Granduncle Mark's Genealogy Parlor

What's A
Second-Cousin Twice-Removed?

'Removed' indicates that the two people being compared are a different number of generations away from their common ancestor.

The other part of the phrase, 'first cousin,' 'second cousin,' 'third cousin,' etc., describes the relationship of two people who are/were in the same generation.

There is no 'removed' used for people with the same grandparents. They are simply first cousins. Similarly, two people whose first common ancestors are the same great-grandparents are second cousins.

But, if John's grandmother is Mary, while that same Mary is great-great-grandmother to Melissa, then John and Melissa are 'first cousins twice removed.' This is because you have to go back two generations on Melissa's family tree to find the 'first cousin' of John.

Put another way, Melissa's grandparent is first cousin to John, so John and Melissa are 'first cousins twice removed.'

So, that is how I calculated that I am FIRST COUSIN REMOVED TEN TIMES of William PENN -- Because I am a great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandson of Lawrence ROUTH (Born 1660 in Hawes, Yorkshire, England, who was a first cousin of William Penn.)

On the other hand, I calculated that I am the SECOND COUSIN REMOVED SIX TIMES of U. S. President, Zachary TAYLOR -- Because I am a great-great-great-great-grandson of his second cousin, John Taylor.

There were few enough people in America one, two and three centuries ago, that almost everyone who isn't a recent immigrant can find a relationship to a famous American.

So, remember this equation and have fun searching for your renowned American ancestors!

Diagrams in the following boxes
illustrate this cousin scheme.

PLUS: Your questions answered below !!!

Illustration of Cousins Removed

Chart to Calculate Cousin Relationships

From CompuServe's Genealogy Forums

On the top row, find the relationship of one person to the common ancestor and follow the column straight down. Find the other persons relationship to the common ancestor on the left hand column and follow that row straight across. The relationship is where the projected row & column meet.

Common Ancestor	Child	Grandchild	Great Grandchild	Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Great Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandchild
Child	Sibling	Niece or Nephew	Grand Niece or Nephew	Great Grand Niece or Nephew	Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew	Great Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew	Great Great Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew	Great Great Great Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew
Grandchild	Niece or Nephew	First Cousin	First Cousin Once Removed	First Cousin Twice Removed	First Cousin Three Times Removed	First Cousin Four Times Removed	First Cousin Five Times Removed	First Cousin Six Times Removed
Great Grandchild	Grand Niece or Nephew	First Cousin Once Removed	Second Cousin	Second Cousin Once Removed	Second Cousin Twice Removed	Second Cousin Three Times Removed	Second Cousin Four Times Removed	Second Cousin Five Times Removed
Great Great Grandchild	Great Grand Niece or Nephew	First Cousin Twice Removed	Second Cousin Once Removed	Third Cousin	Third Cousin Once Removed	Third Cousin Twice Removed	Third Cousin Three Times Removed	Third Cousin FourTimes Removed
Great Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew	First Cousin Three Times Removed	Second Cousin Twice Removed	Third Cousin Once Removed	Fourth Cousin	Fourth Cousin Once Removed	Fourth Cousin Twice Removed	Fourth Cousin Three Times Removed
Great Great Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew	First Cousin Four Times Removed	Second Cousin Three Times Removed	Third Cousin Twice Removed	Fourth Cousin Once Removed	Fifth Cousin	Fifth Cousin Once Removed	Fifth Cousin Twice removed
Great Great Great Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew	First Cousin Five Times Removed	Second Cousin Four Times Removed	Third Cousin Three Times Removed	Fourth Cousin Twice Removed	Fifth Cousin Once Removed	Sixth Cousin	Sixth Cousin Once Removed
Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandchild	Great Great Great Great Great Grand Niece or Nephew	First Cousin Six Times Removed	Second Cousin Five Times Rremoved	Third Cousin FourTimes Removed	Fourth Cousin Three Times Removed	Fifth Cousin Twice Removed	Sixth Cousin Once Removed	Seventh Cousin

Your first cousin once removed is either:

the child of your first cousin

or the child of your grand-aunt/uncle

Why are they 'removed?'

---- Because they are in a different generation than you,
when compared to the most recent ancestor that you have in common!

CAUTIONS

We Americans tend to call the siblings of our grandparents "great-uncle" and "great-aunt." The correct terms are actually "grand-uncle" and "grand-aunt."

Go back another generation and we have our "great-grandparents," "great-grand-uncles," and "great-grand-aunts."

(Actually, this correct terminology is easier when you get used to it. Everyone in any given generation is referred to with the same number of "grand" and "greats.")

English kinship terminology .... contains the following principal terms:

mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister
uncle, aunt, nephew, niece
cousin (differently elaborated in different English speaking cultures)
grandfather, grandmother, grandson, granddaughter
granduncle, grandaunt, grandniece, grandnephew (in many dialects)
plus great-grandmother, great-great-grandmother etc. and great-grandfather, great-great-grandfather etc.

there are also the affinal terms:

wife, husband, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, mother-in-law and father-in-law as well as uncle and aunt.

From: Representing Anthropological Knowledge: Calculating Kinship: Analyzing and Understanding Cultural Codes

http://www.era.anthropology.ac.uk/Era_Resources/Era/Kinship/kinIntro.html

By: Michael D. Fischer

Be aware that the term "cousin" was used loosely during an early period of American history, and could be referring to a cousin, uncle or other relative.

Americans tend to call the children of their first cousins, their own "second cousins." That is wrong. Remember the rule about counting the number of generations to the common ancestor to see if there are any "removeds" to add to the cousin title. In this case, the children of our first cousins are our "first-cousins once-removed."

Hope this helps!

In Other Words

In case my explanations still have not made it clear, I am quoting below the clever explanation of Duane F. Alwin.

The word "cousin" has a variety of meanings, some of which are more precise than others. We often use the word in a general way to refer to any collaterally related persons more distant than siblings who share a common ancestor. When we want to be more specific, we use the term in a different way: cousins (or first cousins) are the children of siblings. That is to say, the children of my aunts and uncles are my first cousins.

Second cousins, on the other hand, are the children of first cousins, and third cousins are the children of second cousins, and so on. In other words, my second cousins are the children of my parents' first cousins, and my third cousins are the grandchildren of my grandparents' first cousins.

The degree of cousinness, thus, simply follows generational lines, given kinship relations defined by a common ancestor. By contrast, when one crosses generational lines to express relationships among cousins in an adjacent generation or across several generations, one normally expresses these cousin relations as "once removed" or "twice removed" according to how many generations separate the related individuals. Thus, one is a first cousin once removed (1C1R) to his or her parents' first cousins, or to the children of his or her first cousins.

I have always gotten a kick out of telling people that I am a cousin to myself. My maternal grandparents were first cousins once removed -- my grandfather married the daughter of his first cousin. His cousin was 15 years his senior and he was a few years older than my grandmother. In any event, following the above definitions -- second cousins are the children of first cousins -- we can see what may appear to be a contradiction. Because they are both daughters of first cousins, my mother is a second cousin to her own mother. This makes me a third cousin to my mother, as she and I are both children of second cousins in the same ancestral lineage. And, of course, to myself I am a third cousin, once removed (3C1R). Thus, when I use my genealogy software to print out the descendants of Samuel CHACEY (our common ancestor) I appear twice (and in different generations)-- once as a descendant of my grandfather and once in my grandmother's line. What better proof that I am my own cousin.

Matings between cousins are called consanguineal, meaning that the members of the pair have one or more common ancestors. In some geographical areas at some times such matings can be quite common. Whether we know it or not, each of us probably has some consanguineous marriage in their pedigree. Most cultures have rules that regulate the degree of relationship permitted between two individuals who wish to marry.

In many societies, including our own, marriages between first cousins, uncles and nieces, and aunts and nephews, are typically discouraged or in some cases outlawed. Although it would mean fewer grandparents to keep track of, such matings are probably not a good thing. Individuals with rare recessive sex-linked traits are often the offspring of such matings. On the other hand, such consanguineous matings are not necessarily undesirable. Charles DARWIN married his first cousin Emma WEDGWOOD, and the entire Darwin-Wedgwood lineage was highly inbred. Some have speculated that the pre-eminence of this lineage in the arts, sciences, and the professions may have resulted from some inbred genetic trait. But this is probably the exception, and genetic diversity in families is probably healthier over the long run.

