Genealogy Chat

There is no problem with recording info about a woman who married brothers. Just do it in the usual way

I have an instance of that scenario in my tree.................

It's not just cousins marrying that's the problem, it's the same ancestor apearing more than once in your tree.

According to Andrew Marr's History of the World last week, the same lady should be, goodness knows how many times, at the top of everyone's tree. :-D

Hi Detective, Im back in the 13th century with Norman origins. I guess they made up their own rules as they went

thanks for your suggestions
cheers
K

What a tangled web, but not as unusual as it might be thought. Actually, there are some reports that it was illegal until the early 20th C.

The best way to record it on GR is to make copies of both the husband and wife as new people, perhaps with (2) as part of their surname and marry them off. Put in the notes section how they are related.

Only record any children against one of the duplicate couples, preferably your main line.

I have seen one tree where the wife is recorded in her first married name, but to me, that's incorrect as females ought to shown with their maiden name if known

Dead simple Uncle Owen!

Keep your tree offline then upload a gedcom. GR have apparently promised to enable this facility but we're suing them for breach of promise.

B

I find the further I delve into my ancestors, the more I come across the need to link 3rd or 4th cousins that marry or an individual that marries one brother, then after his death marries his brother.

clear as mud :-S

Im sure Im not Robinson Crusoe here.... Im told by GR that the system is unable to link cousins by marriage. Has anyone a a neat method of presenting these situations on their Tree?
cheers
Kevin