Genealogy Chat

Hello everyone, i just wanted to chip in. My mother and my have only recently started to trace our tree and I can say that its truly addictive! We have no idea what we're doing and only have 2 files filled with notes, hard copies of census records, and certificates but I would like to think that if anyone needed any help with any research or to look at my tree i wouldnt hesitate to try and help them. However I can acknowledge it probably is different if you have spent 20 plus years gathering info and spending a fortune on certificates! The hot matches can be annoying but we managed to come into contact (via hot matches) with a second cousin who could shed light on many things. We have also been extremely impressed with the friendliness of people who were more than willing and happy to point us in the right direction, give us tips and advice etc. I guess we are lucky not to come in contact with any unfriendly people! Every one we have corresponded and had contact (esp a lovely lady called Susan C) has made using this site a very, very pleasant experience! There, its not all gloom and doom! happy hunting to all out there! Carole and Susan

OC I am PMSL at the thought of you in that record office in your mini skirt. Margaret

Oooh, Charles, do you wear a dicky bow and a mustard yellow waistcoat, lol, if so I know you - and all your cousins, too. Reminds me of my first ever visit to a Records Office. I was a mini-skirted teenager which in itself caused consternation among the three ancient Vicars and the one retired Army Colonel in the room. I asked if I might see the Parish Register for ???? can't remember now. The man in charge surveyed me with distaste and said with finality 'They are not suitable for young women to see'. I left, almost in tears and it was many years before I dared to go again. When I did, I was disappointed to find nothing untoward about that Parish at all, apart from a high proprtion of illegitimate births (most contributed by MY ancestors, I must say) OC

He he ... you remind me of the old style record room where I work. Usually run by a 'dragon' who knew exactly where everything was and also who should - or should not - get access. Now, everything is on databases and is soooooo much more impersonal. In the 1970s, I did my honours thesis on the General Strike. I showed up at the Mitchell Library in Glasgow where I was also presented with a cardboard box absolutely full of original records. It wasn't just that they were useful from a historical perspective, they made the reality of the strike come alive. I wonder how many more cardboard boxes are sitting gathering dust around the country?

Charles LOL!!!! This was in the 1980s - I had never heard of a scanner. I doubt very much if the old dragon in that archive room would have let me take them away to photocopy, either, she was shooting me black looks as it was, for daring to poke around in HER box. But I wouldn't mind betting they are still there, neatly catalogued, for anyone who wishes to find them. OC

'I literally banged into a scruffy cardboard box containing back numbers of a local Church Mag, covering 1820-1860. There were my relatives, getting born, engaged, marrying, dying, going to USA, Australia, New Zealand, writing home and coming back again. There was a list of Sunday School Pupils, the Prize Giving, the gardening Club, the Ladies Circle, on and on. I doubt if these will EVER find their way onto the Internet.' Perhaps you should have scanned them for the benefit of posterity ;-)

Maria Sometimes the tone of a reply can be in the ear of the receiver, if you see what I mean. I can't say I have ever seen a condescending or patronising reply to any newbie., It is sometimes difficult for the oldies to know how much a newbie knows and often the wording of a question indicates that they don't know certain basic facts of research. Any replies are done in a spirit of helpfulness, not to make the poster look stupid. OC

Rebekah, What I find hard to deal with is not rudeness necessarily but the tone of some people's replies when you ask for help. I'm fairly new to this and delighted to help anyone I can despite my limited expertise! but sometimes when you ask for help and don't get the question exactly right or forget to include a piece of information the tone of the replies is sometimes very condescending or patronising. I think the important thing to remember is that this family tree business is supposed to be rewarding and fun for all involved and those minority who spoil it are missing the point. Thanks Rebekah, I feel better now!! Best wishes Maria P.S. Forgot to say that the majority of people on here are some of the friendliest and helpful people I've come across.

One of my best ever finds was in a Local History Study Room, over the Co-op. I literally banged into a scruffy cardboard box containing back numbers of a local Church Mag, covering 1820-1860. There were my relatives, getting born, engaged, marrying, dying, going to USA, Australia, New Zealand, writing home and coming back again. There was a list of Sunday School Pupils, the Prize Giving, the gardening Club, the Ladies Circle, on and on. I doubt if these will EVER find their way onto the Internet. OC

hi ya,looked at your thread, and thought it would be nice to start a thread to thank people for the help and kindness that you get on gr most of the time,but i also agree with what your saying about some people being rude,i spent 2 days researching a lookup on records i found what the person was after and sent a long pm,i didnt even get a thank you,but if you want to thank anyone for their help my thread is on tips, sue jonesxxxxx

Ah yes, there is some information of mine going the rounds of Australia, which was hijacked from me about 4 years ago. My information, culled directly from Marriage Certificates, Census and Birth Certs was sent in good faith to one person in Australia who was looking for the same couple marrying in Northants. Unfortunately for me he then tacked all my info on to his gedcom file and sent to others all over Australia who have all made my info 'fit' into all their trees. I had not even proved that this relative had ever gone to OZ. The info was changed so many times that it was just gobbledy gook when I came across it on Rootsweb. I shuddered at the erroneous information with my name attached and was VERY annoyed, which is another very good reason for not opening your tree to anyone unless you are very sure that the person is part of your family. Peter Hm, do I detect a slightly patronising note! There always were people who did trees like that pre computer days, and there are many that still do trees like that only from the online IGI instead of handwritten notes, but strange as it may seem to people who have never done FH without a computer, there has been for as long as I can remember access to BMD through slightly longer routes ie searching St Cats before the FRC and searching the Fiche Index at all big libraries which you can still do, Family History Societies have been around since the early 1970's, The Catholic Record Society has been around for many years. Searching the Census has been around since I started FH though yes that did take a long time, but somehow you seem to learn things better when you had to search by address. My one defeat before the advent of computers was trying to find my London folk and I did have to wait for the 1881 digitised census for that. Directories have been around for as long as I have been doing my FH and so have poll books. The old PRO in Chancery Lane held many of the records that TNA now hold at Kew. County Record Offices have been around for many many years they have not just sprung up with the internet. As for Reference and Local Interest libraries, many of these have been around for about a century. Just like today there were those of yesteryear who did it properly and those that did not do it properly. Of all the people I have shared info with I have never had anyone complain that I have given them incorrect info, in fact I only ever seem to be the one dishing out the info. Nobody has done the amount of work that I have done on my families of interest, even with the internet! I usually get mails back from all my contacts and over the years I have had about 5 people who have not replied to my requests, and 2 of those were 'cold calling' letters, but I do usually put enough info into a mail to tempt people to reply if they think there is a contact, and then I work with people on furthering investigations. I do believe passionately in team work. Please ALWAYS remember that there is even now only a very tiny fraction of records on the computer. Even one of the FH mags this month urges people to get out to your CRO, and other repositories which is where most of the records still are. Janet.

Well, I can honestly say that no FIRM contact has ever flatly refused to give me information. Sometimes though, they may only give me a small clue like 'Oh, she married George Bloggs and went to live in Leicester'. This is usually enough to kick start me down that road. When I have done what I can, I sometimes go back and say 'Can you just confirm that they married at Saint Poodles, and that their children were X,Y and Z, and that his parents were A and B.' Nine times out of ten they will then offer to send me certs. I don't really expect any more than that. Sometimes I am pleasantly surprised and they send me loads of stuff. I do however, regret giving so much of MY information to a contact I had some years ago. In return, he sent me 2 CDs which comprised 30 years research, done with the aid of a 'Professional Researcher'. Apart from the fact that the CD carried a virus (lol), the whole thing was earnest rubbish and I am very peeved to think that my careful research is now tacked onto this load of twaddle, carefully attributed to ME - looks as though I am in full agreement with his research, which I am not. OC