SOURCE: Written by Duane F. Alwin, dfa@umich.edu. Previously published by Julia M. Case and Myra Vanderpool Gormley, CG, Missing Links, Vol. 5, No. 38, 20 September 2000. RootsWeb: http://www.rootsweb.com/

(Duane F. Alwin is Professor of Sociology at the University of Michigan, where he teaches social psychology, the family and research methods. In his spare time he actively pursues the history of his own family.)

Challenging Questions

Since publishing this particular page, I have received some e-mail messages with challenging questions. I will share some of these with you to further illustrate genealogy nominclature.

Question

If my second-cousin once-removed marry's a man, and that man has a brother, and the brother has children, how would I state my relationship to the brother's children?

Answer

The brother's children are the nieces and nephews of the man who married your second-cousin once removed. (There is no genetic relationship between you and these children. These children are instead related to you because of the marriage of their uncle to your second-cousin once-removed, and without that marriage, they would have no relationship to you.) -- Mark

Question

So, are these people who are related to me only because of a marriage important in my genealogy study?

Answer

Of course, in-law and "by marriage" relationships are important in genealogy.

For example, with some exceptions that we won't describe here, your mother and father were not genetically related to each other. But, the importance of their relationship "by marriage" is illustrated by your existence! -- Mark

Question

I don't understand why the children of my first-cousin aren't my second cousins.

Answer

The children of your first cousin are 3 generations later than your grandparents (their great-grandparents), while you are only 2 generations later than your grandparents. They are further "removed" from the common ancestors by 1 generation. Therefore, they are your first-cousins once-removed. Now, if you have children, and your first cousin has children, those children are second cousins to each other, because they share the same great-grandparents as their first common ancestors. -- Mark

Question

Does the woman who marries my uncle become my aunt?

Answer

No. She is literally your "aunt-in-law," just as she is the "sister-in-law" of one of your parents. Now, these "aunt-in-laws" and "uncle-in-laws" are usually affectionately called "aunt" and "uncle" in our culture, which is nice, but for each pair of "aunt and uncle" that you have, one of them is genetically related to you, and one of them is related by marriage. -- Mark

Question

How am I related to the spouse of my first-cousin once-removed?

Answer

The spouse of your first-cousin once-removed would be your "first-cousin once-removed in-law," although that's not an expression one hears very often. It would be more likely to hear that "she is the wife of my first-cousin once-removed." That person is not genetically related to you because your relationship is based on he or she having married your first cousin once removed. NOTICE THIS: You weren't related before that marriage. You don't have common ancestors. But, that person is in your legal family now because of marrying your first cousin once-removed. -- Mark

Question

Say my Uncle Charles marries Elaine. Say Elaine has a sister, Judy. Say Charles and Elaine have a child named, Fred. Say Judy has a child named, Esther. How am I related to Fred? How am I related to Esther?

Answer

Fred, the child of your Uncle Charles, is your first cousin. Fred is also first cousins to Esther, the child of Fred's aunt, Judy. You are not genetically related to Esther, even though Fred is first-cousin to both you and Esther. The reason is because Fred's first cousin relationship to you is through is father's family, while Fred's first cousin relationship to Esther is through his mother's family. You can refer to Esther as "the first cousin of my first cousin." You could also accurately refer to Esther as "the niece of the woman who married my Uncle." -- Mark

Question

Can you tell me what relation my grandmother's cousin's daughter is to me (if any!)?
Many thanks, Peter

Answer

Dear Peter,
Your grandmother's cousin's daughter is your "2nd cousin once removed." Your relationship with this woman is removed because you are one generation further removed from your common ancestors than she is. (Your great-grandparents are her grandparents. Going back on the family tree, that couple (Your great-grandparents, who are her grandparents) are the first ancestors that you and she share in common.) That woman is the second cousin of one of your parents, because she and one of your parents are the children of first cousins. This explains why the woman is both "2nd cousin" and "once removed" in relation to you. Combining these relationship descriptors, it is accurate to say that this woman is your "2nd cousin once removed." -- Mark

Question

Dr. Hickman,

Given that so many people say it differently than you, why do you use terms like:

granduncle
grandaunt
grandnephew
grandniece

instead of:

greatuncle
greataunt
greatnephew
greatniece

???

Answer

Because the correct terms are actually easier and more logical once you get used to them.

All of your grand relatives in a given generation are named with the same number of "grand" and "greats."

For example, your grandmother's siblings are your granduncles and grandaunts. That's your "grand" generation in the past.

Similarly, your grandchildren are in the same generation as their second-cousins, who are also your grandnieces and grandnephews. That's your "grand" generation in the future.

By the time you go to further generations on the family tree, it is a great relief that the system uses the same naming system for everyone in that generation.

For example, your great-great-grandfather's siblings are your great-great-grandaunts and great-great-granduncles.

No calculations necessary! You know immediately to apply 2 "greats" and 1 "grand" to those people, since there are 2 "greats" and 1 "grand" in your relationship to their sibling who is your ancestor.

That's your "great-great-grand" generation.

See how much easier that is? -- Mark

Question

I think you're wrong about "removed" and generations. My Uncle is in the same generation as me because we're the same age.

Answer

Society's generations are not the same concept as genealogy generations.

In genealogy, generation does not refer to age of the individual or to the time period born. In genealogy, generation refers to how many steps back on the family tree you have to go to get to a given ancestor. So, your uncle is not in the same generation as you, although you're the same age and you grew up together. You're uncle is one generation earlier than you, because his parents (one step away from him) are your grandparents (two steps away from you).

My mother had a first cousin younger than me. He was in my age group, we played together, as friends I was closer to him than my mother was, but genealogically he was in my mother's generation.

This example should explain ----------------- If my mother gave birth to a boy 25 years after I was born, we might be considered in a different "social" generation, but genealogically, my brother is in my generation no matter how far apart our ages, because we have exactly the same parents, the same grandparents, and so on. -- Mark

Question	So, are you saying that only genetic and marriage relationships are important in genealogy? Does that mean that step-relationships and non-married relationships are not relevant?
Answer	Absolutely not! Who my ancestors loved is the most personal and important thing that I can know about them as people. How could we search the Census to find our ancestor's literacy status and occupation, and not care about something as important as the relationships that he or she chose in life. -- Mark

Question

My cousin is being raised by my aunt, but it's a different aunt than the one who truly gave birth to him. He doesn't realize that the woman he thinks is his aunt actually is his mother, and vice versa. How do I handle sensitive issues like that in my genealogy project? Shouldn't I just go ahead and include the true facts?

Answer

Whoa .... slow down!

Different genealogists have different answers to this difficult question.

Most important, I believe that genealogy should never be cruel.

In a case like yours, I would write the relationships just as your cousin, and everyone else, believes them to be. The fact is, by accepting the family's definitions of themselves, you will probably be writing down exactly what you would have found if you had used your cousin's (now altered) birth certificate, school records, marriage records, military records, church records, etc.

Besides, since you've already observed that your family is capable of telling more than one story about a birth, the story you have been told may not be true, either. Even within very honest families, distortions happen, for a variety of reasons.

In a separate, and very private file, I would keep records that clarify the most accurate facts, and your sources, for future generations to consider after the possibility of hurting a living person is no longer relevant. Be sure that your Will clarifies that the trusted heir who receives that file can only pass it on to the next generation after a set number of years. If the story were about a long-gone great-great-grand-aunt, instead of about living relatives, then I would put the actual facts right into the database.

Some other genealogists take a more stringent approach ... refusing to include contemporary people in their databases, or including only names without any identifying dates or data. (Anyone can find just about anything he or she wants, about anyone, via the Internet, anyway. But, I don't include birthdates of living people on my Web site to prevent relatives from having their identities stolen. I do, however, keep birthdates and other personal information in my computer database, to preserve them for future generations.)

Now if you tell me that this will add an inaccuracy to your research, I would remind you that you have no way of prooving fatherhood for the vast majority of the people in your family tree. We'll never know which of our ancestors let their husbands proudly believe that they were the father of a baby that actually resulted from a one-time indiscretion. Like all sciences, genealogical research is based on probability. We are always "more or less" certain of our facts, because we can't go back in a time machine to be sure that a record wasn't wrong. Anyone doing genealogy for very long finds that their ancestors used whatever names they wanted to call themselves at any given time, and some of our ancestors gave different birth dates in family Bibles versus marriage licenses versus what they told the Census workers.

