Monarchy Forum
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 9      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   Next   »
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #16 

Peter I have missed your informative posts and glorious charts.

Thank you for sharing them.


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #17 
I try to make the posts both informative and readable, though since I get so little feedback it is always hard for me to say whether I have succeeded in either aim. I am not so ambitious as to want the charts to be glorious, but have done my best to make them nice to look at as well as providing information, their main function of course. I enjoy doing the work, but it is meant for others to enjoy too, so I am always glad when someone says that I have succeeded in that aim at least. Thank you. I have something else on the go, which is proving very interesting to me at least. My usual blend of popular history and fairly intensive genealogy, I imagine it will be to few tastes, being concerned with a fairly remote era, but I will begin offering it in the next few days.
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #18 

More remote than Basil II of Rome?

[smile]


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
KYMonarchist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,368
Reply with quote  #19 
I'm interested in what era Peter is planning.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #20 
Starting in the twelfth century, so not quite so remote as Basil II (whom I have never done, and wouldn't be able to connect).
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,968
Reply with quote  #21 

its only another hundred years or so........
[smile]


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #22 

Having corrected my understanding of the standard method of calculating nearest relationships, I have amended post #2 in this thread (4/7/14: now in the introduction thread below). No charts are affected except the final one in the Belle Époque thread, which has undergone a slimming programme, along with its prefatory matter in the preceding post. A further change is that in the 1713 note on posterities, post #6, I had Grand Duke Henri's descents from Louis XIV via illegitimate issue numbered at four. The correct number is actually five, as I had overlooked a further descent through a circuitous route. This descent has now been added and the route linked.

As mentioned in the first post of Blood Royal II, the project discussed above has been stalled for a while now. I do intend to resume it sometime in the next few weeks, and have it posted as soon as possible thereafter.

Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #23 
I had a look at the 1939 thread today, and in the table in post #10 found that a 1939 sovereign had not been credited with an ancestor he had. Rather more dismayingly, the same was true of several 2013 sovereigns in the table in the next post, and as a result that table and the comparison between the two look quite different now the errors have been corrected. I don't know where my mind may have been when I originally compiled these tables, but wherever it was is probably somewhere I should not revisit.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #24 
I have been through the threads back to 1713 looking at similar tables (before 1713 I narrate rather than chart these kinds of descents), and found no more mistakes. On reflection, I simply don't believe that I committed such gross errors as were apparent in the second 1939 table; without wishing to sound conceited, I know these ancestries far too well to have, say, Carl XVI Gustaf not descended from VGB, or Henri and Philippe lacking descent from KLB. I know I have revised the layout of the tables from time to time, and I think that one of these times a few x's inadvertently got shifted without me noticing.

Or, apparently, anyone else doing so. I did consider whether it was worth mentioning the corrections, on the basis that no one had ever looked at the tables anyway. But I thought probably a few had glanced at the totals at least, and since over an unknown period of time they were wrong and misleading I ought to own up.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #25 
Although I have done some genealogical work over the last couple of weeks, including on the infamous and much-delayed new project, I hadn't been using Genealogics, since it was mainly writing and some simple research for which Wikipedia sufficed. However, today I did have a need for Genealogics, and got a shock. It now looks quite different, and, as I soon discovered, works quite differently too. Overall the result is a considerable upgrade and improvement in capabilities. Unfortunately, the result so far as my charts are concerned is that not a single red link works any more.

Except in the 1952 chart, because I have fixed it. That took over two hours just for one chart. I will be fixing all the others, but as people can appreciate there are a lot of them and it is likely to be days if not weeks before all are done. There will also be a further delay to the new project, for which all charts are complete, or were, since they will now all have to be fixed too.

