How closely related am I to someone with the same surname?

Question

I met a girl and we share a surname. We are two of the 11094 people in our country with this surname (per 1998 census). Assuming a common ancestor for all the 11094 people. What's the most distantly related that I and me new friend could be? e.g. 5th cousins, 25th cousins, ???

Answer 1

I can't actually tell you that. The name Patel is a very common surname in India just as Smith, Johnson, and Jones are in the United States.

What I can tell you is that mathematically speaking you are related to the girl that you met just through doing a little math.

You have 2 to the first power parents, 2 squared grandparents, 2 cubed great grandparents, 2 to the fourth power great great grandparents, 2 to the fifth power great great great grandparents.

If you continue this math, assuming the normal life span of a human being, back to the time of Adam and Eve, you are looking at a number being 2 to the 75th. power or more. The resulting number is equal to more than all the people who have ever lived on the earth, and that makes this girl related to you as a human being no more that a 52nd. cousin away from you.

Now, seeing that 11,094 people in your country have your surname, just take the lifespan of a person in your country and keep going back until you get to that common ancestor. I don't have the facilities here to do that kind of math. Besides that, it depends on how many children each person had, and some of them might not have had any children. Others might have had 10 children, and it depends on how many of them married other people and how many didn't. You would need all those numbers to accurately calculate what you desire to be calculated.

Answer 2

It is actually impossible to tell without knowing how many of that surname are deceased and how many of that surname were female and so would have changed their name on marriage. Their progeny would also be blood relations, of course, but with different surnames and the females of those families may well have married back into that surname.

I think I see what you are driving at but you need to redefine your problem in more specific (and more artificial) terms for it to be soluble. If, for example, you were to tell me that only 11094 people of that surname had ever lived in that country and that each family of that surname always consisted of a certain number of children of which a fixed proportion were male, then it might be possible to make the calculation.

If it were a practical problem (and assuming that it were illegal for first cousins to marry, which is not the case in most European countries), then you would simply need to establish that, between you, you had 8 different grandparents.

Answer 3

Assuming that the families only bore three men (to maintain the surname and set a realistic average spreading of the tree)....

cubic root of 11094 is ... 22.30

so, 22 generations bearing three men each is necessary to get close to 11094 (10648 actually).

If you are in a country where there was a great deal of immigration (like the US), many immigrants' surnames were changed due to the immigration officials not being able to spell them, or the family's wanting to fit in better.

Also, some surnames were given to people based on their profession (baker, etc) or their heritage (johnson, etc), so there could be some overlapping that way.

The best way to figure it out is to get some family trees together and look for a common ancestor. Many families have family trees - ask around! Ancestry.com works for about 4 or 5 generations, if you'd like to go that way :-)

As for other answers, they are of course right too :-)

My last name, Blunt, was originally Blount in Sweeden, was changed to LeBlount when they moved to France, then finally settled on Blunt when they went to Scotland.

Answer 4

I once knew a Miss Squires who met and married a Mr Squire

they were not related before the event and all the new wife had to do was to move the 's' at the end of her former surname to the end of her new status title Mrs


or i could tell you of the Hungarian descent chappie Mr Kuku who married Miss Pye!

both true stories i assure you!

Answer 5

Surnames were originally derived in England from the place someone held in society.

"Smith" - A blacksmith, swordsmith etc.
"Miller" - Stone miller or flour miler

Or an asset.

"Brown" A family with brown hair, perhaps?
"Johnson" the son of a man named "john"

So a potentially unlimited number of unrealted persons could have the same surname.

Answer 6

Could it be her parents moved there from another state? That will reduce your odds considerable.
We are all related in the most distant past.
It would be interesting for the two of you do do a join genealogy to find out the answer.

Answer 7

It's doubtful if you are related! Surnames derived from many different sources, ie persons trade, nickname, character trait. Plus of course spelling changes and phonetics.

Answer 8

Well, it is possible your not cousins at all.
I remember back to my younger years and there was 2 people called Doyle who kissed each other!
But there is thousands of Doyles in Ireland and they were not related at all, you should tell us your surname.

Answer 9

There are variables to consider such as is this her married name or is it a name by proxy as this would give you less chance of being closely related.But we are all related really however distant because we all originate from the same source.

Answer 10

Just remember, we are "All" related to Kevin Bacon in some way or fashion LOL 8-)