One of my great-grandmothers was a Church of the Brethren Minister, but she didn't get married until shortly after the birth of her second child. Now, we could jump to conclusions about her wild behavior, or we could look in the context of history and realize that pioneers like her entered wilderness areas before the circuit preachers did, and in that culture, you were married if you said you were married. When a circuit preacher was available in the area, she got legally married. And she stayed with my great-grandfather until his death. Similarly, there are often contextual factors in our current sensitive family situations that cause people to make the decisions that they make.

And don't forget that the most important mother relationship your cousin has is with the woman he has known as mother, and the woman whom society has recognized as his mother. This is no different than if your cousin had been adopted from outside of the family. His legal and nurturing mother is precisely who he believes it to be. If genetics are different from legality in this case, you are not the person who has the most right to decide that needs to be sorted.

As Ann Landers and Dear Abby would say, M.Y.O.B.

My main point is, you have no right to destroy families under the guise of honoring them.

And, if you should ever be so insensitive as to cause such pain to your relatives, no relatives will tell you anymore stories, anyway. -- Mark

Question

What does the phrase "twice removed" mean? I know what it means with relatives, but just in general, what does it mean.

Would it be correct to say, "the woman was twice removed from beauty"?

Answer

Dear John,

I personally haven't heard the phrase used anywhere but within genealogy.

I suppose the phrase could be used to clarify steps from a fixed point on any ordinal scale.

But, I really can't imagine any situation in which it would be appropriate to call another person "twice removed from beauty," ----------- unless, of course, you were referring to a sender of mass e-mail advertisements. -- Mark

Question

I enjoyed you website. My sister, who is a math teacher, claims that actually there should be no such thing as a true third cousin, and that cousin relationships should jump from first to second to fourth and then to eighth, etc.

I say that what she is doing is figuring bloodlines, similar to the way native american indians calculate how much of full indian blood a person is - 1/2 indian, 1/4 indian, 1/8 indian, etc. The terms "cousin" and "bloodline" really don't have anything to do with each other.

My sister says that she used to figure relationships for a lawyer to determine who got what share of an inheritance, and this was how she was told to do it. That was the legal method.

I think the lawyer was wrong, and that some people may have missed out on their fair shares of inheritances.

Which of us is right?

Answer

Dear Mike,

Do you suppose the lawyer got the missing percentages in those inheritances?

While it is true that I am approximately half as related to my grandparent as my parent is (I say "approximately" because I don't know whether my mother passed on more of my grandfather's genes to me, or more of my grandmother's genes), didn't your sister have trouble getting the people's fractions to add up to 100% ?

In the formula your sister used, if the deceased left 3 children, that would be 3 halves. Did the lawyer donate the extra money needed in that formula?

Or, if someone died and left one child, one grandchild and one great-grandchild, the 1/2, 1/4 and 1/8 in your sister's formula only adds up to 7/8's. Who got the other 1/8 of the estate?

But, I digress. You are correct that calculating cousin relationships is a different formula than calculating bloodline percentages. That means that you do, indeed, have third cousins. -- Mark

Question	What's the difference between "5th cousins" and "first cousins removed 5 times?"
Answer	About 200 years. 5th cousins are in the same generation with each other. They share two of the same great-great-great-great-grandparents. On the other hand, "first cousins removed 5 times," refers to one person being the first cousin of the other person's great-great-great-grandparent, so they are in different generations of the family. -- Mark

Question	My wife is Korean and their way of naming their relation is way different than ours. My question is if her grandfather has a 1st cousin what would we call that cousin? She calls him her grandfather as well. Thanks
Answer	I do not know Korean relationship terminology. I will defer to your wife's expertise on that. In the United States, her grandfather's first cousin would be her "first cousin twice removed." -- Mark

Question	What is my relationship to my husband's brother's wife's sister?
Answer	Your husband's brother's wife's sister is just that -- your husband's brother's wife's sister. You could also say that she is the sister-in-law of your brother-in-law. -- Mark

Question	Who has exactly the same ancestry as me?
Answer	Your full brothers and sisters have exactly the same set of ancestors as you have. The only other time that would occur would be in the case of double-first cousins. When 2 siblings marry 2 siblings, their children are double first cousins, and have exactly the same set of ancestors. -- Mark

Question	So, are double-first cousins genetically the same as brothers and sisters?
Answer	Not unless their parents were two sets of identical twins. -- Mark

Question

My great grandmother's brother married my great grandfather's sister. Both of these couples had one son, those sons being double-first cousins.

What relationship do I have with my grandfather's double first cousin? Am I double-first cousin twice removed ?

By the same token, am I double third cousins to this man's grandchildren?

It would seem that we're more than simply cousins because I am cousin to them all through both of my great grandparents, not just one.

Answer

You are correct.

You and this man's grandchildren are double third cousins because 4 of your 16 great-great-grandparents are shared with them, while regular third cousins share 2 of their 16 great-great-grandparents. -- Mark

Question

Dear Dr Hickman

I came across your site explaining the entire "cousin x times removed" conundrum, and it has answered many questions that have been nagging me for years (as a trivia buff!). I just wish to congratulate you on a clear, concise and fascinating website, that I have just recommended to all my friends.

... One query though (on a purely theoretical level) arising from your FAQ answer to the "double first cousin" phenomenon. Would I be correct in saying that if a pair of identical twins each married a pair of identical twins, that each child from either marriage are genetically identical, and has a 1 in 4 chance of being physically identical to any one of his cousins? Or is there a gentic factor that I don't understand?

-- James

Answer

Dear James,

Thank you for your kind words.

The children of two couples, comprised of the marriage of two sets of identical twins, would be genetically the same as siblings. These cousins would be as related as brothers and sisters are.

The reason the cousins are not identical, or even identical 1/4 of the time, is because any given parents can contribute many different combinations of genes and chromosomes to a baby. So, just as the odds are extremely against non-twin siblings being identical, the same is true for the various children of 2 sets of identical twins.

Another way to think about this concept: You have known couples with five children, each of them different from the others, even though all five children had exactly the same set of parents.

If each of these parents had an identical twin that married each other, the same variety would show up in the total group of children from both couples. -- Mark

Question

My parents were third cousins to each other.

Does this mean I am "extra related" to my brother and sister?

Answer

Yes, your brother and sister are also your 4th cousins in your father's family, and your 4th cousins in your mother's family.

In fact, you are technically a 4th cousin to yourself through your father's line, as well as 4th cousin to yourself through your mother's line. (Go ponder that tidbit for a while!)

And, each of your parents are also your "third-cousin once-removed."

fascinating, isn't it?

Now, think about this ... You have two families to consider when you think of your parents. Four families are involved with your grandparents. Going back just five generations gives you 32 families to research. Keep multiplying ... go back 20 generations and you'll be studying your 1,048,576 family surnames in your spare time.

Given that there didn't used to be all that many people on the planet, you're probably related to almost everyone you've ever met, and you probably have more multiple relationships than you will ever discover.

But, don't panic. Worries about inherited diseases and lethal genetic conditions usually apply to much closer relationships, such as marriages between first cousins. -- Mark

Question

Up to the late 19th century, U.S. maternal mortality rates were very high. It's not uncommon to see fathers taking second and even third wives after losing an earlier wife in (or very shortly after) childbirth. I have also noticed that the 2nd and 3rd wives would often be taken from the same family (a sister or a niece) as the first.

In my own family tree, I have a great-great-grandfather with several considerably older half-siblings -- but his mother was the niece of the mother of the first set of my g-g-g-grandfather's children. So, might the elder half-siblings better be referred to as '3/4' siblings of my great-great-grandfather?

More generally, is there any standard way of distinguishing between 'simple' half- siblings (where the 'uncommon' parents are unrelated) versus more complicated relationships like those of my great-great-grandfather and his older part-siblings?

Answer

No, I am not aware of a term that inherently explains the extra-relatedness of people related in multiple ways, unless the two relationships are the same kind of relationship (e.g. "double first cousins" describing the relationship of the children of two unions wherein siblings married siblings).

Instead, I would mention both relationships when describing the relationship of two people.

For example, your great-great-great-grandfather's second wife was both step-mother and first-cousin to the children of your great-great-great-grandfather's first marriage.

Your great-great-grandfather's older siblings were both his half-siblings (through their common father's line) and his first-cousins once-removed (through the relationship of their respective mothers' lines). -- Mark

Question

I am going to a family reunion and am making a family album and was going to make a family tree for the cover. In doing this I realized that my Great Grand Father married his second cousin. I have gone through your website to determine that they were in fact second cousins but I would love if you could confirm that I am my Mothers 4th cousin once removed?

