GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2007-12 > 1197178166


From: James Dow Allen <>
Subject: Albert's agnatic and uterine ancestry (Paths to Charlemagne)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 21:29:26 -0800 (PST)
References: <b3e609f2-c02b-4762-a9e0-86f25631cde5@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com><7e664af1-a535-4231-a75b-f98f388997b9@s36g2000prg.googlegroups.com> <5998177b-a7f2-44f7-a8f7-1b8d81a9caeb@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <10527162-2d77-4830-91bf-9e5b1349d563@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <fiukho$gfa$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>


A recent thread involved estimating the number of
generations between future King William V (b. 1982)
and Charlemagne (born 1240 years earlier). My
own data show mode, median *and* mean of path length
as 44 generations, but others thought this was high.

For example:
On Dec 2, 3:49 am, Doug McDonald <> wrote:
> James Dow Allen wrote:
> > Instead of 50 generations between us and Charlemagne,
> > use 45.
> This is way too high. Prince William is Charlemagne's
> 31st great grandson, by the shortest path I have.
> That's 33 generations. The number on average probably clusters
> around 36 or 37. For me the average is about 38 or 39.

In these paths, what portion of links are male?

I estimate average parent-to-child age
gap as about 28 years (perhaps 26 for mother, 30 for
father) and others imply this is too low.

I'd like to mention some of the statistical biases
that can affect such estimates. I'm sure s.g.m'ers
can offer better information here than I.

The following are all reasons to expect a *true*
average path to Charlemagne to be longer (shorter
average generation) than shown in a genealogical database.

(1) Since missing mothers are more common than missing
fathers in all "old" pedigrees, the higher age of
fathers biases any database (producing, e.g. shorter
average paths to Charlemagne).

Taking the purely agnatic line of Victoria's Albert
back 25 generations, I see father's mean age at birth
as 35 years. The purely uterine line shows mother's
mean age at birth as 23 years! (Do *not* use this data
as a general estimate: Albert's pedigree is likely an
extreme case, even though both paths are mostly German.)

(2) Longer paths have more links, so more chance for
data to be missing or controversial. This effect will
bias any database (especially those omitting controversial
connections) toward shorter path lengths.

(3) One might surmise that young nobles may sow undocumented
wild oats, while older nobles might suffer undocumented
cuckolding. Either effect would, again, cause databases
to show shorter path lengths than a true picture.

(4) While the discussion focused on descents through nobility
from Charlemagne, population analysis would also be concerned
with descent through peasants from peasants. I'd assume
such paths would be longer than those from Charlemagne, due
to shorter life expectancies, right?

There are two possible biases that would operate the
other way, but I'm not sure either is significant.

(1) Descent from an heir (oldest son) might be more
likely to be recorded than descent from a younger son.

(2) Speculative and mistaken lineages may tend to have
younger parents, so longer path lengths.

The ancestry of Queen Victoria or her husband are good
places to search for long paths from Charlemagne to William:
I suppose this is because the path from Victoria to the
Heir Apparent is mostly of first-borns.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The pure-agnatic and pure-uterine ancestors of
Prince Consort Albert show a male-female age gap that
is surprisingly large. I'll show them with normal
"ancestor numbers" but remember that, these are *not*
father-mother pairs (except Albert's own parents) and
that, for example 4095 is a generation *earlier* than 4096.

CORRECTIONS WELCOME.

1 Albert Augustus Charles of SAXE-COBURG-GOTHA 1819 - 1861
2 Ernst I (Duke) of SAXE-SAALFELD-COBURG 1784 - 1844
3 Luise Dorothea of SAXE-GOTHA 1800 - 1831

4 Francis Frederick (Duke) of SAXE-COBURG 1750 - 1806
7 Louise Charlotte of MECKLENBURG-SCHWERIN 1779 - 1801
8 Ernest Frederick (Duke) of SAXE-COBURG 1724 - 1800
15 Luise (Princess) of SACHSEN-GOTHA 1756 - 1808
16 Franz Josias (Duke) of SACHSEN-COBURG 1697 - 1764
31 Louise (Princess) of REUSS-SCHLEIZ 1726 - 1773

32 Johann Ernst (Duke) of SACHSEN-SAALFELD 1658 - 1729
63 Juliana Dorothea zu LOWENSTEIN-WERTHEIM 1694 - 1734
64 Ernst I `the Pious' (Duke) of SACHSEN-GOTHA 1601 - 1675
127 Juliana (Juliana-Dorothee) de LIMPURG-GAILDORF 1677 - 1734
128 Johann (Duke) of SAXE-WEIMAR 1570 - 1605
255 Elisabetha Dorothea of LIMPURG-GAILDORF 1656 - 1712

