Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

How many direct ancestors on your tree?

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Andrew

Andrew Report 19 Feb 2005 19:21

Hi All, Interested to know how many direct ancestors everyone has on their tree rather than total number of people in their tree. Out of 726 people in my tree, there are 109 direct ancestors...going back to pre-1700 on some branches, but only to 1904 on one branch (my adopted grandfather). Regards, Andy

Christine in Herts

Christine in Herts Report 19 Feb 2005 19:37

On the most comprehensive version of my ancestral chart (from my sons' perspective), assuming my acquired research is reliable, I have 217 complete names plus another 46 where I have either a first or a second name. However, quite a lot of those names are courtesy of others' research and one day, if I am to derive real satisfaction from the task, I shall have to do a bit more of my own digging. Amongst the 263 there are six of iffy provenance and four highly speculative; there's also a set of seven who came from a pretty reliable source, but on whom doubt has been cast by another plausible source. I leave the iffy ones there (along with some notes) so that I can recognise them if more evidence is turned up. If they are proven wrong, then I shall delete them. No doubt this concept will horrify the rigorous amongst you, but I have every intention of enjoying my hobby and this way pleases me. Those who are horrified may take solace from my remark that I recognise I shall have to do a lot more of my own research to get the real satisfaction. Christine

Andrew

Andrew Report 19 Feb 2005 19:41

Hello Christine, Actually, your method sounds perfect, recording an evaluation (surety level) against each record or fact along with the source of the information. That's the only way to keep track of things. Regards, Andy

Unknown

Unknown Report 19 Feb 2005 19:48

Just a quick tally 50, of whom about 3 are not 100% definite. nell