Genealogy Chat

thanks all av

I have three branches where I can trace the line back reasonably certainly to someone baptised in the 1600s, and one goes back to 1589 - they were all families which stayed in and around the same parish for generations and in an area close to where I live so I can reach therecords office. But I don't really feel connected to these families as they are just names and dates in the registers, I don't have wills, occupations, court cases or any of the things which add flesh to the bones. I am much fonder of a branch which I have struggled to get back to the late 1700s but feel I know each member of the family personally.

I have traced one line back to the early 1600s because they never moved from the village, were all baptised and buried there and the Church kept good records, at times giving all sorts of additional information! Just lucky I guess as another line is stuck in the mid 1800s and won't be budged! Good hunting Chris

You'll probably find that those who have their tree back that far don't have all their lines back to the 1600's, just the select ones who had the right sort of names and had enough records to trace them. If they all wrote wills and owned or rented land then there's a greater chance of finding them. Also if they lived where you live and you have time to spend a lot of hours in the Couty Record office, that will possibly make a big difference. The only branch of my tree that I have back to 1680 were Quakers. Their records are more detailed than the Church of England and they tended to stay in the one area. Most of my other branches are stuck at about 1750, commonly at the parents of the oldest generation to appear on the census! Merry

how do people manage to get their tree right back to the 16 hundreds? i have managed to get back to 1781 and then from there i am just sutck. ist there a way to get back furthur? thanks av