Answer

You are correct. Actually, your mother is your "DOUBLE 4th cousin once removed" in addition to being related to you as your mother. That is because she is your "4th cousin once removed" through your great-grandfather's line because she is the granddaughter of his second cousin, as well as being your "4th cousin once removed" through your great-grandmother's line because she is the granddaughter of her first cousin.

This also means that you are a "double 5th cousin" to yourself, because you are the great-granddaughter of your great-grandfather's second cousin, as well as being a great-granddaughter of your great-grandmother's second cousin. -- Mark

Question

Are my parents my ancestors?

Are my aunts and uncles my ancestors?

Answer

Your parents are, in fact, your closest ancestors.

Your aunts and uncles are not technically your ancestors, because you didn't descend directly from them.

Instead, your aunts and uncles are close relatives. They are in your family tree. But, they are collaterally related to you through your parent, instead of ancestrally related. And, they are part of your ancestral family, as siblings of your parent. But, it's a collateral, instead of an ancestral, relationship. -- Mark

Question

Am I more closely related to my aunts and uncles, or to my first cousins?

Answer

You are more closely related to your aunts and uncles.

This is because you have to go through your aunts and uncles to trace your relationship to your first cousins, and then when you get to your first cousins, they have some additional ancestry that you don't share, through their other parent.

First cousins are close relatives, but your aunts and uncle are even more closely related to you. -- Mark

Question

I have a half-sister (my mother remarried) and a "step"-sister (my dad remarried someone that brought a child into the marriage). Do you have similar nomenclature tables for naming conventions when you only share one parent in common?

Bryan

Answer

Dear Bryan,

To answer your question, the good news is that the same modifiers are used with all kinds of relationships, although it takes a bit of thinking sometimes to figure out which ones to use.

Your father married a woman who already had a daughter. If your father adopted that daughter, then she is your step sister. She is no relation to your mother, except as "the step-daughter of my former husband." To your father's brothers and sisters, your father's step-daughter would be their step-niece, while your father's brothers and sisters would be her step-uncles and step-aunts. Now ... many families will choose to drop the "step" in common usage, out of affection for the step relatives, simply saying, "Aunt Jewel and Uncle Carl."

Your half-sister is the full niece of your mother's brothers and sisters, because they are just as related to her as they are to you -- through their sister, who is the mother of both of you. Similarly, your mother's brothers and sisters are simply uncles and aunts to your half sister, just as they are to you.

Regarding your mother's family, you and your half-sister have exactly the same relationships to everyone. But, since you have different fathers, the half of your relatives that come through your father are totally different than the half of her relatives that come through her father.

Your mother's parents are equally grandparents to your half sister and you, while you have a different set of paternal grandparents than your half-sister has.

You share no ancestry with your step-sister, but you have legal relatives in common with your step-sister. -- Mark

Question

Mark,

I was looking through your web page and was wondering if you could be kind enough to email me a basic family tree. For example my nephew by marriage is married. Is she my niece by marriage and their children my great nieces or nephews? Please either send me a breakwon sheet or let me know where I can find one.

Thank you very much,

Cheryl

P.S. I am sorry to bother you -- can't seem to find the information anywhere.

Answer

Dear Cheryl,

The wife of your nephew-by-marriage is "the wife of your nephew-by marriage." In other words, you worded the answer correctly in your question. It would also be correct for you to refer to her as "the wife of my nephew in-law."

The children of your nephew are your grand-nephews and grand-nieces.

The children of your nephew-by-marriage are your grand-nephews-by marriage (or, grand-nephews in-law) and grand-nieces-by marriage (or, grand-nieces in-law).

The children of your grand-nephews and grand-nieces will be your great-grand-nephews and great-grand-nieces.

The children of your grand-nephews-by-marriage and grand-nieces-by-marriage will be your great-grand-nephews-by-marriage and great-grand-nieces-by-marriage.

Okay, Cheryl, I have tried to combine the concepts of niece-nephew, cousin, and direct ancestry in the chart below.

-- Mark

Mary

sisters

Sue

Jennifer

daughter of Mary
niece of Sue

Jennifer & Cindy are first cousins

Cindy

daughter of Sue
niece of Mary

Tami

daughter of Jennifer,
granddaughter of Mary,
grand-niece of Sue
first-cousin once-removed of Cindy

Tami and Cheryl are second cousins

Cheryl

daughter of Cindy,
granddaughter of Sue,
grand-niece of Mary
first-cousin once-removed of Jennifer

Beth

daughter of Tami,
granddaughter of Jennifer,
great-granddaughter of Mary,
great-grand-niece of Sue
second-cousin once-removed of Cheryl
first-cousin twice-removed of Cindy

Beth and Dana are third cousins

Dana

daughter of Cheryl,
granddaughter of Cindy,
great-granddaughter of Sue,
great-grand-niece of Mary
second-cousin once-removed of Tami
first-cousin twice-removed of Jennifer

Question # 1	First of all your site was very helpful, but I have a few questions I hope you can answer for me. My great-grandfather and Mary's great-grandfather were brothers. Does that mean that we are 3rd cousins and what are the genetic implications if we were to have kids??? A man
Answer # 1	Dear Man, Thanks for visiting my Web site, and thank you for your e-mail message. You and Mary's first common ancestors were your great-great-grandparents, so that you are, indeed, third cousins. I am not a geneticist, but we can calculate that you and Mary have 2 of the same great-great-grandparents out of the 16 great-great-grandparents that you each have. That means that 1/8 of your ancestry is identical. That does not necessarily mean that you share 1/8 of your genes -- it could be more or it could be less, because there are so many possible genetic combinations when a child is conceived. The concern most often expressed about two relatives conceiving children is that some problematic conditions and traits are hidden for many generations on recessive genes, and don't show up in the individual as long as they are paired with a more-beneficial dominant gene from an unrelated other parent. When two relatives conceive a child, there is some increased chance of any hidden negative genes showing up as features of the child. Obviously, that concern is greater when the relationship is closer. It's a bigger concern between brother and sister than with a first cousin. It's a bigger concern with first cousins than with second cousins. And so on. In some families, there is a known hereditary illness or condition that would make people be very careful. On the other hand, most people you've met are probably related to you to some small degree, and European Royalty has married distant cousins throughout history. Of course, European Royalty also has a higher incidence of certain hereditary conditions than other families, such as deafness. This is a brief overview of the issue. As I said, I'm not a geneticist, so I can't give an expert opinion on the risks to your children. We know that the risk is not zero. On the other hand, third cousins are more different than they are alike. You should consult with an expert on genetics, or a physician who deals with genetic disorders, to find out more about whether the risk to your children is statistically great enough to effect your future decisions. The answer to that question may also depend upon whether or not there are hereditary conditions of concern in your family tree. Incidentally, if you should have two children with Mary those children would be related both as siblings and as fourth cousins to each other. Also, your children would be related to you both as parent-child and as your "third cousins once removed." Thank you for presenting this challenging question. If you don't mind, I'd like to post your thoughtful question on my Web site. I would change the names, of course, to protect your privacy. Please let me know. Sincerely, -- Mark
Question # 2	Thank you for the reply. Question, and I want your personal opinion...... what do you feel morally and ethnically about 3rd cousins being together???????????? Feel free to post, but PLEASE change the names.
Answer # 2	Dear Man, Well, your question definitely goes beyond a genealogical focus, and I can't predict your future, but I'll try to share some thoughts on your sincere question. I'm afraid that there is not one simple answer to your question. Instead, there are a variety of issues that you will need to consider in deciding what is the ethically correct answer for you. If you are someone for whom the beliefs of one of the World's religions is important (for example, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.), your religion might have certain beliefs that relate to your question. However, as I mentioned, if your family has been in one area for a few generations, you probably have some degree of relationship to most people that you encounter, whether you know it or not. Across human history, including early American history, populations of human settlements were often small enough that marriages between cousins were not uncommon at all. That is why genealogists often find the same individual as their ancestor when they go back on two different family lines. In your case, you know about your relationship with Mary, so it would certainly be ethically appropriate to take advantage of today's genetic knowledge to learn whether there is significant risk of genetic disease or undesirable hereditary conditions for children produced with your third cousin. And, again, that may depend on whether there are such genetic conditions known to occur in your family background. If you should learn that this is a significant risk factor, then you will have multiple choices. You may determine not to marry your third cousin after all. Or, you may decide to marry her because of your love for her, but to not biologically reproduce. Or, you may decide that you are able to provide the special care and love for a child with special needs (and, you could produce a child with special needs even if your partner were not your relative), and go ahead and follow your heart and see what your future holds. I congratulate you on being someone who is so thoughtful about important life decisions. I wish for you a very happy future! -- Mark

Question

If i were to marry my second cousin once removed; will that affect our future child? Do you know if it is approved by the Catholic laws? Is our gene still concedered related? And are such marriages allowed?

