Relationships in Family Historian
|
Sandra Collins
Good afternoon, First time I've posted since groups have
changed so hope I'm in the right place. I think there is an error on FH (or at least in mine) in showing the relationships and would like some clarification from someone with far more experience than me please. Example: In FH I have set myself as the
root person. My 3x gt grandparents are showing correctly - one
of their sons is my 2nd gt grandparent showing correctly and the
other sons & daughters of my 3 x gt grandparents are showing
as 2nd gt aunts and uncles - are the 2nd gt aunts & uncles
showing as correct please? Should they not be 3rd gt aunts
& uncles? Looking closer at FH I have a level where
it shows great great aunt & uncle & the next level up
showing gt x 2 great aunt & uncle - isn't this the same
thing & the same level?? Some guidance & help would be most welcome right now; I've been happily sailing along thinking FH had it all under control for me but am beginning to think not right now. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
Try https://stevemorse.org/relation/calculator.html -- if the relationships show up that same as in FH, they’re right (and they will). Siblings to you 2nd gt grandparents will be 2nd gt aunts and uncles.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Sandra Collins via groups.io
Sent: 28 May 2020 15:16 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: [family-historian] Relationships in Family Historian
Good afternoon, First time I've posted since groups have changed so hope I'm in the right place. I think there is an error on FH (or at least in mine) in showing the relationships and would like some clarification from someone with far more experience than me please. Example: In FH I have set myself as the root person. My 3x gt grandparents are showing correctly - one of their sons is my 2nd gt grandparent showing correctly and the other sons & daughters of my 3 x gt grandparents are showing as 2nd gt aunts and uncles - are the 2nd gt aunts & uncles showing as correct please? Should they not be 3rd gt aunts & uncles? Looking closer at FH I have a level where it shows great great aunt & uncle & the next level up showing gt x 2 great aunt & uncle - isn't this the same thing & the same level?? Some guidance & help would be most welcome right now; I've been happily sailing along thinking FH had it all under control for me but am beginning to think not right now. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Hi Sandra, Those multiple great ancestors can get a bit confusing but I think FH has got it correct. The first thing to check is how to interpret the (x2), and (x3), etc. So great (x2) great-uncle = great great great-uncle That is one generation different to great great-uncle
The following lists each generation on a separate line: great (x3) grandfather = great great great grandfather great (x2) grandfather = great great grandfather great (x2) great-uncle = great great great-uncle great grandfather great great-uncle
Hope that helps, Mike Tate
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Sandra Collins via groups.io
Sent: 28 May 2020 15:16 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: [family-historian] Relationships in Family Historian
Good afternoon, First time I've posted since groups have changed so hope I'm in the right place. I think there is an error on FH (or at least in mine) in showing the relationships and would like some clarification from someone with far more experience than me please. Example: In FH I have set myself as the root person. My 3x gt grandparents are showing correctly - one of their sons is my 2nd gt grandparent showing correctly and the other sons & daughters of my 3 x gt grandparents are showing as 2nd gt aunts and uncles - are the 2nd gt aunts & uncles showing as correct please? Should they not be 3rd gt aunts & uncles? Looking closer at FH I have a level where it shows great great aunt & uncle & the next level up showing gt x 2 great aunt & uncle - isn't this the same thing & the same level?? Some guidance & help would be most welcome right now; I've been happily sailing along thinking FH had it all under control for me but am beginning to think not right now. Thank you. |
|
|
|
Hi Sandra, Yes it is a bit confusing but it becomes clearer if you think of
a grandparent as a 'great-parent', or
alternatively think of a great-aunt as a 'grandaunt'. So a great-aunt is the same generation as a grandparent, and a 2x great great-aunt (3 greats in total) is the same generation as a 2x great grandparent. (2 greats + 1 grand = 3 greats). In your example of a great great-aunt, this is indeed a generation below a 2x great great aunt, because the first has two 'greats' and the second has three 'greats'.FH could talk about a '3x great aunt' instead of a '2x great great-aunt', but it think it's done this way so that the number before the 'x' sign is the same for all people in the generation, whether they are n x great grand-parents or n x great great-aunts. I hope that hasn't confused you even further! Lorna On 28/05/2020 15:16, Sandra Collins via
groups.io wrote:
|
|
|
|
David Gynes
Would anyone like to join my (lost cause) personal campaign to have “great” aunts and uncles called Grand Auntie & Uncle? Makes it much easier to teach the grand-nephews and nieces their place and ours in the family tree 😀 [It will probably go as well as my other campaign, to stop the use of ‘for” before the word ‘free’. It is tautologous - “For for no cost” but as the BBC newsreaders now use it I know I’ve lost!!] Enjoy your research during Lockdown!
|
|
|
|
Adrian Bruce
Yes - I have a suspicion that you may have missed exactly what FH says - it and Mike Tate say (for example) "Great (x3) Great-Aunt". Note that "Great" appears **twice** in that relationship. It's horribly easy to read "Great (x3) Great-Aunt" as
"Great (x3) Aunt" (been there, done that!) because you don't expect the second "great". Most of us would write
"Great (x4) Aunt" - maybe Calico Pie did it like that so that the number of greats in the first part, matched the number of greats in the sibling 3G-grandparent. Adrian |
|
|
|
Sandra Collins
Oh Jeez!! thank you Mike and everybody
else for helping; you all picked up straight away that I am
reading it wrongly; I am just not expecting that extra great
there & reading gt x 2 great uncle as gt x2 uncle!! {I am
terrible for reading what I expect to be there & not what is
always there, despite the fact I even copied it correctly!!}
Still doesn't make for easy reading on a diagram for me though;
means I'm going to have to engage the brain more now when
looking at diagrams & relationships lol!! As ever this group is always so helpful,
thank you all again; I am now off to recheck all my dna
relationships that I thought I'd got right, just in case I've
messed up on any of those. :-) On 28/5/2020 4:01 PM, Mike Tate wrote:
|
|
|
|
I had been using version 5 of FH for years, but it was only when I recently upgraded to V6 that I noticed the second "great" and had to stop and think about it - I suspect it was exactly the same in the earlier version, but I just didn't notice it.
|
|
|
