The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Genealogy

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 01-01-2015, 07:23 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,416
I just curious about something WarHiker, would DNA clear any of this up?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-01-2015, 07:37 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Corpus Christi, United States
Posts: 28
Lucy, my answer is possibly.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-17-2015, 04:07 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Jefferson Hills, United States
Posts: 16
I am related to Queen Elizabeth II 22nd cousin 2X removed Fascinating!

I have been working very hard to put together our family tree and I was excited to first see William the Conqueror, but as I continued I found I am related to Queen Elizabeth II. Very distant 22nd cousin removed 2X but still interesting! I can't wrap my head around 22nd cousin 2x removed. If someone can explain I would appreciate it. Do we even share the same blood this far along?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-11-2015, 02:14 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
I have read that everyone in the world are at least 14th cousins. As far as being DNA/blood related to a 22nd cousin, probably neither. Think of your maternal grandparents; let us assume your mother inherited 50% of her DNA from each of her parents. At your conception, she passed on to you ONLY those genes that she had inherited from her father. So at that point you actually have none of your grandmother's DNA. So a person can be descended or related to a person and the both of you actually do not have any genes/DNA in common. This is an oversimplified version, but it is entirely possible.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-11-2015, 02:23 PM
Lee-Z's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Heerlen, Netherlands
Posts: 2,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
Think of your maternal grandparents; let us assume your mother inherited 50% of her DNA from each of her parents. At your conception, she passed on to you ONLY those genes that she had inherited from her father.
Don't think this is how it happens?
DNA is passed on from parent to child
__________________
Wisdom begins in wonder - Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-12-2015, 01:17 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
There is nothing to think about, if you reread that page, it says exactly what I stated the 1st time. Possible for it to happen that way, but not probable. Even with that point explained, someone who is your 22nd cousin twice removed (and there is for certain no closer common ancestor), is really not a relative at all. To say you are related to the queen and she is your cousin, you are only fooling yourself with that belief. Give me an update next year when you are invited to Buckingham Palace to celebrate her 90th birthday and she introduces you to all as her long lost cousin. I only wish you good luck with that.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-12-2015, 01:41 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
I have read that everyone in the world are at least 14th cousins. As far as being DNA/blood related to a 22nd cousin, probably neither. Think of your maternal grandparents; let us assume your mother inherited 50% of her DNA from each of her parents. At your conception, she passed on to you ONLY those genes that she had inherited from her father. So at that point you actually have none of your grandmother's DNA. So a person can be descended or related to a person and the both of you actually do not have any genes/DNA in common. This is an oversimplified version, but it is entirely possible.

One of the factors that plays a very important part in not only our DNA and cell structure but also in determining genetic lineage is mitochondrial DNA. It is passed on solely through the female line hence its nickname "The Eve Gene". Males do inherit the mitochondrial DNA from their ancestors but are incapable of passing it on. So then, your DNA can and does contain genetic material that come from one's grandmother.

Mitochondrial DNA — University of Leicester

Case in point. The remains of Richard III were analyzed and compared and it was proven it was indeed the deceased King through DNA testing and his mitchondrial DNA samples.

http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/press/f...m-dna-analysis
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-13-2015, 03:32 AM
norenxaq's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: La jolla, United States
Posts: 95
a cousin is a cousin regardless of how remote if the relationship can be proven via genealogy. note: dna shows that a relationship exists, but for this, not specifically how
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-13-2015, 07:22 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Agreed, but the point is that it is not a close relationship as many who have "proof" they are related to QEII for instance. Some who post in this category really believe that they are now royalty because the Queen is their 22nd cousin. I cannot phathom someone actually believing that because it is just silly. Again, everybody on our earth is related to each other. Royalty is nothing more than a concept, there are royalty genes or DNA - mere mortals who, in throughout history, blatantly stole from those they ruled and their wealth increased exponentially. I may be the queen's 15th cousin - but that info and a couple of dollars might buy a cup of coffee from McD*****s.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-13-2015, 07:50 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
Agreed, but the point is that it is not a close relationship as many who have "proof" they are related to QEII for instance. Some who post in this category really believe that they are now royalty because the Queen is their 22nd cousin. I cannot phathom someone actually believing that because it is just silly. Again, everybody on our earth is related to each other. Royalty is nothing more than a concept, there are royalty genes or DNA - mere mortals who, in throughout history, blatantly stole from those they ruled and their wealth increased exponentially. I may be the queen's 15th cousin - but that info and a couple of dollars might buy a cup of coffee from McD*****s.
I think your chances would be better at a Burger King or a Dairy Queen for the cup of coffee.

