockbuster's, so to marry in the same ranks, which takes place in UK still, can be inferred.

So she is somebody. Just ignoring her would not be fair to her, or anybody else, and not satisfactory. If absolute, concrete evidence is not available, then you have to live with the odds.

The word brother can mean most anything even today. I may start my mail to somebody with "Me hermano" or "Me carnale" if I like somebody a lot. Maybe it means a brother in arms? Or legs? Maybe it means he was Afro-Scottish?

As far as other data available are concerned, what about Jane Ruthven’s testament? It does not mention Marie.

If you read Sherlock Holmes, or logics 101, then you know that the only thing which can be deduced from the testament is that Jane Ruthven wanted to pass her belongings to her daughter Elspeth. But - To deduce that it would exclude Marie from being her daughter, is not logically justified.

The presence of a testament provided supports to Marie being her daughter, not the opposite. There had to be a sibling.

The whole idea of testament is to leave one's belongings to somebody, and not to somebody else. If Jane Ruthven had but one daughter, she would not have not have the testament to begin with. Her daughter would have inherited her belongings.

But because of the testament, it is fair to deduce that Elspeth had at least one sibling who would have inherited his/her fair share, too. If there was no testament.

Think about the concept of testament.

Ask Justin. He's a lawyer. Why testament if Elspeth was the only child? The only one to inherit?

This all is so weird. The former father of Marie's was a bastard. She could have been a bastard, too. Or in those times her being a Catholic. If Marie was a daughter to Ruthven, and if Ruthven was a devote Catholic, and Marie got a divorce, then she might easily want to exclude Marie from her will just because of her divorce. Even if it was justified. But opposed to what the Pope says.

I don't consider this thing closed until Marie has parents or a parent.

Testaments were common in this period, even if the natural heirs would inherit without them.

Janet Ruthven

Janet Ruthven died in 1606 with her testament dative - that is a fact; Neil has added the original which is quite difficult (almost impossible) to read.

Magnus Sinclair of Skaill

Magnus Siclair died in 1608 with his testament dative and mentionioned all living children.

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/research/guides/wills-and-testaments

"Testament is the collective term used to describe all the documents relating to the executry of a deceased person. Every testament has an inventory of the dead person's property. ..."Where there is a will, the document was known as a testament testamentar (the equivalent of English probate). If there was no will, it was called a testament dative (the equivalent of English letters of administration)"......"For family historians wills can often provide a wealth of detail about family relationships, and about how people lived. You can hope to find names of family members, their relationships and details of everyday possessions. You may also find details of the debts that they owed at the time of their death. It is worth remembering, however, that the eldest son in a family will often not be mentioned, because he inherited the heritable property (land and buildings) of his deceased father." ( in Magnus Sinclair's testament dative the eldest son was mentioned).

https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/

If you want to find your Scottish ancestors you could visit the website above.

As a rule testaments include all living children (testament testamentar or dative).

Back to the facts:

- In 1606 Janet Ruthven died with Elsbeth mentioned in har testament dative.
- In 1608 John Sinclair of Toab's father Magnus Sinclair died.
- Between (let's say) 1609 and 1614 John Sinclair died and Marie Stewart married
David King of Warbuster,
- Marie Stewart had children with John Sinclair: William and James;
- David King of Warbuster had children with NN: James, William, David and John:
- In 1615 the marriage between Marie and David King was mentioned for the first time.

Unfortunately there could be many flaws and no sources in the old books like "The Scots Peerage". I haven't found anything in the "Ruthven Family Papers" dated 1912 about Janet and her children other than Janet was married with Adam Stewart.
I am sure that Janet had many children but only Elsbeth is mentioned in the testament dative and Barbro Halcro is accepted as a daughter through the tombstone she raised for Adam Stewart.
If anyone finds Adam Stewart's testament we could close the issue.
I have found only one entrance about Adam Stewart in the NAS Catalogue.

http://catalogue.nrscotland.gov.uk/nrsonlinecatalogue/details.aspx?...

