RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: LucasKernan on Wednesday 19 October 22 12:12 BST (UK)
-
How Far did you trace your Family Tree? I've traced mine's back to the 1700s.
-
Most lines back into the early 1700s but one or two lines back to the late 1500s / early 1600s
With an occasional brickwall in the 1800s
-
For balance perhaps the survey should include the shortest line as well. The furthest back I have personally traced is to the late 1500s with G11 Gdad.
The shortest is a G2 Gman born about 1828. I think her mother was called Hannah but do not know where G2 Gmam was born and she seems to have been a bastard.
-
Depends which line. I have one line back to the 1500s. I was very lucky that the records survived and I was able to find them. On the other hand I have line stuck in the 1800s. The earliest definitive record I have for them is 1851, they would have been born c1830s and I have their parents names form their marriage and death certificates so I have the names of people born very early 1800s but not much on them.
-
It can all depend on the line, and how well off they were to leave wills or other property arrangements, and can also depend on a lot of work trying to see how far back you can go, and what records are available. If some PR's only go back to the early 1700s then you may have reached the end unless they left a will or were mentioned in wills.
The more that becomes available online, the easier it can get.
-
Depends which line. I have one line back to the 1500s. I was very lucky that the records survived and I was able to find them. On the other hand I have line stuck in the 1800s. The earliest definitive record I have for them is 1851, they would have been born c1830s and I have their parents names form their marriage and death certificates so I have the names of people born very early 1800s but not much on them.
Ditto
-
Most of my lines are mid 1800sbut afew back to late 1700 s the lines that cause most problems are Smith Jones Roberts and Brown .
Have traced lines of my grandmothers adoptive parents further than her birth mothers line
-
A line of my rural Sussex ancestors goes back to local landowners and a local knight who wed in London to a woman of Cheshire and Lincolnshire heritage. With a bit of Welsh blood thrown in, so I have some Welsh ancestry. The knight rented land in Somerset as well.
-
Have you ever seen Who Do You Think You Are where the Genealogist produces and unrolls the magnificent decorated scroll of the “Family Tree” of the English Monarchy with the tree going all the way back to God.
That is my tree.
OK so that was tongue in cheek.
Arnulf of Metz c582 is pretty far back in our tree.
Leutfried of Alammania herzog c480 is a tab further back.
-
I prefer to go wide rather than deep.
-
My oldest line goes back to the 1600s. Not particularly remarkable people, they just happen to be in a very small village where records survived, so I can trace them.
My shortest line technically stops in 1901, when my illegitimate GGGrandmother was born. I have no idea who her father was.
Sometimes you are lucky, sometimes not. When I look at my older lines, I do wonder if I am actually related to them. The more generations there are, the more chance there is of a 'paternity event', I suppose.
-
Like many, mine is a story of two halves.
In my wife's tree, there is the baptism of a boy in Prussia in the year 1499. Of course, he had parents who must have been at least 15 years~ old.
Then in my tree, I have no idea where my paternal grandfather was born and cannot honestly say what his birth surname was.
Regards
Chas
-
one of my lines barley makes it into the 1800's born 1895. on other lines reliably back to the middle 1500's. And then other lines in every century in between. Unreliably the usual descent from Charlemagne.
-
I do direct ancestors and siblings of ancestors but do not feel such a connection to any relatives further removed than ancestor siblings, unless it is to help the direct line back further. My main focus is the direct ancestors.
-
Like most others some lines go further back than others. If early dates are important then my favourite is on the first page of baptisms in the Great Milton Parish Register in 1550. Others I can't get back past the mid 1800s.
Many "public trees" on one of my lines go back to the family of William WALLACE (Braveheart), but I haven't been able to verify back that far. ;)
-
Late 1600’s on one line. Others not so far. Trying to confirm another line in Wales which could take me back further. That’s the fun of the hunt.
-
My paternal line is back to 1550 - and documented.
My maternal line has 2 threads back to mid-1500's.
Absolutely no DNA in my tree :D
-
My shortest line technically stops in 1901, when my illegitimate GGGrandmother was born. I have no idea who her father was.
Mabye you should ask for help.
-
I have been delighted to discover digitised records on line for Germany and Switzerland which give bdm to the 16C, though I don't feel much connection to those ancestors of mine.
I have also uncovered an ancestor of my husband with family traceable back to the 16C.
We live in the same area, and can visit their churches, and stroll in their villages, I find that
far more interesting. :D
-
Most of my family lines end in the 1700's with two lines back to the 1400's. I have one line that ends in 1840 and is a complete dead end at this point. The worst part is that it is a primary surname. There is some speculation that there may have been a name change or that they were adopted. I am hoping to put together more information through the use of this forum.
Cheers,
SoilsEng
-
People also moved around more than we give credit for. I started a thread in The Lighter Side recently about Suffolk migration into Essex during and before the census era. Many of my South East Essex lot had Suffolk roots.
If you do find a baptism 30 or more miles away from where they lived, do not just accept it but do not just discard it, they may have travelled a long way for work. Obviously there were plenty of horse and carts around in the 1700s and many people would want to travel on them, ditto for boats.
Many of my Oxfordshire lot have ancestors from surrounding counties, and one from Sussex. And ironically his descendant, my Oxon born great gran moved to Bexhill, Sussex in 1910 after training for domestic service in Hackney.
-
In the main on my main lines I’m stuck around the 1750’s era. I have one line back to 1680 but that is as far back as o go.
-
People also moved around more than we give credit for. I started a thread in The Lighter Side recently about Suffolk migration into Essex during and before the census era. Many of my South East Essex lot had Suffolk roots.
If you do find a baptism 30 or more miles away from where they lived, do not just accept it but do not just discard it, they may have travelled a long way for work. Obviously there were plenty of horse and carts around in the 1700s and many people would want to travel on them, ditto for boats.
Many of my Oxfordshire lot have ancestors from surrounding counties, and one from Sussex. And ironically his descendant, my Oxon born great gran moved to Bexhill, Sussex in 1910 after training for domestic service in Hackney.
Definitely I have one. Born in Wiltshire in 1650, then attended university at Oxford. 48 Miles on modern roads. He gained a place as a servator so not an elite. Then moved to another place in Wiltshire (55miles), then from there to Broughton in Hampshire (28miles) then from there to Portsea 38 miles. He died about 60miles from where he was born. Yes, I am as sure as I can be that it was the same man. No, I didn't just take the same name. His university records refer to his father and his schooling at home in Wiltshire. His work records refer to his degree which matches with the man from wiltshire who graduated. Also the family retained connections with WIltshire for at least the next 100 years
-
I am stuck with one line about 1776, several go back to the 1500s, others stop in between these dates.
I have yet to achieve the success of some trees on Ancestry that go back to Adam and Eve ;D ;D ;D
-
People also moved around more than we give credit for. I started a thread in The Lighter Side recently about Suffolk migration into Essex during and before the census era. Many of my South East Essex lot had Suffolk roots.
If you do find a baptism 30 or more miles away from where they lived, do not just accept it but do not just discard it, they may have travelled a long way for work. Obviously there were plenty of horse and carts around in the 1700s and many people would want to travel on them, ditto for boats.
Many of my Oxfordshire lot have ancestors from surrounding counties, and one from Sussex. And ironically his descendant, my Oxon born great gran moved to Bexhill, Sussex in 1910 after training for domestic service in Hackney.
Definitely I have one. Born in Wiltshire in 1650, then attended university at Oxford. 48 Miles on modern roads. He gained a place as a servator so not an elite. Then moved to another place in Wiltshire (55miles), then from there to Broughton in Hampshire (28miles) then from there to Portsea 38 miles. He died about 60miles from where he was born. Yes, I am as sure as I can be that it was the same man. No, I didn't just take the same name. His university records refer to his father and his schooling at home in Wiltshire. His work records refer to his degree which matches with the man from wiltshire who graduated. Also the family retained connections with WIltshire for at least the next 100 years
I found John Austin of Wootton Oxfordshire in 1755 said he signed a sworn statement saying he was born in Trentham, Staffordshire, in a village just outside Stoke On Trent, a good 50 miles as the crow flies. His son married my several times great aunty.
-
Most of my lines are mid 1800s but a few back to late 1700s
I have the original glass negative of a photo of an ancestor I have identified as born in 1782 :D
-
Norfolk's Bishops' Transcripts show ancestors of mine ( Collyson / Collison) back to the 1450s and they previously came from Aberdeen.
However, just to amuse myself I did the calculation that if you count grandparents back to around the year 1500 you would have over 1/2 Million ancestors so their DNA is dissipated like Homeopathic Medicine.
cheers, Ian
-
Any traceable ancestor is still part of your heritage no matter how far back he or she is. If you could trace back to Charlemagne, the man is still an ancestor of yours, and you descend from him. Also marriages between cousins or distant cousins gets more pronounced the further back you go. Usually the generations multiply the further back you go. 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents, and so on, unless marriages between cousins happen which cuts down the number a bit.
-
I have multiple lines in the 1600 and 1700s that intermarried (in one case I am descended from 3 sons of one couple) which cuts down on number of possible different ancestors quite a bit.
-
I have multiple lines in the 1600 and 1700s that intermarried (in one case I am descended from 3 sons of one couple) which cuts down on number of possible different ancestors quite a bit.
Same in my tree, especially in North Essex, and some parts of Suffolk.
-
With most of my family lines I'm back into the 1700s at least ... except for my Irish ancestors who came over in the potato famine with the very unhelpful surname of Murphy, and my great great grandfather whose mother and her sister appear to have been the village whores, backing the paternal line ineffable. (Their father died young and their mother took in laundry; she and her sister seem to have been contributing to the family income the only way they could ... and between them produced a large crop of illegitimate offspring. I don't judge them for it; it's just a sad reflection of the harsh realities of life before universal welfare.)
Some lines I am back into the 1600s ... with a lot of maternal lines becoming impossible to take further due to lack of surviving records of Commonwealth period marriages before magistrates (very few of my ancestors were wealthy enough to make wills which might enable me to "bridge the gap).
A few lines I've got into the 1500s, with one or two identified ancestors born before the start of parish records.
Most of the lines that reach back before 1700 have at least one conjectural link which I am still working on firming up, or disproving ... I don't mind which because I'm interested in the truth, not a fanciful collection of other people's ancestors masquerading as my own (and yes, I know that maternity is a matter of fact but paternity can only ever be a matter of opinion ... but you know what I mean, and besides, DNA is changing that old adage). Going back past a conjectural link makes sense, I find, because it can often enable a "top down" follow-up which turns up a will or apprenticeship record or something which may either confirm or refute the assumption(s) underlying the original conjecture.
-
You cannot always be sure who the mother is either, the odd informal adoption or in a more common scenario the mother was actually the grandmother, she helped hide the birth of an illegitimate grandchild. Such as if she had a child at 38 then her next child at 49.
-
I thought that the most surprising thing to discover about my great grandmother was that she married four times. She first married my great grandfather James McFarlane Brockett in 1893.
I have now discovered that through her line I could be related to royalty (I stress could).........
Margaret's grandmother was Margaret Gray 1818-1892 and through this line back to Andrew Gray 2nd lord Gray who married Elizabeth Stewart......Elizabeth Stewarts father was Sir John Stewart 1st Earl Of Atholl who married Lady MargaretnBeatrix Douglas The Fair Maid of Galloway.
Sir John Stewart's father was Sir James Stewart The Black Knight of Lorn...he married Joan Beaufort Queen Consort of Scotland who was previously married to James the first of Scotland......
Joan Beaufort's father was John de Beaufort 1st Earl of Somerset and his father was John Gaunt 1st Duke of Lancaster and his father was Edward the third King Of England.
I don't know how factual and accurate this account is but according to Family search I am related to King Edward the 3rd and beyond!!!!!
-
I remember my late mother telling me that her ancestors used to knit socks for Captain Hardy.
As a child I was greatly impressed by this.
When I grew up I realised that a whole load of people probably knitted - unasked - socks for him.
A bit like all the people who knit booties for royal babies and post them in. ;D