Genealogy Chat

Thanks everyone for your advice, it has certainly made it clearer the reasons for saving all information to fit into the "jigsaw" Kind regards Rod

Hi As someone who has no personal memories of paternal side, and very few on maternal side, I'll accept and hoard any information I can. As someone else mentioned, the only block is time and money. Log it all. Keep most on Historian with "main" entries on GC, hoping someone else is searching similar lines. Good luck Badger Bill Worthing

I agree with Paul wholeheartedly, the only limit is time although money has a definite say also! I suspect that I won't be examining my great grand aunt's son-in-law's own family too closely, but there are certain (closer) avenues that I've still to explore, however for now I have other branches that have priority and I'm keen on resolving these as far as I can. You do what you feel is right, it's your tree after all.

I record everyone I find - it has proved useful to me recently! When my gt gt grandfather died and his wife remarried, there was no trace of my gt grandmother (their daughter) and her sister in their new household. Luckily I had previously found gt gt grandfather's sister with her husband and his family, and had noted them all down. Had a look and lo and behold there was my gt grandmother, living with her aunt and uncle, and her sister was living with THEIR niece - someone not related to our family by blood at all! Sort of a niece-in-law to my gt gt grandfather!! Presumably one of two things happened after his death, either the new hubby refused to have the girls in his household, or for some reason there was a prior agreement alon the lines of "if anything happens to me, sister, promise me you will take my girls to live with you". We will probably never know, but at least I know my gt grandmother was reconciled with her mum as she met her husband when visiting her! I would suggest to record everyone - you never know how important they will be in the future! Maz. XX

If I find info on these people then I will add it, but I don't search for it and I certainly don't spend money looking up an ancester's step-children or adopted children. If I have their names and birth years, it's enough for me.

Although I only keep a skeleton tree on GC, on my proper family tree I not only record all relatives but also the parents and siblings of a spouse. I always keep a record of where everyone was living in each census and their occupations. Gary

I agree with these sentiments. I've now made several contacts on GC through investigating "step" families. Indeed I have a step mother and my blood mother, so have done both lines, which my half sister is thrilled by! In fact there are some links between both step and blood familes some generations back, so you never know what you will uncover. Just one person on your tree could open a whole new vista for somebody else! Keep searching. Pauline

I agree! Add as much as possible. I was originally only going to do immediate family but now am also hooked on adding Aunts, Uncles, cousins... I'd add pets if I could! Naomi

I'm a complete sponge: soak up anything which links and store anything which doesn't in case it comes in useful later. This has led to at least four contacts on here, some of whom have added to or clarified previous generations.

I agree with everything said above. I can't stop hoarding ancestors! Jeanette

The only thing that limits me is time. As a general rule, if someone else shares an ancestor with me, then they are in my tree. If you don't include those adopted and step relations, you might never "find" their descendants. And they may be researching the same people that you are. And you will never know if they have a photograph or an old letter written by your ancestor hidden away in their attic. PB

Hello everyone I would appreciate peoples opinions on what their limits are on whom to include on family trees. For example would you include x3 great grandfathers step children (from 2nd marriage) and all their desendants, and great grandmothers cousins "children", who are listed on census as "adopted" but have a different name? Many thanks for any advice Rod