I think when it comes down to a 22nd cousin of anyone in a family tree that at one time was royal, the description would best be that they are descended from the House of X or the royal lineage of Y

As far as being royal today, The Princess Royal's (Anne) children are not royal and they're the grandchildren of the present monarch. Another example is when either of the York girls marry, their children will not be royal either. Both of the descendants of Richard III that were tested for the DNA have a King in their family tree but they're most certainly not royal.

Trick to figuring out who is royal or not in the BRF is to look at the titles. Other than Her Majesty, all other members of the royal family hold the HRH styling.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10-17-2015, 10:37 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Corpus Christi, United States
Posts: 28
Hello there. I would like to help you understand what the cousin terminology really means. Yesterday I decided to attempt to track every Baron of Magna Charta in an attempt to find out if I have lineage past my Gateway Almy ancestor. I think that most would find that my system of describing the close relations is quite more entertaining to ponder than the normal cousin removed system.

Below will be pasted my BOMC lineage links that are Third and Fourth ordered connections. I label the connections based on our common ancestor. For this reason a single order connection means that the person's parents are linked to me as a grandparent. In my defintiion a second ordered connection means that a person's grandparent is one of my grandparents.

Third Order:
-Eustace de Vesci - b 1169/70 - 1st cousin 25x removed
his great gramd father is my 25th ggf
-William de Albini -b abt 1160 - 1st cousin 25x removed
his great grand father is my 25th ggf

Fourth Order
-William de Forz - b abt 1192 - 2nd cousin 25x removed -
his 2nd ggf is my 25th ggf
-Richard de Montfichet b. bef 1202 - 2nd cousin 23x removed
his 2nd ggf is my 23rd ggf


I hope that this helps to show you a little bit of what cousin removed system actually means.

Take Care,

William Wallace Brower Berkhoven III
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-18-2015, 02:25 AM
norenxaq's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: La jolla, United States
Posts: 95
everyone related to everyone else? only if you consider species history, rather than family history, ie genealogy which i what we are discussing. as such, I reject the claim
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-18-2015, 04:02 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by norenxaq View Post
everyone related to everyone else? only if you consider species history, rather than family history, ie genealogy which i what we are discussing. as such, I reject the claim
I do not understand your point - you obviously don't understand genealogy. What "claim" are you rejecting? Charlemagne was King of the Franks about 1000 AD. He had 20+ children - so now everyone in the Western hemisphere is considered a descendant of Charlemagne. The gene for blue eyes actually was a mutation, before the mutation occurred everybody had brown eyes. But because a person needs two genes for blue eyes to express that trait, it was probably several generations down before a male, with one gene for blue eyes and one for brown eyes, and a female, with one gene for blue eyes and one for brown eyes also, produced offspring with blue eyes. So it is all people with blue eyes have probably have a common ancestor. If everybody alive today could trace their ancestry back 1000 years, there would definitely be serious overlapping of ancestors - there were not that enough people living then to for everybody alive today to not have had overlapping of ancestors. You can believe whatever you want but I have read about this subject (and no, I am NOT an authority on the subject) and educated myself somewhat about this subject. To take you seriously, you would need to make sense and your opinions do not concur with scientific data about genealogy, which is ultimately about our species. Your random opinions do nothing to prove a point you are trying to make.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-18-2015, 04:18 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by aubri View Post
I have been working very hard to put together our family tree and I was excited to first see William the Conqueror, but as I continued I found I am related to Queen Elizabeth II. Very distant 22nd cousin removed 2X but still interesting! I can't wrap my head around 22nd cousin 2x removed. If someone can explain I would appreciate it. Do we even share the same blood this far along?
I think your wording is not correct. You are not related to Queen Elizabeth II. You share a common ancestor. That is not the same.

