Medieval Families with Roman Pedigrees

Jun 2016
1,748
England, 200 yards from Wales
#21
That's likely mathematically because of 'ancestors in common' where people share the same set of common ancestors but, although they will be related, they are so via different routes. 22 generations ago, you had 4,194,304 gt.gt. ... grandparents. That was more than the population of the UK after the black death, also about 22 generations ago. Obviously you cannot have more ancestors than the total number of people alive at any one time and the explantion is 'ancestors in common'.

However, the OP asked about lineages, or lines of descent. These are direct ancestors, something very different from ancestors in common, which contain mostly indirect ancestors.
I'm not quite sure if by 'ancestors in common' you mean this -
All great great....................grandparents are of course direct ancestors, that's what it means.
You can have, apparently, more such ancestors than the total population because all those gt gt.............grandparents are not different people, you can be descended from one person who lived 22 generations ago by several routes, so he/she would count as several of those gt gt ..........grandparents.
 
Apr 2018
252
Italy
#22
Apparentely almost all senators were killed during the Gothic war, so is difficult to say who can descend from them. Probabily some Roman noble family could have some ascendence to them. Perhaps the Counts of Tuscolo, Crescenzi and Bobone Orsini families who are traced from IX century could have some ancient roman heritage.
 

MAGolding

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,659
Chalfont, Pennsylvania
#23
Apparentely almost all senators were killed during the Gothic war, so is difficult to say who can descend from them. Probabily some Roman noble family could have some ascendence to them. Perhaps the Counts of Tuscolo, Crescenzi and Bobone Orsini families who are traced from IX century could have some ancient roman heritage.
You should realize that many senators came from various provinces and owned properties spread among several different provinces, and often lived on their country estates in Italy or in various provinces. Note that my post about the ancestry of Charlemagne notes the possibility of his descent from various Gallo-Roman senatorial families who lived in Gaul most of the time, including members of the senatorial order living in Gaul after the Gothic War. When Constantine I founded New Rome or Constantinople about 330 he also formed a new senate for the eastern part of the Roman Empire. Thus many senatorial families would have had members in both the western and the eastern senates.

The time of the Gothic war in the 530s was centuries after the era when most members of the senatorial order could be expected to live full time in Rome or even in Italy.
 
Apr 2010
1,000
evergreen state, USA
#24
I have a grandiose tree at Ancestry where I tried to go back from Charlemagne to Rome. The best I could do was a female Alypia Caratena of Rome, born about 435. She married Flavius Ricimere, Suevic King of Burgundy, 405 - 472. They are the maternal grandparents of (Saint) Clothilde de Burgundy, wife of Clovis the 1st. It's been a while since I did this, so the facts may have changed.
 
Last edited:

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
4,971
#26
grandparents are not different people, you can be descended from one person who lived 22 generations ago by several routes, so he/she would count as several of those gt gt ..........grandparents.
You have one father, two grandfathers, four great grandfather, eight great great grandfathers, all males, but you only have one direct paternal line. You only have one y chromosome. Same with your mtdna which you got from her mother, her mother's mother and so so. Out of the eight gt. gt. grandmothers, you only have one direct line.

Ancestors in common is where gt. gt grandfather no. 5 married gt. gt. grandmother no. 7 for example. In other words, gt. gt grandmother no. 5 is the same as gt. gt. grandmother no. 7 and gt. gt. grandfather no. 7 is the same as gt. gt. grandfather no. 5.

In your example above, you will have virtually nothing from a grandparent 22 generations ago because autosomal dna is flushed out within within roughly 10 generations so even if William Shakespeare were your ancestor (born ~450 years ago), you almost certainly inherited no DNA from him.
 
Jun 2016
1,748
England, 200 yards from Wales
#27
You have one father, two grandfathers, four great grandfather, eight great great grandfathers, all males, but you only have one direct paternal line. You only have one y chromosome. Same with your mtdna which you got from her mother, her mother's mother and so so. Out of the eight gt. gt. grandmothers, you only have one direct line.

Ancestors in common is where gt. gt grandfather no. 5 married gt. gt. grandmother no. 7 for example. In other words, gt. gt grandmother no. 5 is the same as gt. gt. grandmother no. 7 and gt. gt. grandfather no. 7 is the same as gt. gt. grandfather no. 5.

In your example above, you will have virtually nothing from a grandparent 22 generations ago because autosomal dna is flushed out within within roughly 10 generations so even if William Shakespeare were your ancestor (born ~450 years ago), you almost certainly inherited no DNA from him.
Oh, if you're talking DNA that's another matter. But terms like lineage and ancestry were around long before that was known about, in those terms surely a 5xgreat grandparent, even if via mixed male/female ancestors, is a direct ancestor in a way that a 5xgreat granduncle isn't.
 

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
4,971
#28
Oh, if you're talking DNA that's another matter. But terms like lineage and ancestry were around long before that was known about, in those terms surely a 5xgreat grandparent, even if via mixed male/female ancestors, is a direct ancestor in a way that a 5xgreat granduncle isn't.
Perhaps I should have used the term pedigree ancestor rather than direct ancestor. It was the term the OP used. I should have followed it.
 
Jan 2009
8,421
In the Past
#30
That's likely mathematically because of 'ancestors in common' where people share the same set of common ancestors but, although they will be related, they are so via different routes. 22 generations ago, you had 4,194,304 gt.gt. ... grandparents. That was more than the population of the UK after the black death, also about 22 generations ago. Obviously you cannot have more ancestors than the total number of people alive at any one time and the explantion is 'ancestors in common'.

However, the OP asked about lineages, or lines of descent. These are direct ancestors, something very different from ancestors in common, which contain mostly indirect ancestors.
Well it is also likely that were will be a massive overlap in ancestors going back that far. Chances are many of your ancestors actually themselves shared ancestors. It isn't unlikely that many of our ancestors were siblings, their lines just didn't come back together until 5 or 6 generations.

EDIT: Johnminnitt explained it better than me.
 

Similar History Discussions