Just Who Do You Put On Your Tree

[hallmark]

When possible I do follow ancestor's siblings and their descendants forward.  It can sometimes be the only way to confirm who an ancestor actually is.

However, I get a bit frustrated with ancestry trees where they following the "married-ins" backwards looking at their ancestors and siblings.  OK if it's your direct ancestor who "married-in" then there is a genuine reason for doing this, but as sibling's wives are not direct ancestors I don't see why there is any need to research them.  

Well I research them and the reason why is because the "married-in's" siblings married and then kids from these marriage reconnect by marriages maybe 2 generations later as 2nd cousins marrying each other....I've even 3rd cousins marrying each other which I wouldn't see if I didn't research them this way and I found a 2nd cousin once removed, this way and we have filled in so many blanks in the tree between us.

By just doing Direct I wouldn't even know him.

[Finley 1]

Yep  anyone who has a drop of my blood is my Rellie and that is who I count in my Tree... I will never finish it ..... well not in my lifetime.. BUT wow its so interesting..

Imagine having grown up and gone to school with a 3rd cousin 1 removed and never knowing until now why you liked this person....

This I find so interesting, suddenly you realise the genetic link and it makes it all worthwhile.   I have never as yet found a link that I have been thoroughly ashamed or embarrased to be related to.  And believe me there are lots of dodgy characters in this tree of mine.   

It does seem to explain, why we are drawn to people ... I know I am close to eccentric, in most peoples eyes.  But that is me and I am happy with it.

So as many 'married ins' and outs as poss  .... just a drop of blood... thats for me.


 


xin

[mofid42]

You sound lovely xinia, not eccentric at all 

But I agree, a drop of blood and they are included. Don't think my tree will ever be finished either!

I always look at it that our ancestors didn't exist in isolation, they had connections and influences outside of their immediate family that shaped their lives, and sometimes those connections and influences were in-laws,  friends, neighbours or employers.....so it all helps to get a fuller picture.

I contacted a lady who appeared to have my Gt Grandmothers brother on her tree. It turned out my Gt Uncle had married in to the lady's family. Although the lady wasn't directly descended from the person my Gt uncle had married, he, his wife and son had all been invited to a wedding of one of the lady's ancestors. She kindly sent me a copy of the wedding photo and it was lovely to see the family resemblance between my Gt Grandmother and her brother, and an added bonus that I also got see what his wife and son looked like too!

[angelfish58]

I always look at it that our ancestors didn't exist in isolation, they had connections and influences outside of their immediate family that shaped their lives, and sometimes those connections and influences were in-laws,  friends, neighbours or employers.....so it all helps to get a fuller picture.

Well said 

[seagullsurfer]

I started off by being fairly narrow but it didn't last long , so interesting from a social history angle when you explore the wider family , that's my excuse for being chaotic and getting side tracked anyway

[smudwhisk]

Yep  anyone who has a drop of my blood is my Rellie and that is who I count in my Tree... I will never finish it ..... well not in my lifetime.. BUT wow its so interesting..

So as many 'married ins' and outs as poss  .... just a drop of blood... thats for me.

I'm not disagreeing and I do tend to follow all lines forward, it's the trees on there with ancestors of mine who are NOT blood relatives of the tree owner (or their partner or children) that annoys me.   I have some very large trees because I've followed my ancestor's siblings forward whether male or female.  I wouldn't have been able to confirm one line if I'd not done that because of witnesses to marriages or visiting on census night. 

I have come across trees where people have been researching unrelated lines but they're on separate trees and it's obvious when you look at the home person that they are not the researchers ancestors.  Don't have a problem with that, as I said it's those including lines that aren't blood relatives just because they can.  Yes by all means research social history side of things but do you really have to include them on your directline tree

[busybod]

Thank you everybody for your helpful and informative responses.  As you say, I guess for the most part it is down to the individual just who they include and who they dont.  My tree currently has 402 people on it and I think I can safely say that I feel I know each person as an individual - know their year of birth (if not always the exact d.o.b) and their life stories.  I would not want my tree to become just a list of names about who I have no knowledge whatsoever.

[Finley 1]

thank you mofid xx

Yep busybod, that sounds how it should be   ... I would hate it if I didnt feel i knew them..

JUST enjoy the discovery. 


 ;)xin

[busybod]

Thanks Xinia, I am.

Regards,

Busybod