Is ruling in the genes?

Two hot topics for the price of one

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Online
User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10480
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Is ruling in the genes?

Post #1

Post by William »

All presidents bar one are directly descended from a medieval English king
12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215
Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John
[Link]

Assuming this is fact, is it a matter of coincidence, a set of planned event strings, or perhaps there is a special gene which promotes leadership?

User avatar
Difflugia
Guru
Posts: 2294
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1838 times
Been thanked: 1362 times

Re: Is ruling in the genes?

Post #2

Post by Difflugia »

William wrote: Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:03 pm
All presidents bar one are directly descended from a medieval English king
12-year-old girl created family tree linking 42 of 43 U.S. presidents to King John of England, who signed Magna Carta in 1215
Only eighth president, Martin Van Buren, was not related to John
[Link]

Assuming this is fact, is it a matter of coincidence, a set of planned event strings, or perhaps there is a special gene which promotes leadership?
My suspicion is that Americans of European descent have about a 42/43 chance of being descended from King John. It might even be closer to 43/43 and they just lacked the proper documentation for Martin van Buren (I'd bet that nearly everyone from the Netherlands has a bit of royal Habsburg somewhere in the family tree). When you factor in that the presidential pool is at least metaphorically a bit incestuous and over-represents old money (over a third of the presidents were ivy leaguers), the answer is probably statistical near-certainty rather than mere coincidence.

User avatar
The Barbarian
Sage
Posts: 510
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:40 pm
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 323 times

Re: Is ruling in the genes?

Post #3

Post by The Barbarian »

Difflugia wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:50 am
My suspicion is that Americans of European descent have about a 42/43 chance of being descended from King John. It might even be closer to 43/43 and they just lacked the proper documentation for Martin van Buren (I'd bet that nearly everyone from the Netherlands has a bit of royal Habsburg somewhere in the family tree). When you factor in that the presidential pool is at least metaphorically a bit incestuous and over-represents old money (over a third of the presidents were ivy leaguers), the answer is probably statistical near-certainty rather than mere coincidence.
Apparently, most everyone of English descent can trace ancestry back to William the Conqueror. It has to do with the fact that kings tended to have a lot of offspring, and that people of noble descent tended to live long enough to reproduce a lot. Turns out, almost everyone's family line dies out after a given number of generations, and most of us are the descendants of a relatively few people.

A cousin has advised me that both of us are descended from William the Conqueror. It's not that great an honor, and the important part is that it's not a genetic thing. Queen Elizabeth II is a direct descendant of William, but likely has none of his genes at all.

For reasons that should be obvious.

Post Reply