ancestral anˈsɛstr(ə)l/ adjective of, belonging to, or inherited from an ancestor or ancestors. "the family's ancestral home" synonyms: inherited, hereditary, familial; rarelineal "the family's ancestral home" ****nut
Don't hold me to this, but i think that's true. Now, sunderland.. is not the historical ancestral home of George washington….
Hang on lads. Let's sort this out. Washington - little more than a village when I was a lad - was not historically part of the town of Sunderland. That, I think, is what Humbles' getting at. Gary Hutchinson is, I think, referring to the modern Greater Sunderland. So both are right on their own terms. I've much appreciated the posts of Outlaw and Crammers on here - I'm dead keen on how the U.S. soccer scene is developing.
Searching franticly for that last team to do thiid this spreadsheet but too pissed i thinnk Last team to win four in a row Last team to win an fa cup Last team to **** the mags, that one, the list is immense
No, but many people/places can have their fingers in one 'truth'. In medieval times, rich families inherited, bought, or were awarded by the king/queen, estates all over England. Each estate had a manor house, which was claimed to be "the home" of that family. As the head of the family toured around to inspect his estates, he would occasionally live at that house, so these claims are not inherently untrue. How often and for what periods they were actually in residence is a different matter. John o'Gaunt had estates in more than half the counties of England, so how many 'homes' claim him these days is anyone's guess!
Fair point, but George Washington and sunderland… can anyone show me the historical connection?[/QUOTE] No, on your terms , they can't, which is why you've got no disrespect from me. You've made a fair enough point yourself all along. The problem, I think, is that most people think in terms of modern Sunderland - and Washington is as much a part of Sunderland today as Salford is thought of as a part of Manchester. As places grew, traditional boundaries became less significant. No, fair does to you. You made a valid point.[/QUOTE]
No, on your terms , they can't, which is why you've got no disrespect from me. You've made a fair enough point yourself all along. The problem, I think, is that most people think in terms of modern Sunderland - and Washington is as much a part of Sunderland today as Salford is thought of as a part of Manchester. As places grew, traditional boundaries became less significant. No, fair does to you. You made a valid point.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE] Unless i'm being thick http://www.washingtonlass.com/WashingtonFamilyGenealogy.html
