I had a busy weekend, so others have probably replied already, but here goes an attempt at the explanation: First, second, third, etc. cousins are how many generations since the split from a common ancestor. So siblings are the split generation (they share common parents), first cousins are the first generation past the split (they share grandparents), second cousins are the second generation since the split, third cousins are the generation after that, and so on. In other words, people who are fifth cousins are the same number of generations from the common ancestor. A m. B and have children (common ancestor) siblings C and D (the generation of the split from a common ancestor) have children who are 1st cousins E and F (first generation after the split) who have children who are 2nd cousins G and H (second generation after the split) who have children who are 3rd cousins I and J (third generation after the split) But what if two people are a different number of generations from the common ancestor? That's where the removed comes in. So if the common ancestors are grandparents for one of the people in the relationship, but the great great grandparents for the other, they are first cousins twice removed. First cousins because you work from the closer relationship (the person from the closer generation to the common ancestors) and twice removed because the person from the 'younger' generation is two generations further on. A m. B and have children (common ancestor) siblings C and D (the generation of the split from a common ancestor) have children who are 1st cousins E and F (first generation after the split, grandchildren of the common ancestors). Then E had child named X who has a child named Y. So Y and F are first cousins twice removed. Hope this helps, BJ > -----Original Message----- > From: Judy Dawe [mailto:dawejudy@charter.net] > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 4:38 PM > To: SCT-ROXBURGH-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [SCT-ROX] RELATIONSHIPS. > > > I've had 3-4 relation charts since 30 years alo and have yet to understand > the difference "between second cousin" and "first cousin twice removed". > Thanks for asking that question. It's a mystery to me too. jld >

Thanks, BJ, and all the other who have aided in my understand of Relationships. Your explanation of "removed" cleared up some things for me. Jeffery Davidson send a URL (http://www.heirsearch.com/table.htm) which helped me with the overall picture. Many of you did send a URL, but sometimes I look, and don't understand. I'm a VERY visual person; I need to see the picture. I've saved all of the URL's that I've received and am building a file of them. I had the same problem when I took physics. I "fought" the known theories of ages past and got a 'D' in the subject. That was in high school. I didn't do any better in college although I knew better and told myself I would accept the facts and a summer course, no less. What can I say? I'm not quite a dumb blonde; wrong color hair. jld

Hi Judy, Perhaps what you describe is something of a local, even Border trait. To this day and much to the annoyance of my wife, family, friends and acquaintanes I will never, ever, accept the 'obvious' explanation for anything. My grand-mother used to say it was the old 'Reiver' way. It is well documented that they could talk their way out of most things, note famously 'Johnnie Armstrong o' Gilnockie'. Regards Roy P.S. I couldn't stand physics either. :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Judy Dawe" <dawejudy@charter.net> To: <SCT-ROXBURGH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [SCT-ROX] RELATIONSHIPS. > Thanks, BJ, and all the other who have aided in my understand of > Relationships. Your explanation of "removed" cleared up some things for me. > Jeffery Davidson send a URL (http://www.heirsearch.com/table.htm) which > helped me with the overall picture. Many of you did send a URL, but > sometimes I look, and don't understand. I'm a VERY visual person; I need > to see the picture. I've saved all of the URL's that I've received and am > building a file of them. > > I had the same problem when I took physics. I "fought" the known theories > of ages past and got a 'D' in the subject. That was in high school. I > didn't do any better in college although I knew better and told myself I > would accept the facts and a summer course, no less. What can I say? I'm > not quite a dumb blonde; wrong color hair. jld > > > ==== SCT-ROXBURGH Mailing List ==== > Stand firm and sure > For Jethart's here > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 >