General Chat

I have tried to concentrate on direct lines, but end up getting side tracked. Most of mine I have got back to the late 1700's, even have a photo of one of them as an old lady, she would have been born about 1780, which is brilliant.

But.. I have a sticky on one at gt gt grandparent level on my side, and can't even find hubby's two grandmother's births, honestly!!

I haven't done any serious research for about 2 years now, just doodled with a couple of bits (Impey's if anyone has them, please let me know, lol)

But for me, once I start, I become embroiled.. and I am also adding meat to the bones. My dad didn't know that his own grandmothers and one of his grandfathers were still alive when he was 10... he had, to his knowledge, never met them, and thought they had died before he was born. I have got all the details of them... and met some of my dad's second cousins who remember them, so was able to add these details.

I will get back to it one day, properly. But it isn't going anywhere, is it? I mean, they are hardly going to up sticks and move on me. I hope!

I don't think I will ever be *finished* but I might one day feel I have done enough.

Love

Daff xxxxx

Back to 18th C on all lines now, but that's relatively for me easy as my GF's were born in 1859 & 1864. One line all the way back to Adam through a link to Royal family.

xxxx mick

My OH does this. His argument is that even though they are not directly related they where step mum or step dad and would have had an influence on the childrens upbringing especially if half siblings.

I, on the otherhand don't. I feel I have more than enough ancestors to research without married in. Having said that though I have researched an uncles wife's ancestry in some detail on paternal side because I found someone else with her maiden name on my maternal side and was trying to find a link. I did find a link but in a totally unexpected way.

My problem is that I look into people who are
no direct relation of mine. Can't seem to help
myself does anyone else do this? For example
my rellie married twice 2nd husband no direct
relationship but look for his parents and so it
goes on. Emma

Well I suppose if Genes started a searchable on-line database of cave drawings……

Best wishes,
Mayfield.

My tree is wider than it is longer - but that's because I'm trying to do all the gr gr grandparents etc - male and female lines and all. And I do OH's tree and my son's tree on his father's side.

I like to find out what I can about them and track down as much info as possible other than just the basic BMD and census stuff. I'm trying to write up bits about them as I go along as well. I find when I sit down to write out the story of one of my trollope-y gr gr grandmas for example that it starts me off looking for yet another bit of info so it doesn't stop.

But no, not worried how far back it will go. Bits go back to 1640ish and other bits stop at 1884-ish but I wouldn't hope to get all lines back much beyond the 18th century as I know there are gaps in parish records and therefore I don't worry if I can't find anything. If it comes to a halt it comes to a halt. There are plenty of other lines to investigate.

Also I'd like to visit the areas where they lived to see what those places are like and that's not so easy as I work full-time ...

Jill

I too have been handed trees but like Susan never add to tree unless I have verified all the information with records I have researched myself. I only use them as possible leads.

Everyone makes mistakes and spends many hours going down the wrong path so it is better to check all information

Me too TF

I have learned much Geography and History since first starting my research many moons ago. I also find that helping others adds to my knowledge too, so it is not just a one-way street.

I too have had trees handed to me but have always, always done my own research, just in case. There is no fun in collecting names just for the sake of it. Most of my people now have added meat on them...so to speak lol.

I am back to 1600's but it is increasingly difficult to find records so when records run out will I say I'm far enough back.

But I am not just interested in the people in my tree I have expanded to researching the historic events of their time and social conditions. Also I research the occupations and the working conditions. So now feel I have a fairly good understanding of their lives.

when i can find the connection to a queen who rode a welsh fire breathing dragon into Norway or was it Norwich,,,,think she was related to Eve by way of a 3rd cousin or something,}

when I can get to some places and see stuff then it feels real and know its there in black and white as long as there is proof then it just goes on..

All things to all people. For me, it's not how far back I can get or how many I can add that holds no real interest. I like to have a story about everyone that I find and I don't try to go back until I know everything possible about them. I spend lots of time in records offices as a result, but that's how I get my kicks :-)

I mean, I was thrilled to find an account in the Anglo Saxon Chronicles about a relly, confirming my descent from Og the Orrible.

Whenever I see somebody on TTF whining about not being able to find the parents of so-and-so born in 1622, I feel like giving them a sermon. About being grateful for what thou hast.

I'm just glad I still have a few mysteries from the early 1800s to amuse myself with, myself.

I've got a few I've been able to trace back through parish records on line, in Cornwall and the odd other place, to the early 1600s. Particularly since it's an interesting line -- in that case, first I'd had to spend a year or two figuring out who my gr-grf really was -- that's fun, to finally get past the barrier and then be able to go back.

And I've been given a couple of family trees with things like my grx8 grandmother in. But yeah, if it's just handed to you, and it's that far away, it's hard to feel much connection with it/them.

For me its the research I have done, I was passed on stuff from 1600's but it just doesnt feel the same if you havent done it yourself, I have got back as 1788 but still have many gaps to fill .

Mine is about the same but would like to go back further

I often wondered though..how wide is wide enough

the 1800's would be good!

Far enough is when you don't feel like looking any more and are satisfied with what you have.

I can take a couple of lines back to plantagenets and others no further that 1888 ( a right pain he is too ).

Those nearer our own era....well there is still much to be found if one continues to retain the fire and will to dig the information out. It is these tit bits that keep me going.

When I get to the stage of 'brick wall head butting' this is the time for me to have a break, help others with their trees, then when refreshed continue with my own. Usually after a break I find more information and continue the slog.

I expect when I have found my elusive one and sorted out that line, I will stop.

1512 is far enough for me for now
i do do a bit of my side shoots


when i can

Do you feel the need to keep going back through the centuries?

I am 'stuck' on most lines at laate 1700s , but sometimes see on sites and here that people are back to @1600 and still looking... i suppose it might be different if I had any 'nobility' Lords, ladies, kings and queens, parties to world events back then , but I don't lol.