The children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Queen Elizabeth II are related to her but share a common ancestor with you. I hope this has made the difference clear.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-18-2015, 05:45 AM
Lee-Z's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Heerlen, Netherlands
Posts: 2,148
According to this definition:
http://www.audioenglish.org/dictionary/related.htm
"indirect" or "collateral" related
(but that's related too )
__________________
Wisdom begins in wonder - Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-18-2015, 08:04 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
I do not understand your point - you obviously don't understand genealogy. What "claim" are you rejecting? Charlemagne was King of the Franks about 1000 AD. He had 20+ children - so now everyone in the Western hemisphere is considered a descendant of Charlemagne. The gene for blue eyes actually was a mutation, before the mutation occurred everybody had brown eyes. But because a person needs two genes for blue eyes to express that trait, it was probably several generations down before a male, with one gene for blue eyes and one for brown eyes, and a female, with one gene for blue eyes and one for brown eyes also, produced offspring with blue eyes. So it is all people with blue eyes have probably have a common ancestor. If everybody alive today could trace their ancestry back 1000 years, there would definitely be serious overlapping of ancestors - there were not that enough people living then to for everybody alive today to not have had overlapping of ancestors. You can believe whatever you want but I have read about this subject (and no, I am NOT an authority on the subject) and educated myself somewhat about this subject. To take you seriously, you would need to make sense and your opinions do not concur with scientific data about genealogy, which is ultimately about our species. Your random opinions do nothing to prove a point you are trying to make.
Another aspect to take into consideration also along the lines that many people of the Western hemisphere could trace their ancestry back to Charlemagne and/or other members of the aristocracy and royal families of England can be attributed to events such as times of famine and pandemics of the black death in 1348-1350 and the great plague of 1665-1666. These events culled the population severely and it stands to reason that it would be that the higher classes of wealth and status that had the resources to remain healthier with a better diet and able to isolate themselves from the masses if needed, would have a better chance of surviving and producing offspring. The black death and the great plague were the two major pandemics but there were also other outbreaks. From the Museum of London:

"A major outbreak of the disease struck roughly every 20-30 years, killing around 20% of London’s population each time. There were lesser outbreaks in-between the major ones and sometimes the disease could continue for several years in a less serious form."

http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/fil...s_13481665.pdf
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-18-2015, 10:16 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Corpus Christi, United States
Posts: 28
Your terminology is messed up. As cousins he is indeed related (If good lineage is correct). He is not directly related, and that is the difference.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 12-29-2015, 10:56 PM
Hallsteinn's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Unknown, Sweden
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
I have read that everyone in the world are at least 14th cousins. As far as being DNA/blood related to a 22nd cousin, probably neither. Think of your maternal grandparents; let us assume your mother inherited 50% of her DNA from each of her parents. At your conception, she passed on to you ONLY those genes that she had inherited from her father. So at that point you actually have none of your grandmother's DNA. So a person can be descended or related to a person and the both of you actually do not have any genes/DNA in common. This is an oversimplified version, but it is entirely possible.
Absolutely not. Please, think about it for a second. People in most parts of Africa haven't had sexual contact with people of another background since we left Africa. This goes for most other places too, someone in South East Asia, for example, might be related to a European person 30.000 years ago, which is far, far, far more distant than a 14th cousin.

On topic: Elizabeth is my 10th cousin thrice removed
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 12-30-2015, 01:08 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallsteinn View Post
Absolutely not. Please, think about it for a second. People in most parts of Africa haven't had sexual contact with people of another background since we left Africa. This goes for most other places too, someone in South East Asia, for example, might be related to a European person 30.000 years ago, which is far, far, far more distant than a 14th cousin.

On topic: Elizabeth is my 10th cousin thrice removed
http://www.geni.com/discussions/1042...00007278581048 This can explain the concept better than I can
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 12-30-2015, 02:45 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
I do not understand your point - you obviously don't understand genealogy. What "claim" are you rejecting? Charlemagne was King of the Franks about 1000 AD. He had 20+ children - so now everyone in the Western hemisphere is considered a descendant of Charlemagne. The gene for blue eyes actually was a mutation, before the mutation occurred everybody had brown eyes. But because a person needs two genes for blue eyes to express that trait, it was probably several generations down before a male, with one gene for blue eyes and one for brown eyes, and a female, with one gene for blue eyes and one for brown eyes also, produced offspring with blue eyes. So it is all people with blue eyes have probably have a common ancestor. If everybody alive today could trace their ancestry back 1000 years, there would definitely be serious overlapping of ancestors - there were not that enough people living then to for everybody alive today to not have had overlapping of ancestors. You can believe whatever you want but I have read about this subject (and no, I am NOT an authority on the subject) and educated myself somewhat about this subject. To take you seriously, you would need to make sense and your opinions do not concur with scientific data about genealogy, which is ultimately about our species. Your random opinions do nothing to prove a point you are trying to make.
Link to blue eye gene common ancestor: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0130170343.htm
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
General Questions and Information about the Danish Royal Family paulette Royal House of Denmark 166 08-13-2016 02:12 AM
General Questions about the Royal Family of Morocco JulieS Royal Family of Morocco 38 07-11-2016 07:23 PM
General Questions & Random Facts about the British Royal Family Dane British Royals 133 02-03-2015 09:23 PM
Questions about some recent British Royal Weddings Liamdarcybrown Royal Weddings 8 02-05-2011 11:48 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit calendar catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece harald illegitimate children kate middleton king abdullah ii king abdullah in new zealand king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander may 2016 member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess marie princess marie hats princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark state visit to france succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:20 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises