
I am sorry to dissapoint you Felicia, but what you said just now isn't true. Not everyone has Royal ancestry ! I am doing family research from 1996 onwards and did do research on many, many people, including my very own grandmother who has 9 lines leading to Charlemagne and my very own grandfather who does not even have 1 single line leading to Charlemagne ! When most Royal and noble families have lines leading to Charlemagne, it does not mean that everybody is related to those noble and Royal families and so they are related to Charlemagne as well. There are even noble and Royal people who are not even related to him. I really do not understand why some people are saying this, but it is complete nonsense. I do not mean to offend you, sorry if I do, but when you are related to him and I am, it does not mean everybody is. I was thinking the same when I started genealogy in 1996, but soon I did find out that my own grandfather was not, my friend was not, my neighbor was not and so many other people. Some people have a very, very long lineage of hard working farmers or poor people who did beg or even stole their bread and had to go to prison for that. I tracked their whole lineage down, but .... nothing, no nobility or Royalty, not even close. It is still very special to have noble or Royal ancestors. Although I am still very proud on/about those hard working ancestors of mine through my Dutch/German grandfather. Their lives were meaningfull too. But my grandmother was the one who did descend from Charlemagne, not my grandfather. Also my sister in law doesn't descend of Charlemagne, I did a lot of research on her ancestry too, but, all proud hard working Dutch and German farmers and no nobility at all. So, if anyone ever again says almost everyone has Charlemagne as their ggf .... tell them that you're very sorry, but sadly that is not the case. Kind regards from your Dutch cousin, Recia.
Charlemagne is your 31st great grandfather.
Not being able to find a connection to Charlemagne doesn't mean you're not descended from him - it just means the path has been washed away by time.
Circa 800 AD is half again as far back as the standard estimate for "most recent common ancestor" for people of European ancestry. (For people of English ancestry it's more like circa Edward III, middle 14th century.)
It doesn't take long for a line of younger sons and daughters to descend from nobility/Royalty to gentry to commoners - sometimes as little as five generations. And at every step down there's an increasing risk of ancestral information being lost forever.
So yeah, practically everyone *does* have Charlemagne as a distant ancestor - but being able to prove it is the unusual thing.
He's my 33rd GGF and my 33rd Great Uncle paternal, at the moment, then if can click through another lineage and he comes up through my Moseley Ligon linage way, It depends what lineage I've been clicking through recently, more than which route is the closest I've noticed.
Kristin thanks for posting the video.
Private User Hello 20th cousin thrice r, I believe we're closer to Edward III than one another, you're my cousin through my Moseley/Ligon/Denis... https://www.geni.com/path/Suzan-Martin+is+related+to+Kristin-VanNes...
When it comes to Royal stuff, you will find out early on that the odds of you being a descendant of said people are very high and not unique.
It's cool no doubt but the fun part is trying to connect the dots, even if you can't due to lack of sources, it's not really something to fret about as I said above, the odds of you being related to all those people are high regardless.
Suzan Martin is your 17th cousin....
Kristin Felicia VanNest is your 18th cousin twice removed....
Maven B. Helms is your 22nd cousin 6 times removed....
Mark Connett II is your 21st cousin four times removed....
Edward III, king of England is your 23rd great grandfather
Sam Clark DiBrell is your 17th cousin....
Will Arents is your 21st cousin 7 times removed....
Cheley Hokanson is your 18th cousin thrice removed....
Lori Ann Lewis is your 21st cousin five times removed....
Paula Stegall is your 18th cousin thrice removed....
Raymond Chapman is your 17th cousin twice removed....
Recia Ilona Albertine Bruggeman is your 25th cousin five times removed....
Gustavo Adolfo Rojas Calvo is your 26th cousin four times removed....
Hello, I am not descending from Edward III, but from his cousin John III, Duke of Brabant (is your 20th great grandfather) and his aunt Margaret of England, his fathers sister (Edward III, king of England is your first cousin 22 times removed), but you’re right, we are cousins too Suzan Martin :) and also Maven is my cousin, I think most of you here are :) So, hi to you all from Holland ! And yes Kristin, great video.
Suzan Martin is your 11th cousin once removed.
Recia Ilona Albertine Bruggeman is your 19th cousin twice removed.
Charla Ann Wall Roselli is your 14th cousin twice removed
Jani Tapio Aalto is your 16th cousin thrice removed.
Mark Connett II is your 18th cousin twice removed.
Sam Clark DiBrell is your 14th cousin twice removed.
Maven B. Helms is your 20th cousin.
Gustavo Adolfo Rojas Calvo is your 22nd cousin once removed.
Kristin Felicia VanNest is your 10th cousin once removed.
Will Arents is your 17th cousin once removed.
Cheley Hokanson is your 11th cousin once removed.
Jari Asselman is probably your cousin, but just started his tree two days ago. So this is what I have on Jari: Jari Asselman is your 18th great uncle's great granddaughter's husband's second great granddaughter's husband's great niece's husband's second cousin's husband's fourth great grandson.
Lori Ann Lewis is your 17th cousin once removed.
Paula Stegall is your 12th cousin once removed.
Raymond Chapman is your 12th cousin twice removed.
And finally Charlemagne:
Charlemagne is your 34th great grandfather.
I think I am kin to everyone here. I am pretty thankful for that. Glad we have this place. Going to go off and find some more relatives and inconsistencies. :-) Somehow the two concepts work well together.
Kristin Felicia VanNest, I really enjoyed the video as an artist, but especially in reading the commentary below it. I had wondered how the underlying structure for the portrait was suggested or determined throughout the time I was viewing it. The commentary provided a good rationale for the artistic decisions through review of contemporaneous sculptures, along with written descriptions. I would imagine knowing what I do of those artists who work with law enforcement in varying capacities from aging children, drawing from skulls or descriptions, etc. that this is pretty accurate or at least as accurate as possible rendition of Charlemagne. I feel better about it than the current portrait that is on Charlemagne's profile.