My uncle is doing an ansestory study and told me that we are direct decendants of Robert the Bruce of Scotland. He gave no details except it was from the early 1300's I am very curious.

My cynical side says that most people with Scottish heritage will find that they are somehow descendants of Robert the Bruce. My grandfather was named Robert Bruce, so was my uncle and so is my first born cousin on that side of the family... I'm sure if we hired someone to trace our lineage that we'd find we are also direct descendants of Robert the Bruce.

just letting you know that there may be some delivering of messages that people want to hear when it comes to ancestry sites and lineage tracing.

Not sure how they can assure any reliability that far back but it sure is fun to hear that you have someone important in the family.

Haven't you seen Braveheart?

Ok, so you're better off with Fred's link, or this one.

quote:

My cynical side says that most people with Scottish heritage will find that they are somehow descendants of Robert the Bruce.

This is similar to the time I told a person who used to post here that William Tell was a legend, not an historical person. Great offense was taken since the family insisted it was related to him.

This webpage catalogues the historical errors in the first two minutes of Braveheart.

That movie must be the worst Oscar-winner ever:

'At times the film seems an obsessive ode to Mel Gibson machismo...

...Frequent slow-motion sequences offer little more than a chance to study the sumptuous but ultimately burdensome details, not the least of which is Gibson himself, who looks like a '70s rock and roll idol from some Celtic thrash band...

...The overstated depiction of the ``freedom''-crying hero in sequences reminiscent of the crucifixion scenes in ``Spartacus'' are so farfetched they simply make Gibson look foolishly self-aggrandizing.

If Gibson's intention is to remind viewers that the Middle Ages were a brutish time for warriors, it's a hollow gesture.' Macho Mel Beats His Chest

Anyway, 'direct descendants' is a striking claim. Most Americans with Scottish background and romantic tendencies claim indirect links to Bonnie Prince Charlie.

quote:

Originally posted by juanruiz:

quote:

My cynical side says that most people with Scottish heritage will find that they are somehow descendants of Robert the Bruce.

This is similar to the time I told a person who used to post here that William Tell was a legend, not an historical person. Great offense was taken since the family insisted it was related to him.

So why didn't you tell them that they were descended from the Lone Ranger,instead, but someone had got confused over the signature tune ?

Anyway, some of my family claim descent from Adam. Beat that!

I do not know why that almost every time I ask a question, it opens a can of worms. That is never my intention. No I have not seen that braveheart movie. From what I understand it is far too bloody for my taste. No I did not post this as a gag or a practical joke. Thank you for your answers. From what I understand Robert the Bruce was a traitor to Scotland. We can't do anything about who we came from, can we? This is not a perfect world we live in is it?

I don't think you can say Robert The Bruce was a traitor to Scotland.

There barely was a Scotland, in the first place - the idea of nation states was still pretty new at that time. The various squabbling nobles had much more in common with each other - whatever their birthplace - than with the peasant armies they press-ganged into service. (One of the most annoying historical errors in Braveheart is the anachronistic use of the ideas of 'freedom' and patriotism, as if those concepts were understood the same way then as now.)

And Scotland has always been much smaller and less powerful than its neighbour - any king would be forced to make compromises and deal carefully with his English counterparts. Robert the Bruce wasn't a romantic goodie or baddie - just another medieval monarch, of a relatively small and powerless nation.

Wasn't saying you were playing a practical joke. The question had been answered with Fred's link so I thought I'd weigh in with my opinion since my family is also partly Scottish and connected in name to Robert the Bruce. I hardly consider that a can of worms and it is an interesting subject so that may be why there is discussion going on.

You may be interested to know that Robert the Bruce has about a million direct descendants including the Kennedy's, the Roosevelts, the Royal family of Spain, and many other famous people and many not so famous people.

Google "Robert the Bruce family tree" and you'll find a book specifically about the ancestry of this one person.

More 'Braveheart', sorry; Robert Bruce - this is a criticism of the portrayal of Bruce in the movie.

The webpage also points out, "Robert de Bruce VIII, usually known as Robert Bruce, became king of Scotland as Robert I. The Scottish throne passed to his son, David Bruce, known as King David II; he died without an heir." So there are no 'direct descendants' of Robert The Bruce?

On the other hand:

'There is a Mr. Mathews who wants a DNA check of Robert the Bruce's heart, because he believes he is the illegitimate son of the late John Talbot Fletcher, whose East Lothian estate has been reported to be valued at £300 million. After time-consuming genealogical research he is convinced that the Talbot Fletchers are descendants of the Scottish king.

The heart could be the only genetic link between Mr Matthews and the fortune. Lawyers acting for Mr Matthews have told him that if DNA testing confirmed his lineage he could be entitled to a share of the family's wealth.

Mr Matthews, 61, a car plant personnel officer from Swansea, has traced the Talbot Fletchers back to a 17th century nobleman, Sir Robert Bruce, who was said to be a direct descendant of the 14th century monarch. A local historian is now helping him to trace earlier links.' www.magicdragon.com

quote:

So there are no 'direct descendants' of Robert The Bruce?

I'm not sure where you're getting that. Robert the Bruce, according to the various links posted here, had several children, not just the one. In fact, a grandson became king of Scotland (as did a great-grandson, a great-great-grandson, a great-great-great-grandson, a great-great-great-great-grandson, a great-great-great-great-great-grandson, a great-great-great-great-great-great-grandson...).

D'oh! Yes, sorry. I should have read further.

'David's nephew, also the grandson of King Robert I, ascended to the Scottish throne as Robert II and founded the Stuart house of Kings of England and Scotland.'