Mikko, you started last year with your atDNA and this year with a „wolf-lion looking back“ to proof your relationship with Adam Stewart and James V Stewart. In order to do so you claim Marie Stewart to be the daughter of Adam Stewart. You also say that there is a link from Marie Stewart to the Swedish clan of Folkunga. Did you notice that you are connected to the Kings via Barbara Stewart?

Well, most of the old Orkney and Shetland “odallers” are Norwegian vikings, and until the 17th century they spoke a mixture of old Norse and English – o yes, somehow Marie might have a link to Sweden. We are all children of Odin.

Let’s have a short look at Orkney’s history. It is a very outstanding part of Scotland. Kolonised by Norwegian vikings in the 900th century, and ruled by their descendants until the 15th century. It was ruled by “jarlar” who were subordinatet the King of Norway. However, people on Orkney were independent. It was a farmer’s society and the leading people were the “odallers”, they owned their land since the vikings, they were allied with the “jarls” and together with them they controlled administration and justice. The Sinclairs who originally stemmed from the main land lived under three centuries on Orkney, they became “odallers”, one of the leading clans and “jarls”.

Orkney was submitted to Scotland in 1469 as part of a deal, a dowry, when Christian I daughter of Norway married James III of Scotland. The last “jarl” William Sinclair retained the Earldom of Caithness. The Clan Sinclair still ruled on Orkney, in the beginning of the 16th century represented by Sir William Sinclair of Warsetter with the titel “Justice”.

After that the history of the Sinclairs becomes complicated – a conflict among the different Sinclair clans; a war between the Sinclairs of Orkney and Shetland and the Sinclairs of Caithness, who had support of James V, king of Scotland, in Summerdale outside of Kirkwall in 1529.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Summerdale

A turning point for Orkney came when Robert Stewart, illegitimate son of James IV, became power, from 1564 as sheriff and from 1581 as earl. He was an unscrupulous person and looted his subordinates and especially the old “odal” clans.

As an exemple Robert Stewart in 1584 pillaged a large part of Magnus Sinclair’s of Skaill property in order to give it to his brother’s daughter. If this was Marie Stewart she was married to Magnus Sinclair’s son John Sinclair. Robert accused Magnus to have “stolen” land from the king. Robert’s son Patrick terrorized Orkney and one of earl Patricks toadies was David King of Warbester, Marie Stewart’s second husband. Patrick was overthrown in 1609 and executed in 1615. The old language “the Orkney Norn” survived during the 17th century which made it easy for soldier’s from Orkney to take Swedish military service.

Why did I write this?
• Power and politics – Robert Stewart tried to destroy the “odallers” and steal their
land they have owned since the viking times; Robert stole everybodies land
unless they bowed their knees;
• Why did Robert Stewart steal his own clan’s property? If Robert’s brother’s
daughter (halfbrother’s daughter) was Marie Stewart than Magnus Sinlair was a
very close relative, the father of his niece’s husband. Steal land from Marie
Stewart’s father in law? Was “power and politics” more important than clan
relations? Bowed John Sinclair his knees? But not Magnus? We don’t know.
• What happened to the stolen land, to the Earldom Caithness? Why did several of
Marie’s and her second husband’s children leave Scotland to join the Swedish
army?
There are a couple of open issues.

