"Who Do You Think You Are", Series 14: #7 Fearne Cotton

[Mowsehowse]

As we're on The Lighter Side here, I have to admit that the thing that distracted me most was Fearne Cotton's choice of finger nail varnish.  Sometimes is was white, sometimes it was green, and sometimes it was bright orange (though I suppose it could be interpreted as red). Made we wonder whether she already knew that her 4-times gt-grandpa was Irish, these being the three colours of the Irish flag.
But, contrary to some of the comments on here, I did find it an interesting programme, solely concentrating on two of her male ancestors around whom some good historical stuff was woven...
Keith

   I noticed the continual nail varnish changes too.

[mulvenna]

My reactions to this episode were somewhat coloured by my own political prejudices, I have to admit. I found the first half about the conscientious objector totally fascinating and brought something new to my awareness of WWI history. A very courageous pacifist that fella, and quite sad to think that he was possibly shunned by his own community after his ordeal in prison.

Turned off a bit during the second half when Fearne got totally excited by William Gilmour having tea with Queen Victoria. I'm glad I read this thread though, as I had taken away the impression that William Gilmour was a charlatan, not someone to be admired, but now I now that this isn't fair or accurate.

[matt94]

The celebs are lucky to have a team of researchers who are scouring all records they can find to look for info on their ancestors so they seem to have it all handed to them on a platter with bells on it. No trundling off to record offices and spend hours trundling through jittery microfilm machines looking at registers which can be faded, have blobs on them or gaps in them. And finding some of the reels have been wound up the wrong way by a previous user or put in the wrong place.

Normal genealogists have to do this all ourselves and it can take years to crack down a brick wall on one single line. I guess even the celebs have ancestors who reach dead ends though.

Well put, coombes. The celebs miss all the fun! Imagine starting research into our family history and at every turn having en expert miraculously appear with a transcript ... it'd soon lose its excitement.

[BushInn1746]

The celebs are lucky to have a team of researchers who are scouring all records they can find to look for info on their ancestors so they seem to have it all handed to them on a platter with bells on it. No trundling off to record offices and spend hours trundling through jittery microfilm machines looking at registers which can be faded, have blobs on them or gaps in them. And finding some of the reels have been wound up the wrong way by a previous user or put in the wrong place.

Normal genealogists have to do this all ourselves and it can take years to crack down a brick wall on one single line. I guess even the celebs have ancestors who reach dead ends though.

There are some excellent amateur researchers on this Rootschat, with good suggestions to check out!!

I've been stuck for about 18 years at a marriage 202 years ago and a -/+ 2 yrs birth year.

If my good lady and I, can find one record, up in Yorkshire to link up, I could be back another 60 or 100 years (as suggested documents are already checked / photographed for two plausible lines)!

Checked loads of Wills at York etc. but nothing!

Yes microfilms wound back wrong previously and lost or uncatalogued records are a great nuisance!

Mark

[dobfarm]

Its a bit like horse racing tipsters, or TV programmes on football teams, one usually hears about rantings of winners but little about losers. I think WDYTYA will only put on vetted ancestry of celebs to find one who's ancestry can be found in confirming evidence records by researchers that go back a fair way.

I bet if a survey was done on RC of all members, bet a lot would be the ones who's ancestry got stuck with a brick wall, who's oldest known ancestor was a death record with age known going back into the 1700's then get stuck, who died say 1812 to 1850 or a marriage post July 1837 with a fathers name. The survey would be many being stuck around the suggest above aforesaid !! with a few lucky ones who could find confirming evidence records further back or grave burial records or gravestone epitaphs, that have other family members buried near with epitaphs or identifying Will/probate records.

I was recently lucky, a RC member found a Will the help me by it eliminating a fiffy thought ancestor by IGI submissions.

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=502634.36

[coombs]

It can be fun but it can also be frustrating and you could leave a record office with more questions than answers. And some may still say that is the thrill of the chase but surely that thrill has a limit when you keep trying.

[dobfarm]

I think sometimes it feels like!!    its not so much following the twigs back in a tree to the roots, it more a question of finding which tree has the right nest in it, in a wood, after siblings flew the nest and which wood has the right tree in it, as questions coming out of a register office.

I'm not 100% sure on one line, as the fathers name seems to be wrong on as a Charles, on a marriage 1867, as all very strong evidence points to the father as George, (witness was George with same surname) and nothing anywhere came up for a Charles as the father. But that little doubt always lingers. All the family line were illiterate country ag lab type folk - so if vicar got names mix up - no one would have noticed.