Why is a sibling of a 'n' x Great Grandparent one generation higher as a Great Grand Uncle or Aunt?

One thing that defeats me each time, despite many years of experience, is in finding out that a great uncle (or great aunt for the matter) who is a sibling of a great grandparent has an increased generational number than the sibling who is a direct line grandparent.

I will explain something that cropped up this week after some in-depth research about a great uncle (I will say how many times 'great' in a moment) who received a 'Freeman' status (Freedom of the City through being a member of the Wheelwrights Guild) in 1755. From that date you will know I am going back a stretch and in the end I identified him as John the son of my 6 x Great Grandfather George. He was also the brother of my 5 x Great Grandfather who, confusingly, was another George. So without giving it a thought I referred to the said John as my 5 x Great Uncle. However on his page in my Ancestry Tree -where I am the root figure - he was shown as my 6th Great Uncle, despite also being the brother of a 5th Grandfather.

I actually thought Ancestry had it wrong, so I sought a second opinion in FTM with a Relationship chart which confirmed the same. So I had to think it through over again (as I had done in the past) to take on board that any offspring of a Great x ( n) Grandparent who does not become direct line and so takes the generational number lower (n-1) takes the same generational number as their parents -i.e. 'n'. As they say in the vernacular ...'it does my head in'!

If that is as clear as mud, sorry, but if any consolation even though I know that is the way it works, I will I am sure challenge the whole thing again next time.

Perhaps Peter or some other kind soul will provide a rule of thumb to explain why it works as it does.

 

Your grandparents' siblings, Bob, are your great-uncles and great-aunts, so the first 'great' appears in your grandparents' generation. This means that in preceding generations the great-uncles and great-aunts will always be one 'great' ahead of your great-grandparents. Does this help?

 

Thanks for that Susan, but even though I have done that exercise many times, even back to my father's brother being an uncle, and my grandfather's brother (who I knew for a short time as a boy) who Dad referred to as Uncle George, was my Grand Uncle George. I never knew my Grandmother's sister although heard her spoken of as Grand Aunt Florrie, but I knew her husband my Grand Uncle Peter. In all case 'Grand' not 'Great'. That made complete sense then and now - 'Grand' applied to siblings (and spouses) of grandparents

I have just checked out Grand Uncle George in Ancestry and yes he is shown as a Great Uncle and his brother as Grandfather; both being children of a Great Grandfather. So that is where it all starts and the 'step-sequencing' kicks in. Which is a 'grand' (pun intended) shame!

 

Thank you Tim, and as you will see from my follow up posting to Susan, that is precisely how I was taught to address those Grand aunts and Uncles I knew as a child. That probably is why I find it hard to cope with the seemingly mis-alignment of generation numbers between direct line and blood line.

 

Yes indeed it is and something I may well adopt. In the instance about which I posted, I had decided not to refer to my designated 6th Great Uncle as such, instead refer to him as a 5th Great Grand Uncle, the brother of my 5th Great grandfather. I think I can now cut to the chase and just refer to him as my 5G grandfather's brother. Simples! Thank you.