Back to the beginning. I have not seen any evidence with Mikko’s atDNA and I cannot see that the “Coat of Lord Adam Stewart” page 187 in “….Early Orkney Armorials” is a “wolf looking backwards” (wolf regardant) The head of this animal is very doubtful, difficult to see any head at all and the tail is totally different (imgur’s expertise is “how to eat boiled eggs” – is “imgur” a funny blog???) I could not consider this to be evidence and deny that Adams coat of arm is the same as the Bjälbo Folkunga coat of arms. I ignore Mikko's posts about the testaments. As a rule all living children are mentioned in a testament dative for administrational reasons – the Earl wanted to know his tax-payers. I don’t know if this is also true for Orkney; but is was true for the testament dative of Magnus Sinclair.
During the 16th century the “tacksmen” collected rent, taxes and other fees from the Orcadians. How did they do this without paperwork? Testaments and other documents? In Sweden Gustav II Adolf started an administration (mantalskrivning) in the early 17th century in order to collect taxes for his wars and in order to get soldiers for his armies.
I contacted Neil. However- he said he had nothing more to contribute. Maybe he would have something more about tax-collections on Orkney. This – however – would be a library work in Edinburgh.
I say the same as Neil. I have nothing more to contribute. The odds that Marie Stewart is daughter of Adam Stewart is maybe 30%, maybe 70%, maybe she is Adam's daughter - who knows. Maybe I am a descendant of Odin. When I add a profile in geni I have solid proof like churchbooks, testaments, tombstones, other documents; so it should be.

Just a reminder: a testament testamentar (the equivalent of English probate). If there was no will, it was called a testament dative (the equivalent of English letters of administration)".

Thanks, Gerhard.

Gerhard,

Let's walk your text through.

"Testament is the collective term used to describe all the documents relating to the executry of a deceased person."

Testament is a collcetive term... All documents... Deceased person. Okay, so somebody died.

Moving on.

"Every testament has an inventory of the dead person's property..."

Yes indeed. How does that differ from today?

"Where there is a will, the document was known as a testament testamentar (the equivalent of English probate). If there was no will, it was called a testament dative (the equivalent of English letters of administration)"......

Or, when there is a will, there is a way.

"For family historians wills can often provide a wealth of detail about family relationships, and about how people lived."

Often is far from always.

"You can hope to find names of family members, their relationships and details of everyday possessions."

You just posited how comprehensive these testaments are, yet one can only hope.

"You may also find details of the debts that they owed at the time of their death."

If you may, you also may not. Either you find them or not. If it is a matter of wishful thinking, it hardly constitutes firm and uniform documentation with no exceptions.

"It is worth remembering, however, that the eldest son in a family will often not be mentioned, because he inherited the heritable property (land and buildings) of his deceased father." ( in Magnus Sinclair's testament dative the eldest son was mentioned)."

What if there is no son? Then the paragraph above bears not much intel.

"As a rule testaments include all living children (testament testamentar or dative)."

Above you said this is wishful thinking. You said also it is a rule that the oldest son is not included in the testament given that he inherits everything By default. So, it is not justified to speak about rules.

This is called "having it both ways." The logic of it does not survive closer inspection.

"I am sure that Janet had many children but only Elsbeth is mentioned in the testament "

You just said it is a rule that everybody be listed in the testament. So It's not a rule, after all?

"We are all children of Odin."

I am not.

"Why did I write this?"

Good question. I honestly don't know.

"Power and politics"

Bold and Beautiful.

"Why did Robert Stewart steal his own clan’s property?"

Because he could?

"Why did several of Marie’s and her second husband’s children leave Scotland to join the Swedish army?"

Because of the Swedish Swimming Bikini Team?

Why did a number of Scottish men / families join the Swedish army? It was not limited to bros Sinclair (whose relationship is false, even though there is a reference which I should read but nobody else should? There is a link posted in the profile... Then the bros are not properly placed in the tree, but I am sure that you are above the facts.

Moving on.

The first family to move to Sweden / Finland was?

Tait / Teit, who moved to Sweden (Finland) already at the times of Birger Jarl (of Bjälbo / Folkunga).

Then names such as Fleming, Forbes / Forbus, Hamilton, Ramsay, Duwall (MacDougall), Douglas, Ruthven are kinda like household names, but then so and so many other Scots came to Sweden (Finland) and I mention just one last more, Udnie. My friend's grandfather. Pretty much unknown in Finland (Sweden) and I probably knew of Udnie because he influenced in Viipuri.