256 Johann Wilhelm (Duke) of SAXE-WEIMAR 1530 - 1573
511 Elisabeth-Dorothee de LIMPURG-SONTHEIM 1639 - 1691
512 Johann Friedrich I (Elector) of SAXONY 1503 - 1554
1023 Dorothea Maria zu HOHENLOHE-WALDENBURG 1618 - 1695
1024 Johann (Elector) of SAXONY 1468 - 1532
2047 Dorothea von ERBACH 1593 - 1643

2048 Ernst de WETTIN (Elector) of SAXONY 1441 - 1486
4095 Marie von BARBY 1563 - 1619
4096 Frederick II Ernest (Elector) of SAXONY 1412 - 1464
8191 Maria von ANHALT 1538 - 1563
8192 Frederick I/IV de WETTIN (Elector) of SAXONY 1370 - 1428
16383 Margarethe of BRANDENBURG 1511 - 1551?

16384 Frederick III `Strenge' of SAXONY 1333 - 1381
32767 Elisabeth OLDENBURG 1485? - 1555
32768 Frederick II de WETTIN (Landgrave THURINGIA) 1310 - 1349
65535 Christina (of SAXONY) WETTIN 1461 - 1521
65536 Friedrich I (Landgrave) von THURINGIA 1257 - 1323
131071 Elizabeth von WITTELSBACH of BAVARIA-MUNCHEN 1443 - 1484

131072 Albrecht II (Margrave) von THURINGIA 1240? - 1315
262143 Anna WELF of BRUNSWICK-GRUBENHAGEN 1415? - 1474
262144 Heinrich III MEISSEN of THURINGIA 1215? - 1288
524287 Elisabeth of BRUNSWICK-GOTTINGEN ? - 1444
524288 Dietrich (Margrave) of MEISSEN 1162? - 1221
1048575 Marguerite de BERG 1364? - 1442?

1048576 Otto `the Rich' (Margrave) of MEISSEN 1125? - 1190
2097151 Anne von WITTELSBACH 1346? - 1415
2097152 Konrad `the Great' von GROITZSCH-ROCHLITZ 1098? - 1157
4194303 Beatrice of SICILY (& ARAGON) 1326? - 1365
4194304 Thiemo I/II (Count) von WETTIN
8388607 Elizabeth von KAERNTEN ? - 1352+

8388608 Thimo I von WETTIN ? - 1076+
16777215 Eufemia of SILESIA-LIEGNITZ ? - 1347
16777216 Dietrich II im HASSEGAU 991? - 1034
33554431 Elzbieta PIAST von POLEN-KALISCH 1263? - 1304
33554432 Dedi I Count in North HESSEGAU 946? - 1009
67108863 Jolan/Ilona/Helen ARPAD of HUNGARY 1241? - 1298?

Next we see that Albert's 24-great agnatic grandfather
died 290 years ("10 generations") before Albert's 24-great
uterine grandmother!

67108864 Dietrich I im HESSEGAU ? - ca 976
134217727 Maria LASKARINA (-NIKAIA) 1206? - 1270?
134217728 poss. Volkmar in HARZGAU
268435455 Anna ANGELINA KOMNENE 1176? - 1212?
268435456 Frederick II in HARZGAU ? - ca 945
536870911 Euphrosyne KAMATERINA DOUKANIA 1143? - 1211?

By the way, I have Maria LASKARINA as 15-g granddaughter
of Charlemagne. Is this correct? If so, it provides a
49-link path from Charlemagne to future William V.
(There are longer paths than this, but it would be an
effort to find one that passes 100% expert scrutiny.)

James Dow Allen

PS: In another message wjhonson wrote:
> James wrote:
>> That a mother and father may be related is implicit.
>> (Otherwise you'd have a *maximum* of one descent from
>> Charlemagne, not a million!)
> That makes no sense.
> That *a* mother and father may be related, does not say you'd have one
> descent.

You somehow flipped my meaning. "Otherwise" means "if not";
i.e. if mother and father are always completely unrelated, there'd
be a maximum of one descent. Trivially true, but absurd since
everyone's related. (Mine was a reduction ad absurdem to refute
someone who seemed unclear about this.)



This thread: