How far sideways do you go?

[Fuzzy]

I am doing my husbands tree BUT whilst I am awaiting the certificates to check my information and discover hopefully new information I am going back to the beginning of mine and double checking all the information I have. Well with all the new records on Ancestry I now have access to many more marriages on line.

The question I would like to ask is how far twig wise do you go? At the moment I have stopped at the marriages of great grand aunts/uncles. I have started find marriages for their children though and through these can find them on the census BUT would I then just become a name collector OR should I put them down if I can as no matter how far removed they are from me they are family??

I would appreciate you thoughts on this....................

[Guest]

I always add the parents of the person they married and their siblings , and their marriages mainly as it helps me with contacts sometimes and I do like to see what whole families did ,does that make sense? I dont just add their names I add all the records too from Birth till Death.

[Fuzzy]

Thanks Val

[Lin Fisher]

You can go as far as you like. If I come across a good name I might research it further but only put it on my FTM tree.

The tree I have on ancesty is a bit more limited so as not to waste peoples time contacting me when really I know nothing about them.

Like Val I try and find all the info reguarding a person on my tree

[Fuzzy]

Thanks Lin,

I have gone back to the beginning again and looking for baptisms, marriages, address, occupations, war records, anything that relates to the people I have in my tree. It difficult though knowing when to stop I am now finding marriages for cousins 3x removed and from that their children. If I go on at this rate I will still be doing this in 40 years and if the last couple of days are anything to go by I will be completely bald by then!!

[margaretmarch]

You can go as far as you like. If I come across a good name I might research it further but only put it on my FTM tree.

The tree I have on ancesty is a bit more limited so as not to waste peoples time contacting me when really I know nothing about them.

Like Val I try and find all the info reguarding a person on my tree

I think that's a good idea to limit the public tree as I have found someone who put my mother on their Ancestry tree so I was quite excited to find out who they were and how related to my family - only to be told it was a One Name Study and nothing more has been said - even though I asked if I could see the other names as they would also no doubt feature in my tree!

Margaret

[Fuzzy]

I think I have decided to only research and input data on people who are blood related to me. I add the father of the bride/groom at the wedding if I have that information for reference but I have not done any research on them or their extended family

[AlanC]

At the end of the day, it depends on what you want to do.
I have tried to stick to direct line relatives but I've strayed here and there because sometimes Ancestry & others give you more than you bargained for so into the Tree they go.

[Tom Tom]

I add everyone and anyone to my tree, but only if it has been researched by me and I can be fairly sure they are connected.

The only place my tree goes is on my FTM and on this site as a GEDCOM.

Most of my tree (especially the bit with everyone and anyone) is mostly a town and village study of Ashby De La Zouch and Packington in Leicestershire and seeing how all the families inter-relate to each other etc.

For my other lines that are not from there, I research everyone who is blood related, so ancestor's nephews, nieces etc etc.

I have 15,000+ people in my tree but wouldn't like to be called a name collector. Every piece of research in my tree has been done by me and I have enjoyed doing it.

[Fuzzy]

thanks for all you input I appreciate it. I have started just to add in all info on blood relatives and leaving out all info on non blood related. Trouble is one of my line goes back into the 1650's, I have input al the data and researched it but When I printed it out couldn't follow it LOL, think I may have to trim a few branches there!!

[Tom Tom]

Whilst you may not want to record the info about "married-in's" brothers and sisters, they are often worth researching as you may find a nephew, niece, visitor or boarder.

Having said that, if you are doing the research you may as well record it! I have often found things by going around the houses!

[Jill on the A272]

Like Tom I am interested in my ancestors siblings and their families. This can pay rewards when for example you can spot that a witness at a wedding is a 2nd cousin of one of the couple or a vistor on census night is actually a relation of the family.

[Olde Crone Holden]

I put everyone, including the neighbour's dog, on my tree! you just never know where it will take you, so far sideways you meet yourself round the other side.

For instance - found a third half cousin because I couldn't stop adding bmds to my tree - she knew LOTS about the family that i would never have discovered otherwise.

Almost all my married-ins pre 1900 are distant relations, another thing I wouldn't know if I didn't go sideways.

Like Tom and others, I'm also doing a village tree (two actually) which are just mostly a collection of bmds and census BUT do also have some useful personal information. All researched from scratch by me, not copied from other trees, although i will use another tree as a prompt - sometimes they are right, sometimes wrong.

It's your tree and you can put on it who you like. As long as you have researched the info yourself, what's the harm?

OC

[Fuzzy]

Am so grateful for all the advice, I loved the bit about the dog OC made me LOL!!

I have learnt the hard way to take what is in other trees with a pinch of salt. I told someone a few days ago that on Ancestry most people have the wrong great grandmother to my Edward Connor, the confusion came from there being 2 Connor families with near identical names including the parents name on the 1851 mine were under O'connor (they dropped the O by the 1861). Luckily my blood relative Edward was with the family I knew to be right and as I had all the certificates to back it up i tried to tell several of the people they had the wrong last name for Catherine. Some of the responses I got were to be frank not to polite so it put me off telling all the others. One guy in particular though was lovely and we got to talking and I ended up e mailing him all the copies of the birth and marriages certificates that I had relating to the family. We have been in touch ever since. Taught me a lesson though, which is why I have started again and am going over tree with a fine tooth comb!!

[Uncle John]

My tree goes much further sideways than it goes back on most lines. One example is my great-grandmother's family. I recorded everyone who was with her on each census. But then I looked at her brothers and sisters, just to see what happened to them. A couple of years ago I asked (on GF) about the family of one sister and got enough to complete that side. And just last week a couple of people with that surname (brother and sister as it turns out) had found the thread via Google and asked "Why are you looking for our family?". So now I have a bunch of living fourth cousins I knew nothing about and we have been able to fill in some mutual blanks.

[Fuzzy]

Uncle John,

You have definitely made up my mind to go as sideways as possible, I would love to find living cousins however far removed. I best get saving for all the extra certificates I may need!!

[Tom Tom]

Another thing, only by going sideways are you likely to find photographs of certain relatives.

I have managed to find photographs of my great great grandmother's sisters by tracing their families. I can see the resemblance between my great great grandmother and my great great great Aunts and think it is great to be able to see the faces she would have seen.

[Olde Crone Holden]

I agree entirely with Tom - I now have a photo of my 2 x GGM, which was taken in 1857 and was in the possession of my 3 x half cousin. There is no way I would ever have seen that photo, let alone even know one existed, if I hadn't gone sideways.

I also know, by going sideways, that every one of my 2 x GGFs married twice and the second wife was always a relative of the first. this might not sound very startling but the relationship was often a distant one, from several generations before and that taught me that families, although scattered, kept in touch much more back then than they do now.

OC

[Fuzzy]

Am so glad I asked everyones opinion, I hadn't thought of all the advantages of going sideways. I know what you mean about families keeping more in touch with each other than they do now. I have one line who appear regularly together on the census' over the years and one family lived in essex the other in gloucestershire, and when you think how easy travel is these days compared to way back then we should all be a little ashamed of how little some of us see our extended family!!

[PhotoFamily]

Going sideways has brought me two family bibles: one - the scans of the written pages, the other - a summary of some of the people

I have hoped that going sideways, then down a generation or two, might provide the proof I lack for one ancestor. Hasn't happened yet, but it's provided some clues about how he may have met his wife.

And ancestry makes it so easy to add to a tree! Why ignore information when it turns up as your exploring your main objectives?