Genealogy Chat

I was recently given permission to view a Tree with a possible link. I went to the Names list and clicked on the individual, and then pulled up their Tree which unfortunately shows him as Husband of the Person whose Tree it was. When I clicked on his line I couldn't find him on the page anywhere. So it is surely common sense to have some sort of rapport with the Tree owner so you can message them and say "Where is so and so on the Tree.?" That's why I don't understand the curt, out of the blue "Let me view your Tree" messages.

Hi, re the tree maze - if you click on view trees on the green margin on this page just above the annoying AOL ad, you get a choice of looking at your contacts tree or their list of rellies. That makes it a bit easier as I have to admit that before I knew this short cut I would give up trying to find someone on someone elses tree.

Hi Jim I don't uinderstand this lack of names on a tree, either. If someone asks about a name several generations back on my tree, I kind of expect that their tree will go back to at least only one generation less. The implication is that there are some people who are happy to root around and ask other people questions, but don't want to be asked any questions themselves, which does seem a little one sided. However, over time I have to confess I find myself becoming more possessive about my own tree. I do now like to be reasonably confident there is a connection before I open my tree to someone, and have great admiration for those who say "Here's my tree, have a look and see if you can find anything". I have not worked out why I, phsychologically, I am so possessive. Anyone got any suggestions? I also agree about the finding your way around someone else's tree - when I do open my tree to someone I generally give them a route map as well i.e. the person you want is the brother of the father of the mother of the father of my father - that sort of thing. Tina

Hi Jonathan, Over 6,000 in my tree are from my Dad's side. His ancestors came from East Anglia. He was born in Lowestoft. Some of his ancestors were living there when parish registers began in the 16th century. I got a film of the Lowestoft PRs at the LDS and noted down every instance of "my" surnames - as advised to do in my genealogy class. Several times I got back to the "original" couple and the succeeding generations fell into place after that. I found other couples' settlement certificates which gave their original parish then searched those parish records. Also marriage records will say if the bride or groom were of another parish so then I searched that parish. I'm lucky in that some of the names are unusual so easy to spot. I've also got wills from several which give clues as to where to look. Mum's side have been more difficult. She was born in Ebbw Vale and her ancestors arrived there from different parts of Somerset and other parts of Wales. The Palmers were originally from Over Stowey and I was able to trace them quite far back as I could other Somerset families. I'm brickwalled with the Powells in Brecon at 1800 and I can't see me getting any further with that line. If your ancestors stay within a 20 mile radius for 500 years, as most of Dad's did, it isn't that difficult to sort them out. My grandparents were 6th cousin once removed but I doubt they knew it. I didn't set out to discover who the siblings of my ancestors were or who they married but they were all there in my notes so I added them to my files. This means I've been able to help lots of other people researching the names in that area. Several of us "cousins" work together and pool information. Once when, as a child, I went to stay with my aunt in Lowestoft she walked me through the town down to the beach. Lots of people said Hello and I'd ask who they were. They all seemed to be cousins or married to cousins and I asked her if we were related to everyone in Lowestoft. She said, "Yes, if you go back far enough." There were only around 3,000 people living in Lowestoft in 1800 and I am related to a lot of them - so my aunt was nearly right. Gwynne

Jonathan, My direct paternal line is very sparse, but my mother's ancestors had generation after generation of large families. An exponential increase. Plus I have an offline Family Forest with over 16,000 names on it, but that includes the families of In-Laws too.

Sorry Jim, I was joking - and I agree with you. I have trouble navigating ALL the sites not just this one and lots of them are quite costly. I said earlier when I get a contact out of the blue for no apparent reason, I always ask for more info. Invariably tree stays closed. And yes, very annoying when people don't have the courtesy to answer e-mails, especially when you've given them information to support a possible connection. It happens all the time. Perhaps those people are just poachers. But still, I always give what I can if connection is likely 'cos on the other side of the coin I've been helped so much myself by genuine people. LOL Jan

Jan, Surely the point there is that the more names I have on my Tree, which I defy even Sir Francis Drake to navigate on this site, the more chance of someone having the same ancestor has of finding it. All my names ARE listed in the appropriate Names Section of the open site. Anyone who has a valid reason is welcome to view my Tree, but surely it is not only a matter of Common Courtesy, but also a Huge Time Saver if someone can quiz you about the Ancestor. Rather than just an abrupt "Let me see your Tree" However I am also amongst those who hate it when they find a link, or somebody contacts you and you send off an email only to hear nothing.

Er....Jim, can I have a look at your tree. No particular reason, I'm just at a loose end at the moment hahaha. LOL

Love your comments folks, Honest, I'm not being grumpy. I just wonder why anyone should bother to give me the grief of searching their tree when they must know full well that the individual I am seeking is not there! As I understand it the idea of this site is to try to develop links and share information. I cannot put my hand on my heart and say that all 2222 of the names in my GR Tree are 100% accurate, but they are the latest information that I have. I recently had to delete some names thanks to a member who found me some info that showed I had married an umpteenth great grandad to the wrong Elizabeth. This is not my definitive Family Tree but rather a work in progress. However, if someone just takes my research and runs off with it, it is no skin off my nose. Love you all Jim

I have one line (about to up date) that goes all over the place but the rest stop dead at just one or two rellys back. the problem is finding that who you thought were rellys ar'nt and I have to hunt for the lost link. in other word some of us do'nt have easy trees to climb. and like some of the others. I have names that should fit in but no proof. Exsample All UK Kleboes (if family lore is right) come from just one person. but finding the conections from way back is no easy task. I just worked it out there are over 70 known Kleboe I still have to conect to

Oh Jim please don't be grumpy. You know how hard it is to get a connection and we all started somewhere. Mine's still a sappling but I've had loads of contacts from people who see my names and offer help. In fact, that happened just yesterday. Admit I don't open my tree to everyone who requests, just ask for little more info first. Jan

Jim, you should worry, I got one who said definitely thought related. When I looked at their tree they had themselves and their mum and dad and that was it!

Maybe they only include what they have already proved in their tree on here? I've only got back to my gt-grandparents (marriages 1870s and 1880s) on my GR tree although I have some info on 2 branches going back a couple of generations further I haven't yet confirmed the information myself. But I must confess I do search on some of the names I've not yet included, just on the off chance someone else is also researching that line via a sibling of one of my ancestors that I don't currently know about. (I must admit I have only had one hit and the lady kindly shared the info and I'm now stuck at the same point!!!!) Why don't you just ask them for clarification of why they think you have a common ancestor? cheers H

Hi, They may have a lot more than they put on this site. I only have a few generations on here but nearly 7,000 in my family tree maker programme. I pass data on to contacts from my programme. I find the trees on here very difficult to follow and badly laid out. Gwynne

I understand what you are saying, but if they only have three or four Generations on their Tree, why are they asking me about a name from say 1850?

TAKE HEART JIM, I HAVE VERY LITTLE INFO ON MY TREE AT PRESENT, AFTER FOUR YEARS OF TRYING!!! PLEASE DONT ASSUME PEOPLE NOT WILLING TO SHARE, PROBABLY STRUGGLING LIKE MY POOR SELF :-)

LOL Jim - how frustrating :) If I recall - the messaging system has now been changed and says "it may help the other person to see your tree - click here"...........or summat along those lines. Perhaps they are new and not too sure what will or wont help - maybe :)

It might be all they know...

I am finding it extremely difficult to not throw my rattle out of the pram. I get messages asking about a relative from way back and someone opens their tree for me to see, only to find out that they have only half a dozen names on there. WHAT IS THE POINT OF THAT? Jim