Are we all descended from royalty?
Short answer: Probably!
Am I related to Charlemagne?
I found this chart on Ancestry.com. It was a “leaf hint” for some of my ancestors (the ones noted in red in the lower left-hand corner of the chart). It details quite the lineage – all the way back to Charlemagne, the 9th-century ruler of the Holy Roman Empire.
Well…..yes and no….
On the one hand, there is no documentation that accompanies this chart. Even if there were, I would never graft this tree onto mine without first examining every single branch, leaf, and supporting record.
On the other hand, though, once you get back far enough to tie into a royal line, they are usually quite well-documented. I found this article about why and how everyone is probably related to someone ancient and notable and thought you might enjoy it too: So you’re related to Charlemagne? You and every other living European… (it’s not just for Europeans, and not just about Charlemagne). So, maybe being related isn’t as preposterous as it sounds.
Keep in mind that even if you’re descended from the king’s stable boy, some of your other ancestors are probably descended from royalty, so you are too.
Here’s another related article (pun intended): Are you descended from royalty? Six things to consider. Shout out to not only Charlemagne and Genghis Khan, but to Muhammad, Giocangga, Atahualpa, Confucius, and Nefertiti. King Tut’s in there too, but for reasons other than successful procreation.
HINT: Treat Ancestry Member Trees as hints
The first time I saw this Charlemagne chart I dismissed it as being silly and unsubstantiated. I didn’t even keep a copy at the time but was recently happy to find it again. It’s a hand-drawn equivalent of the Member Trees that are routinely offered up by Ancestry as hints. Emphasis on hints. Same goes for any tree you find anywhere, such as on Family Search. These trees are not blessed by Ancestry (or Family Search), which is just a search engine for a giant repository of documents with some built-in genealogy tools for our convenience. The trees themselves are created by members just like you and me.
Sometimes people accidentally introduce errors into their trees and supply no supporting documentation whatsoever. It can be frustrating to notice that others researching that same family have apparently copied the errors without concern for verifying the information. Sometimes the information is correct, and there is proof, but for some reason, the documentation is not attached. Other times there are lots of records attached, but they have no bearing on the individual in question (right name, yes, but wrong time, place, and family). It’s up to you to evaluate each leaf before climbing up to the next branch.
Consider the source
I do refer to Ancestry Member Trees sometimes, but only as a last resort if I get stuck. Sometimes there is lots of supporting documentation, or the trees provide clues that I can work with. And sometimes they lead to a rewarding real-life connection with a distant cousin who is researching the same branch of your family. After all, my own tree is also an Ancestry Member Tree, right?
So, although many of us are, indeed, descended from Charlemagne (or someone equally ancient and notable), I hesitate to believe anyone who says they have traced themselves back that far….unless, of course, it’s the President of the New Mexico Genealogical Society: Royalty in New Mexico: Vigil family related to Charlemagne
But is it important?
Well, that’s entirely up to you. It’s not important to me; I see it as just a bit of fun. My research has no agenda other than getting to know each family, in each generation, one-by-one as I discover them, working my way back into history, and adding them to my tree. It’s not any more important to me to prove I’m descended from royalty than it is to complete the paperwork to join the DAR (Daughters of the American Republic).
I do, however, think that my recent client might be interested in this blog post. An unusual surname — BOYKIN — caught my eye while researching her family because it’s in my chart too. I surmised that we could be related and built a “quick and dirty” tree (in which I did not take the time to prove each step along the way, just followed where the hints led me….because it’s not important, just fun…) and sure enough, we are very likely 8th cousins once removed. It was through taking another look at the BOYKINs that I found this chart again. This means that my client, too, is probably descended from Charlemagne. See? We’re all related!
Are we really all related to one another?
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Watch this 6:25 minute PBS video — Are We All Related? — for their explanation.
Here are some of my favorite comments on the video:
🎶We are family…🎶
So, if you’re adopted, you’re just living with distant family.
Wait, that means that I am related to Albert Einstein.
All 7.7 billion of us should make a family group chat!
So, we’ve been marrying our cousin this whole time?
So, racism is just bullying our cousins?
So, every war was a civil war?
Can we trace ourselves back to Adam and Eve?
Short answer: No.
Long answer: Theology issues aside, this 36:13 minute video will explain Why You Can’t Trace Your Lineage Back to Adam. (Spoiler alert: Records don’t go back that far!)
What about you — are you related to royalty, or someone famous?
Are you sure? Do you care?
Whatever your genealogy goals are, I’m here to help you.
Join the conversation by leaving a comment!
Copyright 2020 by Hazel Thornton, Organized for Life.
I welcome social media links directly to this page!
Please contact me for other types of reprint permission.