• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Hello from a non-skeptic

Yeah, the vast majority are at least of people in the upper classes, but there was one major exception in the Rome thread:



You would think that you'd see a lot more of that if reincarnation were real, but it does seem that some lives are at least occasionally claimed. There were also a couple of people who claimed to have worked in the Coliseum as boys, but while that would definitely be a lower class position, the "cool" factor of working with gladiators and wild beasts in the most famous building of the Rome makes me hesitant to classify these lives with something mundane like the life of a stonecutter.

I was a gladiator, Richard Magnus, and women swooned in the aisles of when I fought. After I was killed the women of Rome had a funeral procession as if I'd been the husband of each of them, they weren't far wrong.

Of course, they were swooning in the aisles five days later for the rat who killed me, Macus Culter*. :duck:

*culter=knife in latin
 
...something mundane like the life of a stonecutter.
...who was part of making the amazing artwork of a beautiful cathedral? That would be plenty of cool-factor for some people.

You COULD argue against this line of thought. If I had 10 000 lives (), I would probably not remember as well the ones where I died as a child. Or a dog or beetle (for animal-friendly religions). And I would remember the ones where I had a connection to famous people and dramatic events (so I could figure out where and when).

Also, maybe really old memories would fade, so I would be unlikely to remember stone-age events or life as an australopithecus or a rodent-like animal in the late cretaceous. (If this is supposed to be connected to your ancestors as some vaguely suggest, like the OP.)
 
I've just read the whole thread on the Jacobite forum, and now know why Charles didn't bother telling us about his alleged descent from James V - another poster pointed out to him that John Stewart, the younger son of the 5th Earl of Moray claimed by Charles to be his 7xgreat-grandfather, died without issue (a fact I've just verified with Burke's Peerage) and predeceased his father, who died in 1700 or 1701. His response:

Certainly it is possible that I might be getting some facts mixed up, but upon verifying the info, and if I am not mixing up the Johns, John Stewart died in 1759 and had at least two daughters to 2nd wife Marion Rose: Margaret Stuart b. ABT 1702 and Marion Stuart b. ABT 1704. Indeed Allan Stewart's parents have been somewhat of a battle to me, but by proximity (Inverness) and dates it did seem a quite certain match...

Will keep on researching...


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Jacobite/message/8382?threaded=1&p=4

So Charles' idea of genealogical research is that going by proximity and date will produce a quite certain match?:rolleyes: Most people would have learned their lesson from this embarrassing mistake, but being unfettered by reality Charles simply went on to project his royal fantasies onto the obscure Janet Gordon and turn her into an illegitimate granddaughter of King James IV. He learned nothing from the more cautious genealogists at the Jacobite forum just as he learned nothing from critical thinkers here.

For all his bluster on the Past Lives forum I'll bet Charles is cursing the day he turned up here to knock us "proud sceptics" off our pedestals. Not only did he make an utter fool of himself, his bogus genealogical links to the Stewarts have now been debunked for all to see...

There seems to be something about the Stuarts that appeals to crackpots, "Prince Michael of Albany" being a shining example:

http://www.chivalricorders.org/royalty/fantasy/stuart.htm :jaw-dropp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Roger_Lafosse

And let's not forget the Sobieski Stuarts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sobieski_Stuarts
 
Agreed. Well done, Alice.

This has got to be very hard for Charles. It is not just a belief, but an identity held for a lifetime, one he has expended great effort and perhaps resources to support.
 
Obviously, this makes plenty of sense with the idea that these "memories" are based around the bits of information about Rome that they get from school and popular culture. It might be interesting to see how much similar clustering there is for other locations and time periods. It's probably more of the same, but it would still be something nice to have hard data on.

Exactly - could we, in principle, correlate the reports and the variations in their contents within and between countries with the media and educational provision and exposure of historical material, in those areas prior to the reports, etc. Potentially a huge job, but one that should be increasingly possible in our data-driven digital society - given a large and well-distributed sample of reports...
 
Last edited:
So Charles' idea of genealogical research is that going by proximity and date will produce a quite certain match?:rolleyes:
It's the same approach that Numerologists take!
Most people would have learned their lesson from this embarrassing mistake, but being unfettered by reality Charles simply went on to project his royal fantasies onto the obscure Janet Gordon and turn her into an illegitimate granddaughter of King James IV. He learned nothing from the more cautious genealogists at the Jacobite forum just as he learned nothing from critical thinkers here.

For all his bluster on the Past Lives forum I'll bet Charles is cursing the day he turned up here to knock us "proud sceptics" off our pedestals. Not only did he make an utter fool of himself, his bogus genealogical links to the Stewarts have now been debunked for all to see...
I agree with Garrette and Agatha - excellent research and follow up, Alice Shortcake.
 
Thanks, all! I can honestly say that thanks to Charles Boden I've learned more about the Stewarts in the past week than I have in the entire 50 years of my existence. This little debunking exercise also reminded me why I didn't enjoy studying the Stewarts at school - they're so bloody confusing!