Answer

I can only answer the genealogy part of your question. Your second cousin once removed is indeed a relative.

Your questions are good ones, but your other questions are religious, legal and medical, so it wouldn't be appropriate for me to give an opinion. You will get your best answers from experts in those fields.

As for whether such a marriage is allowed under Catholic law, your priest can probably answer that question.

As for whether such a marriage is allowed where you live, the laws vary in different states and locations. An attorney, a clerk who issues marriage licenses, or a priest who conducts marriages in your location may be able to answer your question. Or, you can probably find your location's marriage laws on the Internet or in your local library.

As for whether such a marriage would effect a child, that is a medical question, and depends on lots of factors, such as whether or not there are hereditary medical conditions in your family. Your physician may be able to help you with that question. -- Mark

Question

Hi there.

I am on a quest to find a chart or explanation of degrees of affinity and degrees of consanguinity. Can you explain to me the difference between the two, including listing what degree of affinity a first or second cousin, aunt, great grandchild would be. I've searched everywhere, including Black's law dictionary. Help!

Thanks!

Ginger

Answer

Dear Ginger,

The problem with providing an exact answer to your question is that degree of affinity and degree of consanguinity are legal concepts, instead of genealogical concepts.

Accordingly, the definitions may vary from one location to another.

However, degrees of affinity are based on marital relationship while degrees of consanguinity are based on blood (genetic) or adopted relationship.

An example, from the Texas Code, is provided below. -- Mark

� 573.022. Determination of Consanguinity

(a) Two individuals are related to each other by consanguinity if:

(1) one is a descendant of the other; or
(2) they share a common ancestor.
(b) An adopted child is considered to be a child of the adoptive parent for this purpose. Added by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 268, � 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993.

� 573.023. Computation of Degree of Consanguinity

(a) The degree of relationship by consanguinity between an individual and the individual's descendant is determined by the number of generations that separate them. A parent and child are related in the first degree, a grandparent and grandchild in the second degree, a great-grandparent and great-grandchild in the third degree and so on.

(b) If an individual and the individual's relative are related by consanguinity, but neither is descended from the other, the degree of relationship is determined by adding:

(1) the number of generations between the individual and the nearest common ancestor of the individual and the individual's relative; and
(2) the number of generations between the relative and the nearest common ancestor.

(c) An individual's relatives within the third degree by consanguinity are the individual's:

(1) parent or child (relatives in the first degree);
(2) brother, sister, grandparent, or grandchild (relatives in the second degree); and
(3) great-grandparent, great-grandchild, aunt who is a sister of a parent of the individual, uncle who is a brother of a parent of the individual, nephew who is a child of a brother or sister of the individual, or niece who is a child of a brother or sister of the individual (relatives in the third degree).

Added by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 268, � 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993.

� 573.024. Determination of Affinity

(a) Two individuals are related to each other by affinity if:

(1) they are married to each other; or

(2) the spouse of one of the individuals is related by consanguinity to the other individual.

(b) The ending of a marriage by divorce or the death of a spouse ends relationships by affinity created by that marriage unless a child of that marriage is living, in which case the marriage is considered to continue as long as a child of that marriage lives.

(c) Subsection (b) applies to a member of the board of trustees of or an officer of a school district only until the youngest child of the marriage reaches the age of 21 years.

Added by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 268, � 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993.

Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 260, � 32, eff. May 30, 1995.

� 573.025. Computation of Degree of Affinity

(a) A husband and wife are related to each other in the first degree by affinity. For other relationships by affinity, the degree of relationship is the same as the degree of the underlying relationship by consanguinity. For example: if two individuals are related to each other in the second degree by consanguinity, the spouse of one of the individuals is related to the other individual in the second degree by affinity.

(b) An individual's relatives within the third degree by affinity are:

(1) anyone related by consanguinity to the individual's spouse in one of the ways named in Section 573.023(c); and

(2) the spouse of anyone related to the individual by consanguinity in one of the ways named in Section 573.023(c).

Question

I think some genealogists gauge relatedness by degree, counting connecting relatives to the person in question. Thus your mother is your relative to the first degree as are your children; your mother's brother would be related to the third degree because you count one up for your mother and another up for her parents and then one down for her brother. Your grandparents are related in the second degree as are your grandchildren. Your second cousin once removed is related either to the fifth or to the seventh degree, depending on whether he is toward your common ancestor pair or in the other direction. Is there any use or significance to this in biology or genealogy, that is to measuring relatedness in degrees?

Donald

Answer

Dear Donald,

See my answer to the previous question, which explains that Degrees of Relationship is a legal, rather than a genealogical, concept.

Because of that, definitions of Degrees of Relationship may vary from place to place. -- Mark

Question # 1	Is a grand nephew of a half brother closer in blood than a second cousin once removed?
Answer # 1	I appreciate your challenging question. If your half-brother's grandnephew is not also your grandnephew, then I presume that grandnephew is from your half-brother's other family, and therefore is not biologically related to you at all. Your second cousin once removed is a biological relative. On the other hand, if your half-brother's grandnephew IS related to you biologically, then that grandnephew is either also your grandnephew (if he descends from another one of your siblings), or he could be your own grandson (your grandson would be a grandnephew of your sibling). If so, he would be more closely related to you than a second cousin once removed. -- Mark
Question # 2	Here's an even more challenging question. Are you considered an expert in genealogy? The question I previously posed to you is for a probate litigation matter and we would like to use your affidavit in that matter if possible. We have a case where a person is claiming that he is a grand nephew of a half brother of a decedent and we represent the second cousin once removed (which he can prove). If you cannot or won't provide an affidavit, can you recommend a genealogy expert?
Answer # 2	Shame on your for pretending to have a genealogy question in order to screen my answer to see if it would help your legal case! And, shame on you as an attorney for not knowing that probate decisions are based on the state or locality's probate laws, rather than on genealogical relationships. -- Mark

Question

Hi, I'm looking for some answers here and would like your help.

Years back I was married to a man named Ted (names have been changed), who has a sister, Karen, by the same mother, but with different fathers. So, that makes them half-brother and half-sister. Is that correct?

Ted and I had two boys together. Karen had two girls, with two different fathers.

I have been in a relationship with Bill, one of Karen's ex-boyfriends, which happens to be the father of one of her girls.

If I were to marry this man, what would the relationship be between the children?

Karen claims that our relationship is wrong and bad for the kids. I don't understand her point.

She won't let him see the girls, and he is trying to fight this in court. Does she have a case with this legally? What's your opinion, and how is everyone related here? Thanks.

Answer

You question about whether or not Karen has a case is a legal question, not a genealogy question. I'm not an attorney, so I can't give legal opinion.

Your children with Ted are "half first cousins" to Karen's children, same as they have always been. If you marry Bill, then your children could be considered step-brothers to one of Karen's daughters, as well as being her half first cousins.

Bill's daughter can now be considered "the half niece of your former husband." If you marry Bill, that daughter could also be your step-daughter.

But ..................... since we aren't talking about any new primary relationships between two people who are blood relatives, I am guessing that Karen's concern is not about multiple genealogical relationships. Instead, I suspect the question is related to all of the various relationships & former relationships, and how your marriage to Bill might complicate a tangle of relationships that is already tense.

That is probably an important question to all concerned, but it is not a genealogy question.

