Girl Traces US Presidents' Family Tree, All Related But One

digtriad.com ^ | Aug 2 2010 | Carrie Hodgin

[Germanicus Cretorian]

Paso Robles, CA -- Their political party lines maybe different but one thing United States presidents could share is their family line.

A young girl in California has put together a Presidential Family Tree. Twelve-year-old BridgeAnne d'Avignon found that all the presidents but one are related to King John of England through a common ancestor.

"They are all cousins and all grandsons of John Lackland," BridgeAnne told KCOY News. The girl searched more than a half million names for months. She started with George Washington, then traced both the male and female family lines to make the connection.

KCOY reports that before this, historians were only able to link 22 presidential family trees.

The teen also found out that she is the 18th cousin of President Barack Obama. She even wrote him a letter to let him know.

The only president not linked to King John: the eight president, Martin Van Buren.

[ZULU]

We are probably all related to Genghis Khan too.

[cuz_it_aint_their_money]

The teen also found out that she is the 18th cousin of President Barack Obama.

Meh! That's nuthin'
I found out (now follow me on this) that my mother's sister's mother-in-law is Rush Limbaugh's Grandfather's Sister.
Now that's something to brag about!

[wolfcreek]

Maybe this one?

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/merovingians/merovingios_02.htm

[SunkenCiv]

The fact is, the odds are pretty good for having ancestors who were the so-called nobility; the NEHGS used to have a title about tracing royal roots; according to that book or booklet (never ordered it), the last of the Plantagenets has or had a million descendants in N America, and his father (the second to last) has or had TEN million. And that’s not even counting wayward bastard children and such.

[agrace]

I am a genealogy buff, have traced family lines back quite far, and I determined a few weeks ago that Obama and I are 8th cousins - we share an 8th great-grandfather through the Dunhams on his side and the Berkheimers on mine. Yay.

[celtic gal]

Glad you are happy with your distant relative in the WH..

[celtic gal]

Glad you are happy with your distant relative in the WH..

[SunkenCiv]

http://library.nehgs.org/search/a?searchtype=t&searcharg=plantagenet&SORT=D

[agrace]

The yay was sarcastic. As the relation is through my biological father rather than my stepdad (who raised me), I think it’s the first time in my life that my ultra-conservative dad was happy he and I aren’t blood related, ha.

[celtic gal]

Good to know. I was going to say something but then didn’t as I didn’t want to be snarky..to let someone know the comment is sarcastic I have seen the /S..some of us are just slower I guess..

It seems none of his relatives are too thrilled with him in the line up either.

[TheOldLady]

I can go there but have no idea what to do when I get there.

[Joya]

Thx. Quix, I finally saw this one which you mentioned a while back. Interesting.

[Help!]

DAR records from a couple generations ago are sometimes slipshod. I also had some folks join on an ancestor of mine that has since been discredited. No more memberships can be based on that individual.

Today, with digital records, etc. DAR is a lot more picky. You can no longer prove descendency based on county book sketches, etc. They want to see wills and other court documents regarding birth, marriage, death; bibles; sometimes graves, but they want to see something set in stone as it were. Many of these older family lines have been discredited.

[Aliska]

IOW the burden of proof is far more stringent than I use to put in my family tree program. But I put my source and try to only use well vetted sources. I do make notes that I need more proof on some.

Speaking of DAR, I have my grandmother's letter of acceptance from the local group but cannot find her in any of their records or those stacks of blue books at the library. It doesn't matter because I've never been interested in joining and there is at least one more she might not have known about. I don't think I could prove any of the rev war ones w/o professional help and then maybe not even then.

Some of those older birth, marriage and death records no longer exist anywhere. Some never existed at all except by word of mouth or have been lost. Even graves and stones are lost. I do think I could pick up a few more proofs and links if I were free to travel and do the arduous hunting.

I have to chuckle though. Even the peerage books, like I concluded with a relative who was asking about our lines, "one indiscretion and the whole thing falls apart."

[SunkenCiv]

Exercise caution when "finding" nobility in your ancestry -- in the 19th century a professional itinerant genealogist for hire invented a King of France, and for each hoodwinked customer invented a child of the invented king. Also, when dealing with genealogists, silently discount to the point of disbelief anyone, anywhere who claims to have traced their family tree back to Roman times or earlier. The records quite simply DON'T EXIST. And even if they did, no one born before 800 AD or so had any idea who their *father* was. :')

[to reiterate:] This sounds a little like crap to me -- searched *millions* for months. Got no sleep, didn't go to school, didn't leave the house, didn't even take a shower, and had to eat at the computer.

This also stinks to high heaven:

• Human populations are tightly interwoven The most recent common ancestor of all humanity lived just a few thousand years ago, according to a computer model of our family tree. Researchers have calculated that the mystery person, from whom everyone alive today is directly descended, probably lived around 1,500 BC in eastern Asia...

[SunkenCiv]

The WORST of the monarchs:
King John was the VILEST of them all, reveals new biographies
http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/books/566721/People-s-charter-reigned-in-vile-King-John

> Although these biographies cover similar ground, Marc Morris has injected his with a livelier fluency that nods to popular culture. Stephen Church’s account is detailed and more academic (he is professor of medieval history at the University of East Anglia) and while he too writes flowingly he has clearly taken advantage of the contemporary chronicles and surviving documents about John’s acts of amazing folly.

[cynwoody]

Van Buren was the first natural born citizen to be President. His predecessors were all citizens of the United States “at the time of the adoption of this Constitution”, i.e., British subjects.

[Verginius Rufus]

As a descendant of King John, does that mean you will consider the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta (coming up on June 15) to be something to be lamented rather than celebrated?

[Verginius Rufus]

Martin van Buren and Zachary Taylor were the two Presidents who were born after the Declaration of Independence and before the adoption of the U.S. Constitution. Double dippers—they qualified on both counts, being born in the US and being citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.

[Verginius Rufus]

Martin van Buren and Zachary Taylor were the two Presidents who were born after the Declaration of Independence and before the adoption of the U.S. Constitution. Double dippers—they qualified on both counts, being born in the US and being citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.