Seriously, Charles has provided would-be family historians with an object lesson in how NOT to do the job. It's so easy to jump to conclusions, especially if you have a common surname (Stewart is now the 7th most common surname in Scotland) and are driven by fantasies of royal descent.

My own family is supposedly related in some way to Sir Henry Thompson (1625-1683), Lord Mayor of York, but the last Thompson ancestor I've been able to trace with any certainty lived a century after his death. If I used the Boden method I'd probably be able to fill the gap quite easily as Thompson is a very common surname in the north of England.
 
Will the Real Janet Gordon Please Stand Up?

I've invited Charles to return to this thread and comment on the flaws I discovered in his genealogical claims. Since I came across information indicating that the mysterious Janet Gordon was the illegitimate half-sister of Lord John Gordon I've come across other problems with the Stewarts of Appin link. The following account is primarily for Charles' benefit, so avert your eyes if you've had enough of the Stewarts to last you a lifetime.

According to Charles:

The fourth Lord of Appin, Duncan Stewart (1515-1547), married Janet Gordon, daughter of Lord John Gordon (1477-1517) and Lady Margaret Jane Stewart (1493-1517), eldest but "illegitimate" daughter of King James IV and Lady Margaret Drummond (1476-1501). I am descended from the 2nd son of Duncan Stewart 6th of Appin (b. abt 1570), John Stewart.

According to Burke’s Peerage(BP), these are the children of Lord John Gordon (son of Alexander Gordon, 3rd Earl of Huntly) and the King’s illegitimate daughter Margaret Stewart:

1a John, Lord Gordon; married Nov 1512 Margaret Stewart (married 2nd 20 Jan 1530/1 Sir John Drummond of Innerpeffray), illegitimate daughter of JAMES IV by Margaret Drummond (see PERTH, E), and died in the lifetime of the father 5 Dec 1517, leaving:
1b GEORGE, 4th Earl
2b Alexander; titular Archbp Athens, Bp of the Isles, later of Galloway
3b James; Chllr of Moray
2a Alexander, of Strathavon; ancestor of the GORDONs OF CLUNY
3a William; Bp Aberdeen 1547–77

http://www.burkespeerage.com/Search/FamilyHomepageFull.aspx?FID=7080

No mention of a daughter called Janet.

However, the BP entry for the Stewarts of Appin says:

ALAN STEWART, 3rd of Appin, who with five of his sons was with JAMES IV at Flodden 1513, said to have married a daughter of Alan Cameron, 12th of Lochiel (see that family), and died c 1562, having had, with other issue,
1a DUNCAN; married Janet (died post 1562), daughter of 3rd Earl of Huntly (see HUNTLY, M), and died in the lifetime of the father ante 10 Sept 1547, leaving issue, a son,
1b JOHN, succeeded his grandfather.


http://www.burkespeerage.com/Search/FamilyHomepageFull.aspx?FID=13020

(It’s a minor point, but note that according to BP Duncan died before his father Alan, so it was Duncan’s son John who became 4th chief of Appin.) So Janet was the daughter of the 3rd Earl of Huntly, which would make her the SISTER of Lord John Gordon and not his daughter. This obviously means that she had no royal blood to transmit to her descendents. But we’ve already hit a problem, because as we’ve seen there is no mention of the 3rd Earl having a daughter named Janet. So who was the Janet Gordon who married Duncan Stewart of Appin? Perhaps the 3rd Earl had a daughter named Janet who for some reason isn’t mentioned in BP?

After a bit of Googling I found this site, http://thepeerage.com/p1340.htm, according to which the 3rd Earl of Huntly did in fact have a daughter named Janet. No mother is named so I assume she was illegitimate. The source for this information is given as The Complete Peerage, published between 1910 and 1959. When I first came across this version I assumed that Janet was the half-sister of Lord John Gordon and fully expected to read that she married Duncan Stewart of Appin. No such luck - no mention is made of any marriage, merely that Janet gave birth to an illegitimate daughter,Agnes Campbell, by Archibald Campbell, 4th Earl of Argyll.

At this point things stop being merely confusing and get downright weird. The Complete Peerage also assigns the 3rd Earl of Huntly a legitimate daughter, Jean. The names Janet and Jean were often used interchangeably in that period so perhaps this lady was Charles’ ancestor? Alas, no. Jean married none other than...Colin Campbell, 3rd Earl of Argyll, and became the mother of Archibald Campbell, 4th Earl of Argyll!

Now, the Complete Peerage version would have us believe that the hot-blooded young Archibald Campbell got his mother’s half-sister pregnant. If such a thing had happened in a 16th century noble family the affair would have been hushed up and the resulting offspring quietly given away to be brought up in ignorance of its origins. Instead, the Complete Peerage informs us that Agnes Campbell was married off to Sir Turlough Lynach O’Neil, a cousin of the 2nd Earl of Tyrone.

What on earth are we to make of all this? Although BP doesn’t list Jean Stewart as one of the 3rd Earl of Huntly’s children it does record her marriage to the 3rd Earl of Argyll:

COLIN CAMPBELL, 3rd Earl of Argyll; Lt the Borders, Warden Marches, Heritable Sheriff Argyllshire, Justice-Gen Scotland, Master King's Household 1528; married c 28 Feb 1506/7 Jean Gordon, daughter of 3rd Earl of Huntly (see HUNTLY, M), and died by 26 March 1529, leaving an eldest son:
ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL, 4th Earl of Argyll
http://www.burkespeerage.com/Search/FamilyHomepageFull.aspx?FID=388


Needless to say, there is no mention in BP of the 4th Earl of Argyll having an illegitimate daughter by anyone, let alone his “half-aunt” Janet Gordon!

In conclusion – who was the Janet Gordon who married Duncan Stewart of Appin? I find it rather odd that the book “The Stewarts of Appin”, published in 1880 and available in pdf form here:

http://www.chuckspeed.com/balquhidder/history/Stewarts_of_Appin.pdf


...describes “Jonet” Gordon merely as “the daughter of the Earl of Huntly”. Did the authors – both surnamed Stewart and probably part of the family – not think it worth mentioning that she was the grand-daughter of King James IV? Were they aware of the family legend concerning her origins but knew it to be false? Or did the story not exist in 1880, but was later invented or grew out of a misunderstanding of the complex web of relationships between Scotland’s leading families?
 
so avert your eyes if you've had enough of the Stewarts to last you a lifetime.


Alice's hard wprk on the Stewart bloodline inspired me to give her a little easier geneology ... mine. Here, in glowing detail is everything that can be known about my family.

Loss Leader - LL's father - LL's father's parents - some Jews who got renamed at Ellis Island and for whom no records exist wherever they may have been from.

And now my mother's side:

Loss Leader - LL's mother - LL's mother's parents - some Jews who got renamed at an entry point that wasn't Ellis Island but that nobody can remember and for whom no records exist wherever they may have been from.

Do I have to be biologically related to somebody to have been them in a past life? Because I've always felt a strange connection with Bette Davis. Although, I was 19 when she died.
 
They're talking about this case over at the PLF. I thought, well let's see what the facts are:

http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/07/reincarnation_a.html

A 2 year old kid has nightmares about airplanes, and names a particular type, and the parents (former skeptics) figure out that he is a reincarnated pilot from WW II. He has no way of knowing anything about airplanes...all sorts of technical details (says mom). Well they got a book out of it. They forgot to mention that they took him to an air museum at an early age, and he was fascinated by airplanes and talked of them all the time.

I'm beginning to see the pattern. There's really no point in arguing facts with the believers any more. It's religion 1.2b.
 
Even worse, given the miscarriage rate of 10-20%, many of them should remember being flushed down the toilet.;)

Well, it would explain some people's irrational fear of water...
 
Alice's hard wprk on the Stewart bloodline inspired me to give her a little easier geneology ... mine. Here, in glowing detail is everything that can be known about my family.

Loss Leader - LL's father - LL's father's parents - some Jews who got renamed at Ellis Island and for whom no records exist wherever they may have been from.

And now my mother's side:

Loss Leader - LL's mother - LL's mother's parents - some Jews who got renamed at an entry point that wasn't Ellis Island but that nobody can remember and for whom no records exist wherever they may have been from.

Do I have to be biologically related to somebody to have been them in a past life? Because I've always felt a strange connection with Bette Davis. Although, I was 19 when she died.

LL, using a combination of the Charles Boden Genealogical Research Method and a ouija board I've discovered that you are descended from Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene (so is the branch of the Stewarts currently represented by Prince Michael of Albany). Joseph of Aramathea is involved in some way and sends his love, as does Bette Davis.

Oh, and Charles won't respond in this thread because I was too rude to him. :(
 
OMG!!!!

That would explain the agonizing neck pains I suffer every year on the anniversary of her execution, not to mention my habit of spending vast amounts of money on clothes and jewellery! There's clearly more to the Candyland game than meets the eye...

And Akhenaten, I'm notorious for my "clever argumentations", especially where matters of "mediumnity" are concerned. Not sure if I inherited this from my illustrious ancestor/previous self, though.

Meanwhile, over on the other thread, Charles has mentioned his two genealogical claims to royal descent. He admits that the first one was mistaken, but

I do believe the latest one is correct.

That's it. No explanation, just a statement of fact. No surprises there, then.
 
Loss Leader - LL's father - LL's father's parents - some Jews who got renamed at Ellis Island and for whom no records exist wherever they may have been from.

And now my mother's side:

Loss Leader - LL's mother - LL's mother's parents - some Jews who got renamed at an entry point that wasn't Ellis Island but that nobody can remember and for whom no records exist wherever they may have been from.

LL, my family history is exactly the same. We must be related! :jaw-dropp

-LF
 

Back
Top Bottom