Solomon, King of Israel - great-grandfathers

Hi there 17th cousin! We share gggrandparents Sir William and Kathrine Tendring in the 13th century.

Iam also related to King David, and King Solomon the generations can vary as I have discovered that they can come up to you through different branches of your family tree!
I hope this was helpful ceck it out and then I guess with a curator

Check

Hi cousin,that's very helpful information.As I got to thinking of how many people are on or in our tree.:)

Hi is my 99. grandfather

Solomon, King of Israel is your 93rd great grandfather

I got before Solomon, King of Israel, Anttila Anne's
97th great grandfather!
But now it has changed to: '' Solomon, king of Israel is your wife's great grandfather of 73. Another great uncle's son's wife's cousin man.
How so?

Solomon, King of Israel is your 96th great grandfather

If King David is your 100th GGGrandfather then Solomon his son would be 99th simple math.

Of course..:)

Solomon, King of Israel is my grandson Joshua's 95th great grandfather.

He is my 97th GG. Hello cousins, from Texas!

I noticed that Solomon is my 101 GGF through one line but shows up as a cousin through another. So sometimes on geni they come up as cousins and sometimes as GGF's. I assume the program normally takes the shortest path. But if you can get one a spefic path that you want and then click on the person I think you can get the longer path to come up. I prefer to record the closest relationship over the shortest path.

Also through one line William the Conqueror is my 27th and through another line my 30th but in that case it's the same relationship so it doesn't really matter.

92nd great grandfather!

so exciting!! and to have King David ,my 93rd great-grandfather

so exciting!! and to have King David ,my 93rd great-grandfather

King Solomon is Not your ancestor in any genealogical sense.

I suggest you focus on source citing your tree and not worry about error correction.

Weird. It was direct from mom, and now, no route from mom.and a silly indirect one from dad..it seems like people are messing around with davidic lines..is it on purpose ?

Especially since wz found saoudi dna in us..so the person messing with this is being either stupid,.either motivated to disperse the descendants

Making connections relies upon documentary evidence.

For most of us, there is NO documentary evidence for our family trees before about 1600.

For Norman French families in England, there is some evidence going back further.

For rabbinical Jewish families, there are genealogies that go back further as well.

For other cultures, there may be more documentary evidence, such as church records for Scandinavia.

But in general, for the ancient and Medieval family tree, there is no or sparse evidence, usually only for nobility and once you get into ancient times, little or no evidence.

We have expert users, some of them curators, who keep up with historical evidence and discussions about the ancient and Medieval worlds and I rely upon their expertise and trust them.

Personally on my mother's Anglo-Norman lines I discount anything before the 1200s or even later. On her Scots Irish lines, I discount anything before the early 1700s.

On my father's side, there are a few lines that are rabbinical and can be traced with some certainty to the 1600s. But in the vast majority of Jewish lines, my tree stops at 1800 or even 1850.

So while it's fun to imagine we are descendants of Solomon or King David or even Charlemagne, the actual documentary evidence is either non-existent or only exists for some people.

By documentary evidence I mean ideally primary evidence - records of birth/death/marriage, wills, land deeds, censuses. Secondary evidence includes scholarly articles, contemporaneous genealogies that have been accepted widely (many have been shown to be incorrect), chronicles and histories.

I was giving you an explanation. On Geni we attempt to improve the world family tree over time such that the connections are based on sources - primary or secondary.

Where connections are severed, it is because there is not such evidence and in fact, there may be counter evidence.

The world family tree is a work in progress. You can expect connections to occur that were NOT there previously and connections to disappear that were there previously, as we all work on the tree to make it more accurate and "sourced" (evidenced by sources).

It is disconcerting to new users -- it was too me too when I was a new user -- to have connections cut.

I happily cut connections in my own tree now when my research reveals that there is no evidence for the connection or that it was invented in the late 1800s when it was fashionable to write genealogies proving descent from noble families.

The flip side is also true, that we become connected to famous people over time as new connections are made.

Cokie Roberts

We had had her connected to the Geni World Family Tree for some time, but worked hard to expand her tree (there is more room for more work on it). It looks like she has an ancestor arriving from Andalusia to New Spain. That was a thrilling find, at least to me.

Unknown Profile It’s shabbas, and the person who did the disconnect you’re concerned about is observant - and also, in a very different time zone. So you do need to give it time for answers to the questions.

No one is trying to make fun. We’re trying to explain based on our own personal experience in genealogy.

All I had a dozen years ago was a family bible beginning in 1849 (on one side) and a family history beginning around 1860 (on the other). Because of collaborative genealogy I got to the point where I “saw” many of the same relationships as you do, and accepted them as all “true” links (relationship paths). Now I understand better that I need to verify each link in a path for myself as best I can, and there is a lot I won’t be able to verify, one way or the other, because I’m not an expert.

From working with Geni, I’m just beginning to get “good” on some of First arrivers to America (but not all). It took a long time and there’s lots of work-in-progress, but that’s my zone, it seems. And what I’ve learned mostly - and try to get across - is what I “don’t” know. What I try to do mostly - and try to get across - is showing in Geni profiles how the genealogy conclusion has been reached. I know you know this, I’m not trying to preach or talk down. But it’s the most effective way to build a single, accurate, world family tree, profile by profile.

Aaron moses's brother is not my ancestor anymore.. considering it was direct through all kings and rabbis, what happened ?

@hatte..some of us also come from historically well known families, and whose records are historically accurate. ..

It seems like the problem comes from the spanish royal lines.. the navarre and castille kings don't seem tp be linked to the davidic line anymore which is not logical..

Thank you Hatte Blejer (absent until Nov 1) and Erica Howton for your patient and comprehensive answers. There's really not much else to say.

Unknown Profile and Jessica Christophe-Dymock Paternal Ydna QM 242 if you suspect the cuts were made in error then let's see your evidence for why these profiles should be connected. Saying "they already had it all worked out" is NOT evidence. Links to Wikipedia pages that don't even mention the people in question is NOT evidence. If you're going to challenge the work that other people do here, be prepared to base your arguments on proper genealogical practices, starting with the Genealogical Proof Standard.