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