RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: panda40 on Friday 20 October 17 13:06 BST (UK)
-
Hi everyone
Feeling frustrated. I’ve decided that certain branches of my tree are purposefully being awkward and frustrating in me in my research. I’ve had two weeks off work to recover from a minor op and thought I would attack some of my brick walls. Well I’m no further along regardless of all the hours I’ve put in so I think I will divorce them and find some easier ones to research ;D
Anyone else feel like this?
Regards
Panda
-
Oh yes. :-X
-
More than once ::) ;D
-
Oh definitely :) but if it was easy where would the sense of achievement be when you do, finally, break those walls ;D ;D
Patty
-
Oh no I like to keep them difficulties and all :)
-
I never give up and if I can't help myself I ask others to help me like I help them, very rewarding
Louisa Maud
-
Some families can be resolved in days, or weeks.
Others take years and years! ;D
The latter give me a greater sense of achievement ;D ;D
-
I wish for some less common surnames. I would have preferred fewer people with surname Smith, Jones or Davies. Particularly Widow Alice Smith my 6xGGM. I'd like to know who she was before she was Widow Smith?
Swap an Irish couple for one who would divulge where in Ireland they came from and who wouldn't keep changing the wife's 1st name. My replacement couple would have a record of their marriage and fathers in Ireland on Griffith's Valuation. The substitute couple would have lived long lives, as would their children, with security and comfort in old age.
I don't want to "divorce" either of my 3xGGFs who were each twice up before a court. They were 2 of the most interesting ancestors. One of them came from nowhere (OK it was Scotland) and disappeared to nowhere (back into a Scottish mist?).
-
My 2x great grandfather got a bit confused. In the 1911census. He filled it in and said they had four children two of which had died. Truth is they had nine children and they were all still living in 1911. He said he and his wife had been married 27 years when in fact they had been married for 38 years. He is the only person with that name so no chance of confusing him with someone else. All the other previous census information as well as other sources match correctly so why does he think two of his children have died?
I just love the information he wrote down
Regards panda
-
Regularly ;D
-
Rather than divorce them I'd like to move them to a parish that has records earlier that 1849.
-
No!!!
I sometimes wish the correct info. was attached to deaths such as maiden names which I have a few with informants being G/sons, Inmate (I think she was actually a sis-in-law), a Nephew (who I can't fit with any of the siblings families), I think he may be a g g/son?, a few who 'acquire' middle names post baptisms/marriages & one of the surnames isn't all that common!
I would have liked a few more middle names, real ones not 'acquired' as I have many families with doubles among siblings such as 2 sisters named Catherine, 2 brothers named John etc.
My g/mother was Maggy-Jane, exactly that on her birth & took an age to find....who would think to put a hyphen in a search ??? She had 2 sisterS named Margaret born 2 yrs apart, both married in different towns but too many with same name & a surname with variants, not knowing whether they used Margaret or Maggie I have kind of lost them in 1911 (Scotland) as the place of birth isn't indexed only the place where the census was taken ::)
It is though a great feeling when eventually cracked whether by myself or with help when I can't stand anymore headaches ;D
Annie
-
NO !
But I would move to Salt Lake City.
-
No, not divorce them. I do get frustrated and want to give them a shake, for example when they are really inconsiderate and die 2 weeks before civil reg is introduced in Scotland. BUT this hobby wouldn't be as addictive and satisfying if it all came too easy.
-
No but I wish I could find out the birthplaces of 3 of my ancestors who were alive and well in the 1841 census in London, Oxford and Essex respectively but God claimed them within 2 and a half years of the 1851 census. And the 3 ancestors all ticked "No" under "Whether born in county of residence". And one of them was James Smith of all names.
On the other hand I managed to recently solve the mystery over Elizabeth Harbord who wed Dennis Helsdon in Norwich in 1752. I finally found who her actual parents were.
-
No, but I do wish Mary Walsh and her parents had given us a clue as to where in Ireland the family came from. I wish I'd asked questions before it was too late, I have doubts that my grandmother Smith knew that her grandmother was Irish born.
-
Rather than divorce them I'd like to move them to a parish that has records earlier that 1849.
Me too, I have lines in Berkshire, Hampshire and Sussex - very little on line as original records. In some ways I am fortunate with researching less common surnames, but the downside is that rare surnames have far more spelling variations than Smith, Brown and Day.
OH has Essex, Herts and Suffolk - took out subs to FindMyPast, Ancestry and SEAX and got several generations back in a few days.
-
I would be grateful if some of them had had the foresight to give their children names like Marmaduke or Scholastica. Instead they're all Thomas, Richard, Margaret and Anne.
-
No - just like to have the key to the door or the route around the brick wall.
No matter how mundane or diverse the journey is/has been wonderful.
Like the duck on the lake we don't seem to be going far but we keep paddling.
Keep at it.
Jack
-
Not divorce them but wish they didn't disappear from certain census years. So frustrating !
-
I just wished they left a paper trail that matches the names they used. I have certificates, census records and baptisms but none of them match up date or name wise. No clear line to follow as each generation throws up another quandary.
Panda
-
No, don't want to divorce any of them....... just need some honesty and clarification on some of them!
The hobby addiction to FH has brought together all of us from all over the world to help one another out, become internet 'friends' so I'm quite happy to still battle with my brick walls!
I've grown quite fond of the ones who are making going back further more elusive and if I swapped them for others they might come with harder less interesting problems!
Caroline
-
The thing is though that more unusual names are often just as difficult to research as there are many variations in the spelling. One of my worst is Illidge in later years, which was Hildige, Hilditch, Ilage etc previously. Not even being able to search on Ill* made it very difficult 😀
-
8 years ago I found that the reason why my ancestor vanished off UK records after 1891 was he emigrated in April 1892 to join 2 daughters in America who had gone there. I found him on the 1900 US census aged 72 in Pennsylvania. I was so pleased but the downside is, I am no closer to finding his death date as PA registration did not begin until 1906 and he probably died before then. I think I know where he is buried as his daughter bought a plot there but the deeds only give number of burials and name of owner rather than burial registers. One day perhaps, I wish I could divorce his 1900-1905 death date and have him died after 1 Jan 1906 so I could get a death date.