I am a relative newcomer, having only started serious research some 5 years ago. I was very fortunate to make contact with an elderly lady who provided a tiny handwritten tree which was based on information that her late husband had researched pre computer age. One bit of this tree had very convincing evidence of the marriage of a certain James Bettridge and Sarah Goacher of Leicestershire. No problem with this as there is a Parish record of the marriage. So far so good but when I started to look back for the couples pedigree, there were doubts and cracks starting to appear. Other researchers boldly confirmed the couples ancestry and when I started to question the fact that the ages shown on the subsequent censuses did not tie in with the dob's in their trees I was given the usual , don't rely on census ages, as they probably told lies or didn't know their ages anyway. Wrong...! Eventually I got to the truth by working backwards through the censuses. The ages were surprisingly consistent. This then lead me to finding a complete different James and Sarah, which re-wrote the tree of very many people. This was further corroborated by plotting the destinies of the 'wrong' James and Sarah forward through the censuses. Incidentally the two Jamess and Sarahs are very likely to be cousins, but that is another story.

Elaine Can I ask you a question? When someone does share info with you, do you accept it as read? Do you check it or just assume because someone has done it then it must be correct? I have always checked the info people have sent me and the mistakes I have found are numerous, even relatives within the last 100 years are wrong. Too many people just take for granted the 'memories' of older relatives without checking official records and then just keep passing this wrong information on to others. Margaret

Elaine Has anybody actually said on here that they are not prepared to share? I know that I have said I will share the parts of my tree with those that can prove some lineage. I have already done so with many people met on the internet, although not anyone from Genes Reunited. What are you actually trying to say? One point about Family History/Genealogy is that we should always be very succint in what we are seeking, and clearly make ourselves understood. Oh, my genealogy is fun, but I am also very serious in my research, as I hope others would be, and I hope I would never lead anybody up a wrong tree or give wrong information about my family history to anybody. To do that would not be 'lightening up', but grossly undermining the very precious relationship that Family History/Genealogy has always enjoyed in our society. Janet

OC That is exactly the same attitude as me. The person who asked to see my tree today, I had already told her there was no connection. The places are hundreds of miles apart. She still wanted to see for herself, which I think is very rude as it says to me that she thinks I'm lying. I believe that she couldn't find the one that was hers and just thought she could 'have' mine. Yes, I agree, if a person related and can prove that, then yes help. Only the part that is related though, no one is related to the whole of my tree. Margaret

The tread has obviously moved on a bit but going back to the original point, any one who is rude I ignore, and just delete their contact. As far as OC's comments are concerned then I am probably a bit more liberal than her as to who I share my information with , but I echo her view entirely. PROVE your connection first and then you will get some assistance. I do enjoy researching and will happily help anyone who asks politely and genuinely. If their tree is connected to mine, even if only by a marriage, I will add the details to my master tree, but not on GR I only add information that I have verified myself independently. This must at the very least include census and BMD references, otherwise it does not get recorded.

Elaine You are missing the point I think - prove to me that you are my relative and I will give you everything I have, on that relative and probably several generations before. If you cannot prove you are my relative, then by withholding my information from you, I am saving you from going down the wrong path, and up the wrong tree! OC

OC There rests my case. Perhaps I was the lucky one in that Northamptonshire IGI is just not there for my family, so it had to be the old fashioned route. Janet

I have gone seriously wrong twice in my 35 year- odd search. First time, a naive newbie to any form of research, I was very pleased to find my James Holden, baptised in the PR, where I expected him to be. I looked no further and ASSUMED he was mine. Some years later, it dawned on me that there was more than one. Also, a look at the 1861 census gave me an entirely different birth place for him. I had to discard several years, and about 10 generations, of work.However, that exercise turned me into the nitpicker I am today. Second time was when I got the Internet and found the LDS. Excitedly printed off dozens of pages of 'my' James Holden, only to sit down later to check it all - and realise it was utter rubbish. I had no idea that people made up fantasy trees! OC