RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: mazzie74 on Thursday 26 February 15 07:44 GMT (UK)
-
Hi
I am writing a family tree to show to family members.
When I have parents I have it written as:
John Smith
b.1859 Newcastle
d.1903 Newcastle
Coal Miner
m.1881 Newcastle
Ann Jones
b.1862 Newcastle
d.1918 Newcastle
What I would like to ask is (particularly for more modern ancestors), if there is a child born to unmarried parents, what is the best way to show both parents - obviously I can't write a marriage year or place?
Thanks
Darin.
-
You need to replace the "m" for married with something else?
"c" for cohabited? "r" for relationship with?
-
Just omit the 'm' and date, or write 'unmarried', or 'did not marry', or 'no marriage found' ...
-
"P" for partner or partnered works too.
-
I normally do the same as Ruskie.
-
I understood that the way to denote an illegitimate child was to put a short horizontal line across the line from the parent to the child.
That's what I do in my handwritten tree for any child born of a parent who isn't married.
-
I've always used the "not equal to" sign:
John SMITH ≠ Mary JONES
K.
-
I've always used the "not equal to" sign:
John SMITH ≠ Mary JONES
K.
Yes, I would read that as John SMITH is not married to Mary JONES (and their children are on the generational line below). BUT as far as I am aware, there's NO well recognised ISO standard for family history (tree charts, or otherwise), so if you simply put your own "key" list of your chosen symbols on your document or at the introduction/cover sheet, I would hope anyone reading it would appreciate your hand prepared document. That is definitely a labour of love task you have set yourself.
Cheers, JM
-
Oh .. I use "+" meaning Adam + Eve, with no formal marriage!
-
I have one and I have input 'and' instead of 'married'. Family history is going to become a nightmare in the future.
-
Hi
Thanks for your suggestions
Regards
Darin.
-
Yes, I would read that as John SMITH is not married to Mary JONES (and their children are on the generational line below). BUT as far as I am aware, there's NO well recognised ISO standard for family history (tree charts, or otherwise), so if you simply put your own "key" list of your chosen symbols on your document or at the introduction/cover sheet, I would hope anyone reading it would appreciate your hand prepared document. That is definitely a labour of love task you have set yourself.
Cheers, JM
The not equal to sign ≠ has been used since at least the late 19th early 20th century in genealogy.
In addition a dashed line is used to connect the parents to their issue.
It is what I have used for the last 50 or so years also. ;)
Cheers
Guy
-
I've always used the "not equal to" sign:
John SMITH ≠ Mary JONES
K.
Yes, I would read that as John SMITH is not married to Mary JONES (and their children are on the generational line below). BUT as far as I am aware, there's NO well recognised ISO standard for family history (tree charts, or otherwise), so if you simply put your own "key" list of your chosen symbols on your document or at the introduction/cover sheet, I would hope anyone reading it would appreciate your hand prepared document. That is definitely a labour of love task you have set yourself.
Cheers, JM
Since (for me at least) the research is (and always will be) ongoing, I would never put
lots of labour into a graphic representation.
Drawing fancy diagrams of trees is what computers are for.
BugBear