If you look at the 1952 chart, it isn't all bad by any means. Every single link in it is now red, and this includes multiple relationships, all of which are now displayed, as you will see if you scroll down once connected to the Genealogics graphic. Further, where people are connected multiple times in the same degree through a particular ancestor, all instances appear; for example, Haakon VII of Norway was 5c1r to Rainier III of Monaco through LIXHD in two different ways, and both are shown. The one downside is that Genealogics, validly, treats for example 3c and 2c1r as in the same degree and will show both. They are, but according to the scheme here 2c1r is closer and that alone appears in my charts where both relationships exist. Where the relationship I want appears first I can suppress the others, but if another appears first I have to either allow it or not have the link at all. I have chosen the former, as can be seen with Juliana of the Netherlands and Gustaf VI Adolf of Sweden. I have them as 2c1r WDN, and that does appear, but you have to scroll past 3c FW3P to see it. There are one or two others like this, but it is a price worth paying to have, as I anticipate will be possible, all relationships (except, probably, some that are very remote) in all charts red-linked.

I say this even though for all I know no one has ever clicked a single one of these links. I hope and assume that use is made of them by people interested enough to come here, and in that hope will get all the other charts back up and running in that particular respect as soon as I can. Happily, the revamp has not affected the links I use to illustrate descent from a particular ancestor, for example in the tables above showing descents from JWFO to 1939 and present-day sovereigns and from LIXHD to current heirs. There has been a change, in that in most cases I could now dispense with the stage I; stage II business and just show the whole chain in one go, but since the links work as they are I will leave them alone. Although they look different and behave a little differently links to individual ancestries also still work, thank goodness. Anyway, if anyone wants to use a red link I haven't yet got to just click it. You will get a screen advising that the individuals are not related within that number of generations. Increase the number by one, click 'refresh' and you should get the desired chart.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #26 
I have now reposted all the charts in the 1952 to the present day thread, with working links. This took the entire day, from before seven in the morning until five at night, and though admittedly this thread has by far the most charts I think it will definitely be weeks rather than days before all charts are fixed. As well as fixing the charts I made some small revisions to the 2000 and 2005 narratives, due to the different way the links work now, and while at it linked rather than just asserted the Belgian noble ancestry of Albert I and his wife Duschess Elisabeth in Bavaria in the second 2013 narrative.

There were a few more instances of the type mentioned in the third paragraph in the preceding post, with a particularly rough one in the Heirs chart. Crown Prince Frederik is 5c2r twice to Hereditary Prince Alois. To see the first one you have to scroll past two 6c1rs, then to see the second get past a third 6c1r. There was yet a fourth 6c1r after that, but I was able to suppress that one at least. (Added later: I have now found ways to suppress the great majority of these undesired relationships, including the ones mentioned here, but one or two have proved obdurate.) Another notable thing in this chart is that it has the only unlinked relationship in the entire thread, 6c KLHL between Felipe, Prince of Asturias and Hereditary Prince Alois.

The reason it is not linked is that Felipe and Alois are sixth cousins fourteen times, you can only show up to ten relationships in any particular link, and KLHL's number did not come up in this one. Similarly, the links between their fathers, and also between King Juan Carlos and Alois's grandfather Franz Joseph II, show only ten of the thirteen times the men are/were fifth cousins and fourth cousins once removed respectively, though all four ancestors do come up in each of them. The table below starts by showing that Alois and Felipe are indeed both great-great-great-great-great-grandsons of KLHL, thus sixth cousins through him, and continues by showing all descents of Hans-Adam II and Juan Carlos I from their four closest mutual ancestors. Easy enough for Hans-Adam II, as he has a modest one descent from each. Juan Carlos I is rather less restrained, as you will see. Links in grey are a further generation back, therefore irrelevant to the charts, but are included to give a complete picture. It is worth remembering by the way that CIVS and FI2S, from whom Juan Carlos is descended nine times apiece, were brothers, and LIIE (four) their brother-in-law.

KLHL to FelipeKLHL to Alois
CIVS to Hans-Adam IIF12S to Hans-Adam II
KLB to Hans-Adam IILIIE to Hans-Adam II
CIVS to Juan Carlos I (1)CIVS to Juan Carlos I (2)
CIVS to Juan Carlos I (3)CIVS to Juan Carlos I (4)
CIVS to Juan Carlos I (5)CIVS to Juan Carlos I (6)
CIVS to Juan Carlos I (7)CIVS to Juan Carlos I (8)
CIVS to Juan Carlos I (9)F12S to Juan Carlos I (1)
F12S to Juan Carlos I (2)F12S to Juan Carlos I (3)
F12S to Juan Carlos I (4)F12S to Juan Carlos I (5)
F12S to Juan Carlos I (6)F12S to Juan Carlos I (7)
F12S to Juan Carlos I (8)F12S to Juan Carlos I (9)
KLB to Juan Carlos ILIIE to Juan Carlos I (1)
LIIE to Juan Carlos I (2)LIIE to Juan Carlos I (3)
LIIE to Juan Carlos I (4)`
Windemere

