Some of my distant family and I share almost 300 common ancestors. Is this normal.

Question

WikiTree says that William the Conquerer is my 28th great grandfather.

Comments

I have noticed,over the years, in this question/comment format on WikiTree,  and in general, that there seems to be some confusion about interpretation of the terms ancestor, direct ancestors, CFA lines, CMA lines, connected to, relative of etc. Perhaps it is time for a forum discussion on the subject matter. When does a cousin stop being a cousin? When is an ancestor an ancestor? What does connected to actually mean?

---

Ok, bypass the Kinge and I still find my 28th ggf is Montlhery-12. How can this be proved or disproved? I'm a total novice and have no idea how to find the truth. Who or what or where would one find proof?

---

Finding the proof can be a long but rewarding task. It is done one ancestor at a time and requires a great deal of patience. First find those that have already researched the family name and or the ancestors location. They can provide you with research that has already been accomplished and likely a list of appropriate resources. There are literally millions of resources. Here is a good place to start for any particular ancestor.

George

https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/Online_Genealogy_Records_by_Location#Canada_Online_and_North_America_Genealogy_Records

---

WikiTree says we are 22nd cousins once removed. Is your line proven?

---

Good afternoon Frankie:

The relationship finder on WikiTree is a " fun tool " to establish both relationships and connections

I have checked the relationship finder in WikiTree. When you input for relationship there is none. When you request connection by marriage it pops up. It shows 22nd cousin as you stated. The connection is through a marriage and not a common ancestor. It is therefore a connection and not a relationship. This is where WikiTree has gone a bit astray, ( in it's definitions ).

My connection to John Churchill of Plymouth and his wife, Hannah Pontus is a " pedigree "; a relation proven buy multiple primary sources. The connection to his English parents is not proven by primary sources. It is at a point of only being " highly likely " at this stage.

Hope this clarifies a few things.

Regards: George

---

Thanks George. I believed WikiTree, but now I know a lot is just conjecture. I have learned however, that Im definitely related to many families of NY, Conn., Mass., and RI. Most are of English descent. Good enough for me! Will keep looking for my paternal ggp's Jen's Andersen of Denmark and his wife Christeanna Schutz of Nassau, Germany. Thanks to everyone for their input.

---

Your welcome. WikiTree is a great place for finding helpful genealogists. If you ever run into a brick wall in your research, just post a new entry in G2G using the category " request for genealogical help " . The odds are very good that you will connect with someone with expertise relating to your question.

Answer 1

Frankie, If you can trace your family back to your 28th great grandfather, from you to that level includes 16,777,216 direct line ancestors.  Relative to that number, I don't think it's far fetched to share somewhere on the order of 300 common ancestors, especially since the most recent common ancestor between you and "distant family" might be well before the generation of your 28th great grandfather - you could easily have 300 shared ancestors on the way back from your common one to good ole' William's generation.

Important disclaimer - I know nothing of the genealogical principles involved here - my answer is strictly mathematical.

Comments

Ok so, how many are alive today, mathematically speaking?

---

That's a much harder question - it means going the other way, down through the generations from William to you, and it also requires theorizing how many children each person had along the way, and how many children each of the children had, etc.  On top of that, you have to decide how many generations back from you would be living right now.  Finally, you need to decide exactly what level relationships are included in what you're calling "distant family".  Sorry, but there are too many variables for me to take a stab at it.

Answer 2

Which of your ancestors is it showing the connection to William through?  Have you gone to that line and looked to see if it is a 'confirmed' connection or just a hypothetical one?  You would go to your 'gateway ancestor' and then look to see if its a proven or questionable line.

Once you get your tree connected to royalty or aristocracy, you will find that you are related to many of the medieval families, and thus will have thousands of ancestors that you share with others.

Darlene - Co-Leader, British Isles Royals & Aristocrats 742-1499 Project

Comments

Beaumont - Ferrers- Kinge

---

Frankie, can you provide a Wikitree profile ID for your gateway ancestor and the Beaumont, Ferrers, Kinge to which you refer?  Thanks.

When I used the Wikitree relationship finder for you and William, it said, "We could not find a blood relationship between Frankie Johnson and William I the Conqueror (Normandie) de Normandie."

---

Normandie-32, FitzRoy De Beaumont-104,  Dunkeld-4, Duward-7, to William Ferrers-311, to Kinge(King), to Tuthill to Havens, to me. Have to search "30 generations".

---

Well, I see some real problems with the lineage as shown on Wikitree. Margaret (Ferrers-49) is shown as being married to three men.  Royal Ancestry by Richardson confirms her marriage to Richard Grey, 6th Lord Grey, who didn't die until August 1442, making it impossible for her to be married to John Kinge in 1439 and having a son William Kinge in 1440. . .

Also, William (Kinge-44) has no sources showing him as the son of his parents shown.  A message from 2015 states: One source suggests his parents are Phillip Kinge and Thor Bethwin: http://www.billputman.com/King.pdf

Preceding generations also have no sources.  It appears someone decided to put together a connection back to William the Conqueror with absolutely no valid sources. . .  Due to the lack of any evidence of the parents of Kinge-44 and various notes on his profile suggesting different parents and asking for proof of any kind of his parents, I have detached the parents with a note on the profile.

I appreciate you bringing this profile to our attention.  Numerous of the generations have absolutely no sources for them.  Since this is one of your lines, perhaps you will be able to find time to research it.  All the best!

---

Darlene. Could you run me against old William.
Then run my mother rigg-346 against Him.
Its getting so confusing.
Now run me against you!
We share over 300 in so many lines its freaky.
Then run my mother against you at 30 gen.

---

If anyone knows, its you Darlene.
Is this what it says?

---

Hi Dave, Wikitree shows your mom and me sharing Sir Thomas Beauchamp as a common ancestor.  The problem is that the line on Wikitree is 'shaky' at best.  As I mentioned previously, the Kinge connection that people have made up my potential line is unproven.  I don't show it in my personal database. . .

I unfortunately don't have time to check your line for errors or proof, but I suggest that you research it.  It's a lot of fun and you will learn a lot.  Once you can prove a line in the British royals and aristocrats, you will have lots of connections.

You and I do share a common 10th great-grandfather in Rev. Henry Whitfield.  He's a very interesting person and there are some excellent books about his various lines.  Many years ago when I was at the Family History Library in Salt Lake City, I was able to look at the book "The ancestry of Reverend Henry Whitfield (1590-1657) and his wife Dorothy Sheafe (159?-1669) of Guilford, Connecticut".   It was a fabulous book by John Brooks Threlfall with some beautiful hand colored illustrations.  There is a digital copy of it online these days:  https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE86743  Unfortunately it's only in black and white.  Rev. Whitfield's wife was descended from Erasmus Kirkener, a well known armourer.  When I was in England, I was able to view one of the armours he had created -- really wonderful!

As far as shared ancestry, if both of our lines ever get proved back to a Magna Carta surety baron or even William the Conqueror, we will share thousands of ancestors!  The issue is proving the lines.  Many of the lineages on Wikitree are unproven.  There aren't a lot of people working on trying to prove them; it's a slow, difficult process.

---

Thanks so much. The whole concept of being interrelated to so many people is tempting. And these profiles should be fixed. I will devote some time to my own theoretical lines soon.
And ydna is coming.

So perhaps we match there on my moms side. I will check on gedmatch, if youve uploaded.

Thanks agian.