Now, if you and Bill should have a child, that child would be the only person related to absolutely everyone mentioned above. That's the only genealogical point in these questions about relationships. Everything else in your situation seems to be more of a legal and contact/no contact nature. -- Mark

Question # 1	My grandmother, through my mother's side, has a brother. Well that brother is my uncle I guess, and that uncle had a boy, and that boy is my husband. What degree of cousins are we?
Answer # 1	Your grandmother's brother is your granduncle (and he is uncle to your mother). The son of your granduncle is first-cousin to your mother, which means that your husband is your "first cousin once removed." -- Mark
Question # 2	Thank you Mark for replying so quickly! So does that mean he (my husband) is my second cousin?
Answer # 2	No. Your husband is your "first cousin once removed." It is a removed relationship because in relationship to your first common ancestors (the parents of your grandmother), you are their great-granddaughter, while your husband is their grandson. You are one generation later in the family tree than your husband, so the "removed" phrase is used. If your husband had a son, that son would be your "second cousin," because that son and you would both be 3 generations later than your first common ancestors going back, which were your great-grandparents. Now, this is where it gets fascinating -- and complicated. If you and your husband have a child, that child will be both (1) your child, and (2) your second cousin. That child will be related to your husband as both (1) his child, and (2) his "first cousin twice removed." In relationship to your great-grandparents, that child will be both their (1) great-grandson (through your husband's line), and (2) their great-great-grandson (through your line). In reference to your grandmother, that child will be both (1) her great-grandchild, and (2) her grand-niece or grand-nephew. In reference to your mother, your child would be both (1) her grandchild, and (2) her "first cousin once removed." -- Mark
Question # 3	Okay! I think I get it now! Just to make sure, he is less or "further" related to me than a second cousin. Right? Sorry! This is like so foreign to me. Thank you so much Mark! Take care
Answer # 3	No. Your husband, as your first-cousin once-removed, is MORE related to you than would be his offspring (your second cousins). That's because if you were tracing your relationship to your second cousin, you would have to go through him. Your second cousins are related to you because they are the children of your "first cousins once removed." If you are trying to figure out if your genetic relationship to your husband is a close one, the answer is yes. He's not as related as a first cousin, but he's more related than a second cousin. Now, marriages between cousins were not uncommon in earlier times when communities were smaller and separated by greater distances. Your marriage is probably legal in most places, although laws governing cousin marriages vary from State to State in this country. Some places do prohibit marriages between first cousins, and some places do not. Your relationship to your husband is a little more distant than a first cousin relationship, since you are "first cousins once removed." The most important point for you to consider is whether or not you might be at any significant risk of producing children with inherited problems that usually don't show up because they are associated with recessive genes. Looking at medical conditions in your shared family background, as well as consulting with a geneticist or your physician, are ways to approach that question. -- Mark

Question

My mother recently informed me that her mother and my father's mother were first cousins. Are my parents second cousins or first cousins once removed and how close is that, as far as genetics are concerned? Great website by the way.

Answer

Your parents would be second cousins to each other.

That means that 2 of your mother's 8 great-grandparents were also 2 of your father's great-grandparents. Put another way, 1/4 of your mother's ancestors were the same as 1/4 of your father's ancestors.

That does not mean that they share 1/4 of their genes. In fact, it would probably be much less than that since brothers and sister have 100% the same ancestors, but are still genetically different from each other, unless they are identical twins.

This also means that you have 14 different people as your great-great-grandparents, instead of the customary 16 -- but 2 of those are your double-great-great-grandparents.

Interestingly, your mother is also your "second cousin once removed" through your father's line, and your father is your "second cousin once removed" through your mother's line, as well as being your father.

You are, in fact, "double third cousin" to yourself. That is because you are third cousin to the children of your mother's second cousin (who happens to be your father), and you are third cousin to the children of your father's second cousin (who happens to be your mother).

If you have a child, that child is both (1) your child and (2) your "double third cousin once removed."

Your father is both (1) grandfather and (2) "second cousin twice removed" to your child, and your mother is both (1) grandmother and (2) "second cousin twice removed" to your child.

Complex, but fascinating!

Thanks for writing! -- Mark

Question

My father's mother remarried when my father was quite young. She had another son and daughter making my father their half-sibling. I want to know exactly what the relationship is between myself and my half-uncle's children. Could you tell me? The reason I am asking is that I am marrying one of my half-uncle's children and I don't know how to respond to people's questions when they ask what the relationship is.

Answer

Your half uncle's children are your "half first cousins."

One of your four grandparents is also one of the four grandparents of your half first cousins, so you share 25% of your ancestry with them, while full first cousins share 50% of the same ancestors, and full siblings share 100% of the same ancestors.

If you have children by this marriage, your children will also be your "half first cousins once removed."

They will also be "half first cousins once removed" to your spouse.

Your children will be both siblings to each other, as well as being each other's "half second cousin."

Your children will be your father's grandchildren, as well as being his "half grand nephews" and "half grand nieces."

Your paternal grandmother will be great-grandmother to your children twice. In other words, most people have eight great-grandparents. Your children will have only seven great-grandparents, because your grandmother will fill that slot twice for your children. -- Mark

Question

I understand the "removed" idea for going up in the family tree (ancestors), but it does not seem consistent going down. For example, my grandmother's second cousin is simply my second cousin, twice removed (two generations). My father's first cousin is my first cousin, once-removed.

Going down on the family tree, why isn't my son's second cousin my second cousin, once-removed (one generation)? It is my understanding that that person would be my first cousin, once-removed?? Technically, it would seem that my first cousin, once-removed, going down the family tree, would be my son's first cousin, or my nephew!!

Answer

Remember that regardless of whether one is going "up" or "down" the family tree, the concept of "removed" is about how many generations each of the compared relatives is from the first common ancestors (which always requires looking back in time).

Your son and his second cousin have their great-grandparents as their first common ancestors. You are a generation closer to their great-grandparents than they are, because those same ancestors are your grandparents.

Your son's second cousin is related to you because he/she is the child of your first cousin, but is removed from your grandparents one more generation than you are.

The reason that your nephew, who is your son's first cousin, is not your first cousin once removed is because that would be calculating the closeness of relationship through each of your relationships to your son, instead of through your common ancestors.

It may also help to realize that your nephew is a closer relative to you than is your first cousin once removed. Your nephew is the child of your sibling, while your first cousin once removed is the child of your cousin.

Excellent question, though. -- Mark

Question

Mark,

Thank you for an informative website.

I have had a couple of discussions with fellow language and grammar buffs in the past about the definition and use of "second cousin".

Your site and others I have found make it clear that the official system in genealogy defines "second cousin" as sharing great-grandparents.

Yet many people still use the term to refer to a first cousin's children. I suspect this is a vulgar usage that took hold despite being wrong (the student didn't know which book was theirs).

One dictionary definition I saw a while back (a printed dictionary, mind you, not a web-based offering!) allowed that "second cousin" can mean either the child of a parent's first cousin or a first cousin's child. I have seen this allowance elsewhere. Does this reflect the official/vulgar split that dictionaries have learned to acknowledge? Or are there actually two systems out there, one of which is accepted by the educated genealogy community?

In short, what is the history of the official terminology? Did the current definition win out over a competitor in the past, though the competitor remains in our popular usage? Or did the currently "incorrect" but decidedly popular definition arise as a misuse of a previously accepted but easy-to-confuse system?

The question of whether the dictionary writers lead the masses or the other way around comes to mind.

I would appreciate your help with this somewhat historical question.

Answer

Thank you for visiting my Web site, and thank you for your challenging and thought-provoking questions.

I am not a linquist, so I don't claim to know the origins of contemporary genealogical nomenclature.

I suspect that your hypotheses are correct. Dictionaries evolve as language evolves, with the purpose of defining words in use rather than as a rule book for words to use.

A compelling reason for genealogical researchers to consistently use the nomenclature accepted by other genealogical researchers is to ensure that we are accurately communicating information.

On the other hand, the careful genealogist must maintain awareness that language, and therefore records, may be less precise or less consistent in defining relationships.

For example, when reading a letter addressed to "my dear brother," we must be aware of the fact that the term brother usually implies (1) male sibling, but also could imply (2) writing to a monk, (3) writing to a fellow church member, (4) writing to a fellow member of black culture, (5) writing to someone with cultural roots in the 1960's, or (6) writing to a friend who is "just like a brother to me."

Genealogy would be an easier task if language was consistent across time and across locations. Since language is not always consistent, the genealogist must seek as much evidence as possible to support conclusions.

Similarly, when someone refers to a person as his/her second cousin, I don't automatically presume that the two people share great-grandparents since so many people use "second cousin" to refer to the children of one's first cousin.

Now, I think that usage is illogical, because if we count every step that way then two people with the same great-grandparents would be called third cousins (i.e., if the child of your first cousin is your second cousin, then your own child would have to be the third cousin of the child of your first cousin -- and no one seems to take the misuse to that extent.)

So, I continue to hold that second cousins are people who share the same great-grandparents as their first common ancestors. -- Mark

Question

I am trying to come up with a descriptive term for a couple and their children that we see at church and sporting events all the time. When I try to describe the relationship to people it always sounds so confusing.

