Whoa, Paul, it isn't always that easy -- or obvious.  Consider:  I have a
cousin, whom I'll call L, whose 4th great-grandfather (I'll call him H) is
my 2nd great-grandfather.  Counting up my line, we are third cousins twice
removed; counting up his line, we are fifth cousins twice removed (removal
in the opposite sense).  To muddy the waters a bit more, we are descended
from different wives of H, so though H is our closest single common
ancestor, H's parents are our closest common ggrandparents.  So you could
make a case for our being:
1.     Third (half?) cousins  twice removed;
2.     Fifth (half?) cousins  twice removed;
3.     Fourth cousins  three times removed;  or
4.     Sixth cousins  three times removed.

Sticking to the shortest-line approach, should we say that L is my third
(half?) cousin twice removed but I am his fifth (half?) cousin twice
removed? Or vice versa?  Or am I obsessing over the number of generations
on a pinhead?  Could ambiguities like this affect per stirpes computations
in determining inheritance?

Looking forward to your thoughts,

Pete Toulmin



Original message:

>Date:    Wed, 4 Feb 2004 07:49:48 -0600
>From:    Paul Drake <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: [DRAKE] RE: That "Removed Stuff"
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
>I have been asked so many times about the whole business of cousins,
>"removed" and ancestral aunts and uncles.  The calculation of those is
>really VERY SIMPLE, yet for years and for reasons that continue to baffle
>me, people have drawn goofy charts and given mystifying and complicated
>explanations of this simple reckoning.
>
>Here is the easy way of it all, and this is all there is to the whole
>matter:    Find the MOST recent common ancestor that you share with
>someone else; COUNT the number of "greats" in the title of that ancestor;
>add ONE, and that is the DEGREE of cousinhood.  Thus, if we are related
>through a common great-great grandmother (2 greats), take those two greats
>in her name and add one (2+1=3), so we are third cousins.   If our 4th
>great grandfather is our most recent ancestor, we are 5th cousins.
>
>Aunts and uncles are calculated  exactly the same way.  Take the number of
>"greats" in the title of the ancestor and add one more "great", and you
>have the title for the aunts and uncles who were brothers and sisters of
>that ancestor.  So it is that a sister of your great-grandmother (1 great)
>is your great-great aunt (2 greats).
>
>Now, the "removed" part simply designates the number of generations that
>you and that cousin do NOT share.  SO, as to you and your second
>cousin,  your children are "once removed" from that cousin, and the
>grandchildren of your second cousin each are your "second cousins, twice
>removed", and on and on.
>
>This is ALL there is to the whole matter.

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html