Registered:
Posts: 356
Reply with quote  #27 
Thanks for the above information Peter, and good luck fixing your links. I imagine it will be quite a bit of work. I only became able to use a computer about 6 or 7 years ago, and the technology involved in posting the genealogical relationship charts is far above my comprehension. They do convey a great deal of useful information, so your work is appreciated. It's good that the individual ancestry links still work.

It's wonderful how much additional information can be found online, and how quickly, compared to the old days, when we relied on books, and on libraries. But the problem is how rapidly online links and technology change, and how much effort is required in staying up-to-date. Personally, I am just beginning to learn how to use a cell-phone, and I am also trying to learn how to use a digital camera. I have no idea whatsoever how to use an ipod, to text,  or even what the current terminology regarding those electronic gadgets is, despite continuously seeing them in use everywhere I go.  It took me years to learn e-mail, and how to navigate the internet (though I still don't know how to post links to anything).  I know the basics of Microsoft Word (how to type a letter), though not much more, and nothing whatsoever about graphics.

__________________
Dis Aliter Visum "Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #28 
Thanks, Windemere. I like to think I am quite good with computers, though of course there are many people far ahead of me. Cellphones, or mobiles as we call them, I do not like and do not get on with, though unfortunately having one is a necessity. I manage the basics with it, but have so far sent exactly one text in my life. Quite likely the number will remain at that.

The 1939 thread has now been reposted. The Genealogics relationships calculator being so much more powerful, adaptable and controllable than it was before means I could have used it to actually do a lot of the work compiling the charts, which wasn't possible with the older model, and an upside to having to redo all the links is that the calculator is effectively being used to check the relationships shown. I was pleased that there wasn't a single error of mine in the 1952 to the present day thread, and that situation applied to the 1939 thread too, until I came to the bottom line of the very last chart. I had George VI as 6c1r LRBW to Vittorio Emanuele III, which he was, but also 6c1r JWFO, which I had overlooked and the calculator showed up. That was the only error and I won't whip myself too hard over it. Unfortunately it was an awkward one, as the additional connection promoted JWFO to the elite group forming four connections or more. Which meant I had to redo the tables that caused me so much trouble before, outlined a few posts back, all over again. And then the addition of JWFO made the first table too large to post! I fudged round that, and now the thread is back in, I hope, complete order, and more informative than before as all relationships without exception are linked, with the new steroid-pumped links at that.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #29 

All charts have now been reposted in all threads, so the series as a whole is back in working order. In fact, working far better than before, as the charts are more accurate (there were not proportionally all that many errors found by the new calculator, but there were some, which I will list at another time; moreover, the relationships of for instance Stanisław II in 1789 and Vasily II in 1453 are no longer mere examples but the actual nearest, and linked to prove it). Also, the new links include so much more than the old, and seem to load more quickly and reliably too. I have amended post #5 (moved 3/7/14 to the introduction thread below, this is How to read the charts, linked in each thread introduction) appropriately, and will be attending to further clean-up work and improvements later. For now, though, I am done, and very glad of it.

Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,734
Reply with quote  #30 

To summarise several earlier posts, I have now completed work on all 1914 threads plus those for 1939 and 1952-2013, putting in actual nearest relationships rather than examples for the Princes of Monaco and Liechtenstein in 1914 (1) and (3) and otherwise fixing up links that needed it to load faster and with only the desired relationships, i.e. those nearest by my reckoning. Earlier threads should not need that work, as by the time I got to them I was much more up to speed with the best way to do things. There is still some cosmetic cleanup work to do and also I want to write about the relationships now given for the Princes, plus I still have to list out the errors of mine found by the calculator. However, as I seem to have done little but work on these threads for the last three weeks I am going to let all that wait for a while.

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.