Let's see if I can describe it to you. My husband's sister, Beulah, is married to David. David's brother Ted is the first one I am trying to assign a term. Is he my brother-in-law by marriage? Or is he called something else. Ted and his wife Jan have two children.

Are their children called anything to my children. We have just given up to having my children call them Aunt Jan and Uncle Ted even though we know that they are not really related.

Answer

You are, of course, correct that relatives of your in-law are not genetically related to you.

Unfortunately (if you were looking for short summaries), long descriptions like you used are the most accurate descriptions. Ted is the "brother of your husband's brother-in-law." In fact, David isn't your brother-in-law, either. He is "your husband's brother-in-law." However, Beulah is your sister-in-law, while she is your husband's sister.

Ted's children are "nieces-in-law and nephews-in-law of your husband's sister," or "nieces and nephews of your husband's brother-in-law." They are also "first cousins of the first cousins of your children," or "nieces and nephews of your children's uncle-in-law David," or "nieces-in-law and nephews-in-law of your children's aunt Beulah."

David and Beulah's children are first cousins to both your children and to Ted and Jan's children, but their first cousin relationship to your children is through your husband's relationship to Beulah, while their first cousin relationship to the other children is through Ted's relationship to David.

Given those long cumbersome descriptors, I don't blame you for yielding to your children's tendency to define their relatives' relatives as their own relatives. I'm sure that Jan and Ted feel honored to be "Aunt Jan and Uncle Ted." -- Mark

Question

Hi Mark, (you have a great website!) I just found out that my 9th cousin, 8 times removed is George Washington. Whether or not I believe this, I had no idea what it meant. I think I got half of it figured out. (Tell me if I'm wrong.) So far I think that he and I share the same great great great great great great great great grandparents...am I right?! Now I'm totally lost about the removed part! Please help!

Answer

Well, this was a challenge! No, you don't share the same great-great-anything, because the "removed" means that you are a different number of generations away from a set of ancestors than is George Washington.

George Washington's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents (8 greats) would be your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great -great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents (16 greats). -- Mark

Question

My family is having a hard time figuring this out. What would my grandpa's grand-nephew be to me? We think it's either a second cousin twice removed or second cousin once removed. Can you explain this to us please?

Thanks for your time. We really appreciate it.

From,
A family

Answer

Your grandfather's grand-nephew would be your second cousin. There are no removeds in this relationship, because your grandfather's grand-nephew and you are both the same number of generations from your first common ancestors, which would be your great-grandparents.

-- Mark

Your Great-Grandparents

Grandpa

--- siblings ---

Grandpa's sibling

Your parent

--- first cousins ---

Grandpa's niece or nephew

You

--- second cousins ---

Grandpa's grandnephew

Question

Mark I went to your website and it is quite interesting. I have a question for you. My parents were divorced and my mother remarried to a man who I believe is her second cousin.

(My mother's mother and my step-father's father were first cousins since they had a set of common grandparents).

I have two half-brothers from my mother's second marriage. Are these half brothers also my third cousins?

And my step brother and sister, are they my third cousins as well?

What is my stepfather to me as far as cousins go?

Thanks for your help,

Answer

My compliments! You have done an excellent job of identifying relationships. I hope you don't mind me using your excellent questions on my Web site!

Yes, your mother married her second cousin because her own mother and her second husband's father were first cousins.

Yes, your half-brothers, as well as your step-brother and step-sister, are also your 3rd cousins because they share the same great-great-grandparents as you do through their father's line.

Your step-father is also your "second-cousin once-removed."

A few other interesting points ...

Your half-brothers are great-great-grandchildren of your great-great-grandparents twice -- both through your mother's line and through their father's line.

Your half-brothers are related to your mother both as her children and as her "second-cousins once-removed." They are also related to their father, both as his children and as his "second-cousins once-removed."

Your half-brothers are related to your grandmother, both as her grandchildren and as her "first-cousins twice-removed."

If your half-brothers have children, they will be your half-nieces/nephews (through your mother's line), as well as being your "third-cousins once-removed" (through your step-father's line). -- Mark

Question	I have a question regarding naming. My step-grandson is named David Charles Smith II. (names changed for privacy) His father is David L. Smith. My late husband was the baby's grandfather and his name was David Charles Smith. Is II the correct ending to use for his name? Also, am I considered the step-grandmother even though the baby is no blood relation to me?
Answer	I presume that the baby is "II" since his father had a different middle name, while the baby has precisely the same three names as his grandfather. Yes, for genealogical purposes I would consider you the step-grandmother of the baby, although that may or may not be your legal relationship, depending on the laws of your state. -- Mark

Question

Hello I'm [hopeful] that you can be some help to me.

This girl and I have been talking for a while now, but my mom says that we are cousins.

So is there anything wrong with cousins going out [and] engaging in sexual relations, by any means in biblical or laws that have been set? In our case?

Let me explain this girl grandmother is my grandmother second cousin and my moms third. So this girl mother would be my grandmother third cousin and my moms fourth cousin. And the girl herself would be my grandmother fourth cousin and my mom fifth, leaving her to be my sixth cousin, right?

Well can you please break this down to me in scientific terms and dummy terms. So I can break this to my mother because I really like this girl.

Thanks

Answer

I was a little confused by your calculations.

Let's start over.

If the girl's grandmother and your own grandmother are truly second cousins, that would mean that you have a great-grandparent who was first cousin to one of the girl's great-grandparents.

It would also mean that you have a great-great-grandparent who was brother or sister to one of the girl's great-great-grandparents.

It would also mean that the first ancestor that you and the girl have in common would be a great-great-great-grandparent.

If those things are true, then your grandmother and the girl's grandmother were, indeed, second cousins.

Then these things would also be true ...

One of the girl's parents would be third cousin to your mother.

The girl would be "third-cousin once-removed" to your mother.

The girl would be "fourth-cousin" to you.

That is not as close a relationship as most of the ones people write to me about. Being fourth cousins means that 2 of your 32 great-great-great-grandparents were also 2 of the girl's 32 great-great-great-grandparents. You and she share 1/16 of your ancestors.

Now, your genetic relationship may be somewhat more or less than 1/16, because so many genetic combinations are possible each time that a baby is born.

I'm not aware of any particular laws or religious rulings specifically about relationships between fourth-cousins. In fact, that relationship is distant enough that there have probably been many people who married their own fourth cousin without realizing it.

But, because some of the relationships you calculated in your e-mail to me were incorrect, go back and recalculate to be sure you really know what your relation to her is.

And, someone might want to avoid even a relationship as distant as fourth-cousins if there is any specific hereditary disorder that runs in the family line that you share with her. -- Mark

Question

Hiya,

Your "What's A Second Cousin Twice Removed?" webpage is very interesting, and has got me thinking about what my relationship is with people in my family.

1) My mum's cousin
2) My mum's cousin's children
3) My mum's cousin's grandchildren

1) Is my mum's "first cousin" my "first cousin once removed"?

2) As my mum's "first cousin's children" and I share the same great-grandparents, are they my second cousins?

3) Are my mum's "first cousin's grandchildren" my second cousin's once removed, and if so, will my children be their third cousin's?

Many Thanks

Answer

1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) Yes. Yes.

Excellent job! -- Mark

Question

I receive many e-mail messages asking about whether it is "right" (ethical, moral, etc.) for second or third cousins to marry.

The writers are hoping for a simple "yes" or "no" answer.

But, this is a more complicated question than the writers presume, because there are so many degrees of relationship, and so many factors that can be involved.

People are seeking a definitive answer for a question that has a thousand variations.

So, to all of you with this question, here is my response ...

Answer

The information that I present on my Web site is genealogical. The information that you are requesting is ethical. Legal is yet another area to consider.

At one extreme, marrying a very close relative is called "incest" in many cultures and religions, and can result in an increased probability that genetic problems will show up in the offspring of that marriage.

At the other extreme, we are likely to be distant relatives of almost everyone we know, because of the doubling of families involved every generation one goes back on the family tree. As I say on the top of my main Web page, "You have two families to consider when you think of your parents. Four families are involved with your grandparents. Going back just five generations gives you 32 families to research. Keep multiplying ... go back 20 generations and you'll be studying your 1,048,576 family surnames in your spare time."

So, the question isn't a simple yes or no question about relationship. The question is HOW CLOSE a relationship is okay. Close relationship is problematic, but you'll have some relationship to most people, even if you don't know it.

I think that most people would believe that marriages between siblings or between parent and child would be wrong -- ethically and legally. Risk of genetic problems showing up in the children of such very close relationships would be very significant.