The noble family which comes closest to me in terms of being my grandparents is Cedersparre, which was also of Scotch origin (Joungh).

But if it was not the Bikini Team, what might it have been?

The usual reasons. I'll quote Otto Donner: ”The general causes of emigration are in all ages the same: the state of affairs in the fatherland not affording sufficient facilities for the winning of fame and fortune, which… In Scotland moreover, the disturbances over citizens, the religious persecutions… The desire felt by the young nonbles to take part in warlike enterprices, which were considered a necessary part of their education…”

The DNA issue was very interesting, and beautiful in It's simplicity. How do you pick up a location of a cellular phone? You mirror it via a triangle, but you already score an estimate on an X scale By two points. It's quite simple math, and it can be used to show whether or not a given individual would fall in a given range.

I offered Justin transparency - we'd do it togethe so there is not fiddilng with the numbers.

My impression is that he got scared and we might find out a range, then he just doublepacked up, said atDNA cannot be used to di this and that, I agreed, but I said it can be in doing this and that.

Then he writes about the coat-of-arms, when I do he doublebacks.

Then he says, providing nothing to back how he rolls up. And now thanks you for semantics.

You say testament is used by a taxman. But when you start your text, you make a reference to a dying of a person, and I should guess Mr. Taxman is interested in taxes all of the time, not just when somebody dies. Then you say blaah, and blaah, then you dismiss yourself making your text be of a lesser value, but valuable to those who have some weird agenda in stalling things from happening rather than doing something clever and productive.

He thanks you. I don't know for what.

Mikko, you're being a bit disingenuous here. I was very interested to see your DNA results and to understand why you believe they prove your descent from this line.

After several weeks of messaging back and forth, during which you were mostly concerned to make the point you don't believe in DNA evidence, we reached a point where you said I would have guess what your results are.

That was the end of that discussion.

When my mothers biological father died, she inherited nothing from him, she wasn't even notified about his death, despite the fact that he had paid alimony to the mother when she was a child, does this count as an evidence that she wasn't his daughter too?

There are many reasons, today and back then, to not include children in a will, and it shouldn't rule out a child by default just because they wasn't mentioned in will.

By the way, two of my brothers have taken a DNA test, they are roughly 84% Scandinavian, 9%Brittish, and 7% from Eastern Europe, I guess it pretty much historically reflects the typical contacts between us and other people which we find a lot of example of here at Geni, and since we do not have any immigrants in our family after 1650, this mix must have happen earlier, probably it was businessmen, nobles, clergymen, and definitely not slaves or foot soldiers who contributed most with their genes, and in that way we are genetic living typical proof of our viking heritage and the development that occurred in Scandinavia after them.

In the few cases where we actually have a named foreign ancestor, a family, I would also be sad if someone like Gerald, who does not even have that relationship, or worse, only has set up one father without any ancestors at all here at Geni, would question this, do your own tree first before you intervene with other peoples!

Ulf, the law varies by time and place. You have to be an expert in that period to know what conclusions you can draw legitimately.

In early America, for example, there was a legal presumption that if you made a will and didn't mention one of your children, then you intended to give them their full share (which was different in different places). The will applied only to the children you did mention.

Then too, also in early America, there was a rule you could not disinherit any of your own children. So, if you tried they could contest the will. That's the origin of the stories where a child was "cut off" with only one dollar, or some other small amount.

In some places these rules persisted into modern times.

So, we can't make guesses without knowing the actual law at the time. And, we should keep in mind that Scottish property could be entailed, which would mean the inheritance could not be changed by a will.

Sorry for the long delay. I've been buried in another project. I finally got a chance to review the new evidence and merge the two Marie Stewarts.

Still waiting for something more definitive about her ancestry.

Mikko, the evidence just isn't there. Close, but not quite.