My tree is private on Ancestry but I have shared it with a few people, and they've put up the same info.
I also don't understand why people are so keen to add in unrelated families. Like they put in someone who married in, and then they add that person's entire family tree. Those people aren't in your family! One of them is related by marriage, that's all. I might research someone's parents if I'm looking for potential kids' names but that's it usually.
Occasionally, if there are less common name combos, I've found it increases the potential of finding a match with some info.
I've also found that as further resources become available and I improve my information digging techniques; I usually have the only accurate source for any info anyway. Haven't got a single useful lead on Ancestry in years but have had to convince a few people to fix terrible inaccuracies.
I've also wrung Ancestry dry and there's nothing new coming out of it for me. Not sure what to do now, either try FMP again next year or give it a rest. I'd love to find some live descendants of a particular line as I'd like to have clarity on where my granny went!
Well, an hour ago I would have agreed but it suggested a hint for a marriage of my ggg grandparents in Quebec tonight. I knew the groom's parents names already so it's definitely right! I've no idea why 2 people from Limerick married in Quebec but I'm bloody chuffed. The bride's parents names were new to me and hello new gggg grandparents! I've added about 15 people to my tree in the last hour. Should be in bed.
Ancestry & FMP keep adding new databases, so it's worth going back to the well.
FMP recently uploaded Betham's genealogical abstracts which gave me leads on one particular branch of the family - he summarises genealogical information from selected wills from which I was able to identify a sister of my 4xgreat grandfather, and her husband.
I wonder were thet Famine immigrants who made a return journey? Quebec was an important port in that era.
Yoy probably know this lready, but it is worthwhile having a peek at Nick Reddan's Deeds project site - I was able to crossreference a Betham with Reg. of Deeds entries to clarify/confirm some relationships.
I was going to ask had anyone had any luck with the new Betham, Crossle or Thrift uploads to FMP? I've found one or two entries which will help me with my Moore research. However, these images appear to be just 'the notes' as Fr. Ted once said, and I'm wondering is there more to it than what's been presented by FMP?
Reading John Grenham's recent article on the Betham uploads the answer would appear to be yes. And in the case of deeds, there's lots of further research that can be done. But does anyone know of other surviving work that was done as a follow on from all of the above?
Yes, it's certainly a possibility but the marriage was 1846, so maybe a bit early. The husband was born in Limerick and was a river pilot. The wife's father was from Bruff but she was born in Dublin.
Just to say I'm without my regular computer for a couple of weeks so my replies may be less fulsome than usual.
Hi all, am finding family history interesting and often stunning! .............I mean at some points, I just gotta wonder 'what were my ancestors thinking!'
Anyone else find strange twists in your family's back histories?
Every family researcher finds amazing / strange / bizarre discoveries.
Anyone who hasn't, did not try very hard.
Over on the History Forum I mentioned that I would post a ‘find’ on the ‘chat’ thread as I thought it a more suitable place.
Some years ago my genealogy work developed another side - a sort of ‘one name study’, a collection of oddments / people of my infrequent surname, recorded because ‘stray’ mentions often provided clues to help identify ‘orphan’ families and when satisfied an ability to link them to different branches. The links to the old NY newspaper archives posted by Hermy and Kildarefan a few weeks ago prompted me to revisit those sites during the ‘snow days’. I discovered a person (described as a bachelor) with my surname living in 1860’s New York who was the victim of a murder / manslaughter by his brother-in-law. More searches showed the surname was spelled very differently in several newspaper reports, many of which gave good detail on the crime.
I started to work through census and marriage records to correctly identify the surname and obtain support info. The child birth records matched ‘my’ spelling, as did the parent’s marriage. The names and address entries in the 1860 Federal census matched the crime details. This brought up an interesting find – the marriage certificate of the murderer showed his wife to be a daughter of a missing distant relative. It is an exaggeration to describe him as a minor landlord in Ireland, he was a ‘middling’ farmer with a hundred or so heavily encumbered acres, who had a few tenants on variously sized lots. He had married ‘well’ but the agrarian unrest in the 1820 - 30’s caused him hardship as rents went unpaid and he could not obtain vacant possession of his land or put paying tenants on it. He was a reasonably innocuous individual, trying to survive, the odds stacked against him. He had death warnings, hay stacks and buildings burned, employees attacked and a son-in-law beaten to near death, etc. The Famine finally ruined him financially. I sometimes wondered what had happened to him and his issue after his eventual bankruptcy.
Now I know what happened – he emigrated with his wife and children to NYC, worked as a clerk and died there aged 57 in 1863. His NY Herald death notice even named the village of his birth in Ireland.
The murdered son was unmarried, the crime was deemed to be manslaughter, the brother-in-law was released by the State Governor after serving 10 years and went back to his wife.
FWIW curiosity provoked me to contact two tree owners on Ancestry whose online trees contained the victim’s sister and her ex-con husband. Both trees had what I considered to be an incorrect name for the paternal grandmother and incorrect places/dates of death. Only one replied, “Can't help you much on this one…... Ancestry is telling me that she is: the wife of 1st cousin 1x removed of wife of 2nd cousin 4x removed and the 'Ancestry Hint' says she died in New York City and the husband died in Australia."
Factually, she died in NYC as did her husband. So much for the accuracy of online trees, but it shows the usefulness of newspaper archives.
So i am just curious of what age group the majority of people interested in geneology are?
I ask this because while in contact with someone from a geneology reasearch centre through email, the man was taken by surprise when he learned i was only an 18 year old boy!!!
Also, all people, distant familiy members or otherwise (who also had interest in geneology) which i was in contact with troughout the years were either retired people in there 60s or people in there 30s/40s.
Are people here surprised to read that i am only 18 qnd have a big online family tree...and that my main hobby is reasearch..i dont know of anyone else around my age group who does the same !
I got my interest when i was only 11...my uncle died and it came up in conversation how many 1st cousins i had on my dad's side, so we went about counting them ALL and when i realised we had 56 first cousins on my dad's side (and i always knew my total of 4 first cousins on my mam's side!) I just had to put it into a tree format...and from there it grew!
I'm in my thirties but started at a similar age to you. Anecdotally, many people become interested in genealogy after the death of a parent, so usually in their 50s/60s. I do know a couple of people who got the bug in their teens. The 3 year course I did in UCD (now defunct) had 2 people in their 20s (me and one other), one thirtysomething, some 40s and the majority above 50.
There's a great benefit to starting young: more older people are still around and have their marbles so they can tell you what they know, and are available for followup questions.