On the other hand, most people wouldn't worry, and probably wouldn't even realize, marriages between sixth cousins or seventh cousins. The risk of hereditary problems in the children would be much smaller for such distant relationships.

But you see, the risk is a matter of degree, with first cousins being more at risk of having children with hereditary problems than are second cousins, but second cousins being more at risk than with third cousin relationships, and so on. Since the risk varies by degree, rather than being "yes, a risk," or "no, not a risk" this is a question that you will have to answer for yourself after you have studied the issues, thought about the values involved, and searched your own heart.

About laws and marriages between relatives ... Laws very from state to state, and from country to country. In some places first cousins can legally marry. In other places, they can't.

You're less likely to find a law against second or third cousin marriages.

I can not advise you on the ethics of your second or third cousin relationship, because it is not my role to make such decisions for you. Hopefully some of the information on my Web site, and in this e-mail, will help you study the question in relation to your own religious beliefs and family values, and in relation to any concerns about genetic conditions that are, or might be, in your family genes.

In past centuries, marriages between second cousins were not uncommon. In early American history, even marriages between first cousins weren't all that uncommon -- simply because there weren't all that many people in many parts of America in those earlier years.

Today second and third cousin marriages are probably less common because people are more aware of the greater risks of problems showing up in the children because children of relatives are more likely to inherit two recessive genes for a given characteristic. This combination of two recessive genes is problematic more often than it is beneficial.

But, this is all about probability of risks, rather than about a certainty of defects, so answering your question would just boil down to my opinion, rather than science. Hopefully you will carefully weigh all of the factors and risks to make your own wise and ethical decision.

And, there are countless other factors that can make each situation different. For example, if both of the second cousins who want to marry are 83-years of age, then we can skip the part about hereditary conditions in their future children.

Regarding risk to future children, you can consult with a genetic scientist for help in making your decision.

Regarding the ethical implications of your decision, you can consult a leader in your own religion or culture.

Regarding the legalities of your decision, check the laws of your own State / Province / Country.

If you are a minor, you will need to follow the guidance of your parents or guardian. -- Mark

Question	My daughter recently married and she plans to adopt children, even though there is no reason to doubt that she can have real children. She even mentioned the possibility of adopting mixed-race children. I'm so angry I don't know what to do. What can I do to save my family?
Answer	You could move far away, so that your attitude doesn't harm your daughter or her children. -- Mark

Another great site is at

http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~julieann/relationships.htm

Copyright 1996-2006, Granduncle Mark
(Mark Ellsworth Hickman, PhD)

Granduncle Mark's Genealogy Parlor

Click here to contact me

Granduncle Mark's Genealogy Parlor

What's A Second-Cousin Twice-Removed?

Illustration of Cousins Removed

Chart to Calculate Cousin Relationships

Your first cousin once removed is either: the child of your first cousin or the child of your grand-aunt/uncle Why are they 'removed?' ---- Because they are in a different generation than you, when compared to the most recent ancestor that you have in common!

In Other Words

Challenging Questions

Question

If my second-cousin once-removed marry's a man, and that man has a brother, and the brother has children, how would I state my relationship to the brother's children?

Answer

Question

So, are these people who are related to me only because of a marriage important in my genealogy study?

Answer

Question

I don't understand why the children of my first-cousin aren't my second cousins.

Answer

Question

Does the woman who marries my uncle become my aunt?

Answer

Question

How am I related to the spouse of my first-cousin once-removed?

Answer

Question

Say my Uncle Charles marries Elaine. Say Elaine has a sister, Judy. Say Charles and Elaine have a child named, Fred. Say Judy has a child named, Esther. How am I related to Fred? How am I related to Esther?

Answer

Question

Can you tell me what relation my grandmother's cousin's daughter is to me (if any!)? Many thanks, Peter

Answer

Question

Dr. Hickman, Given that so many people say it differently than you, why do you use terms like: granduncle grandaunt grandnephew grandniece instead of: greatuncle greataunt greatnephew greatniece ???

Answer

Question

I think you're wrong about "removed" and generations. My Uncle is in the same generation as me because we're the same age.

Answer

Question

So, are you saying that only genetic and marriage relationships are important in genealogy? Does that mean that step-relationships and non-married relationships are not relevant?

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

What does the phrase "twice removed" mean? I know what it means with relatives, but just in general, what does it mean. Would it be correct to say, "the woman was twice removed from beauty"?

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

What's the difference between "5th cousins" and "first cousins removed 5 times?"

Answer

Question

My wife is Korean and their way of naming their relation is way different than ours. My question is if her grandfather has a 1st cousin what would we call that cousin? She calls him her grandfather as well. Thanks

Answer

I do not know Korean relationship terminology. I will defer to your wife's expertise on that. In the United States, her grandfather's first cousin would be her "first cousin twice removed." -- Mark

Question

What is my relationship to my husband's brother's wife's sister?

Answer

Your husband's brother's wife's sister is just that -- your husband's brother's wife's sister. You could also say that she is the sister-in-law of your brother-in-law. -- Mark

Question

Who has exactly the same ancestry as me?

Answer

Your full brothers and sisters have exactly the same set of ancestors as you have. The only other time that would occur would be in the case of double-first cousins. When 2 siblings marry 2 siblings, their children are double first cousins, and have exactly the same set of ancestors. -- Mark

Question

So, are double-first cousins genetically the same as brothers and sisters?

Answer

Not unless their parents were two sets of identical twins. -- Mark

Question

Answer

You are correct. You and this man's grandchildren are double third cousins because 4 of your 16 great-great-grandparents are shared with them, while regular third cousins share 2 of their 16 great-great-grandparents. -- Mark

Question

Answer

Question

My parents were third cousins to each other. Does this mean I am "extra related" to my brother and sister?

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Answer

Question

Are my parents my ancestors? Are my aunts and uncles my ancestors?

Answer

Question

Am I more closely related to my aunts and uncles, or to my first cousins?

What's A
Second-Cousin Twice-Removed?

Your first cousin once removed is either:

the child of your first cousin

or the child of your grand-aunt/uncle

Why are they 'removed?'

---- Because they are in a different generation than you,
when compared to the most recent ancestor that you have in common!

Can you tell me what relation my grandmother's cousin's daughter is to me (if any!)?
Many thanks, Peter

Dr. Hickman,

Given that so many people say it differently than you, why do you use terms like:

granduncle
grandaunt
grandnephew
grandniece

instead of:

greatuncle
greataunt
greatnephew
greatniece

???

What does the phrase "twice removed" mean? I know what it means with relatives, but just in general, what does it mean.

Would it be correct to say, "the woman was twice removed from beauty"?

Your husband's brother's wife's sister is just that -- your husband's brother's wife's sister.

You could also say that she is the sister-in-law of your brother-in-law. -- Mark

Your full brothers and sisters have exactly the same set of ancestors as you have.

The only other time that would occur would be in the case of double-first cousins. When 2 siblings marry 2 siblings, their children are double first cousins, and have exactly the same set of ancestors. -- Mark

You are correct.

You and this man's grandchildren are double third cousins because 4 of your 16 great-great-grandparents are shared with them, while regular third cousins share 2 of their 16 great-great-grandparents. -- Mark

My parents were third cousins to each other.

Does this mean I am "extra related" to my brother and sister?

Are my parents my ancestors?

Are my aunts and uncles my ancestors?

I have a half-sister (my mother remarried) and a "step"-sister (my dad remarried someone that brought a child into the marriage). Do you have similar nomenclature tables for naming conventions when you only share one parent in common?

Bryan

daughter of Mary
niece of Sue

daughter of Sue
niece of Mary

daughter of Jennifer,
granddaughter of Mary,
grand-niece of Sue
first-cousin once-removed of Cindy

daughter of Cindy,
granddaughter of Sue,
grand-niece of Mary
first-cousin once-removed of Jennifer

daughter of Tami,
granddaughter of Jennifer,
great-granddaughter of Mary,
great-grand-niece of Sue
second-cousin once-removed of Cheryl
first-cousin twice-removed of Cindy

daughter of Cheryl,
granddaughter of Cindy,
great-granddaughter of Sue,
great-grand-niece of Mary
second-cousin once-removed of Tami
first-cousin twice-removed of Jennifer

First of all your site was very helpful, but I have a few questions I hope you can answer for me. My great-grandfather and Mary's great-grandfather were brothers. Does that mean that we are 3rd cousins and what are the genetic implications if we were to have kids???

A man