Mailing List:2001-08-30 10, Fwd: Re: Re: fifth cousins, by Richard H. Mathews

From WRG
Jump to: navigation, search

Mailing List Archives > 2001-08-30 10, Fwd: Re: Re: fifth cousins, by Richard H. Mathews

From: Richnpatty -at- aol.com Subject: Fwd: Re: [WHITNEY-L] Re: fifth cousins Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:06:36 EDT ------_Part_3b8e567c-0200-211b-010203040506 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Allan & Merry -- I'm not the "expert" you seek, but my understanding of "xth cousins, y times removed" coincides with the concept introduced by Allan. My wife Patty is in the 12th generation that began with John-1 the immigrant. As an example, if Eli Whitney the inventor was in the 7th generation from John-1, and if John-1 is the most recent common ancestor of these two, then Patty and Eli are fifth cousins, five times removed. I think so, anyway. That's what I've been telling all my friends. (With great pride, I might add.) I'll be interested to see if we do indeed have an expert on this issue who chooses to weigh in. Richard in CA ------_Part_3b8e567c-0200-211b-010203040506 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <WHITNEY-L-request -at- rootsweb.com> Received: from rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (rly-ye04.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.201]) by air-ye01.mail.aol.com (v80.17) with ESMTP id MAILINYE11-0830104149; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:41:49 -0400 Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (v80.17) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYE47-0830104123; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:41:23 -0400 Received: (from slist -at- localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f7UEaGD01253; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:36:16 -0600 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:36:16 -0600 X-Original-Sender: ALLAGREEN -at- aol.com Thu Aug 30 08:36:15 2001 From: ALLAGREEN -at- aol.com Message-ID: <171.d7f20.28bfa957 -at- aol.com> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:36:07 EDT Subject: Re: [WHITNEY-L] Re: fifth cousins Old-To: MerryJWhit -at- aol.com, WHITNEY-L -at- rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532 Resent-Message-ID: <xmA1ED.A.QT.f9kj7 -at- lists5.rootsweb.com> To: WHITNEY-L -at- rootsweb.com Resent-From: WHITNEY-L -at- rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: <WHITNEY-L -at- rootsweb.com> archive/latest/5910 X-Loop: WHITNEY-L -at- rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: WHITNEY-L-request -at- rootsweb.com Merry: Didn't your sainted mother also raise the question of "once removed, twice removed?" I think we need to go to one of the handy charts that come with most genealogy programs. If Nathaniel-3 and William-3 first cousins, you wrote "Nathaniel-3 and William-4 are second cousins (as are William-3 and Samuel-4);" The way I "larned" it, that would make Nathaniel-3 and William-4 first cousins once removed (which accounts for he difference in generation). What we need here is an "expert." Allan E. Green ------_Part_3b8e567c-0200-211b-010203040506--


Copyright © 2010, the Whitney Research Group

Personal tools