Direct Line Only vs The Whole Kit ‘n’ Caboodle

[Josephine]

How many of you are only interested in your direct line and how many are interested in the entire extended family?  What do you think is representative of amateur family researchers in general?

I started out only interested in finding information related to my direct line (as per the articles I had read) but I couldn’t help but find their siblings, etc., and then I had to follow them down the line.  When I found a marriage, I wanted to find the spouse in prior census years, just to round out the picture.

It’s all fascinating to me but most of the people in my present-day family are only interested in the direct line:  the rest is meaningless to them.  (I don’t mean this as a criticism.)  One brother tells me, "Just print a tree when you’re done and give me a copy."   

I think I will eventually post my info online in the hopes of building a more complete family tree.  Some distant cousins might be interested, even if my closer relatives may not be!  ;  )

Years ago, my husband said that I am a "completist" and I think he was right.  If I liked a singer, I wanted all of his/her albums.  I recently became hooked on the TV show "24" and now I want to buy all previous seasons on DVD so I can see them all.  (We’ve just started watching Season 3.)

Regards,
Josephine

[Shropshire Lass]

I couldn't possibly stick at the direct line. 

I want to know the whole picture:
- where did the ancestor's siblings and descendants end up? 
- what jobs did they do?
- what did the new wife's father do? 
- how many siblings did she have?

To me it's all part of understanding the family and what they were like.  Sometimes it's brought up good results, eg. where a brother and sister both married into the line I'm researching or a younger brother was taken on as an apprentice by another family member.

For me it helps to make them real rather than just lists of names and dates.

Monica 



 

[Chasing-fireflies]

I am only researching direct line and their siblings with partners which is why my tree is still relatively small(in comparison to others). The problem is, when you research on a huge scale there is more room for error especially with the names i am doing!It would be great to be able to a huge tree but nobody else in my family would be at all interested. Maybe one day when i have completed the search i am on for direct line i will span out slightly but my question to this is..Where do you stop?
 

[Josephine]

>> Where do you stop? <<

LOL, badgirl!

I only stop when I hit a brick wall and can't get back any farther!  This happens quite a bit for me, which might be the reason why I like branching out sideways in my searches.

I agree with Monica: 
>> For me it helps to make them real rather than just lists of names and dates. <<

I can't afford to buy official certificates for the non-direct line, though.  (Maybe someday.)

I'm fortunate in that two of my direct lines lived in the Medway area of Kent and those Anglican parish registers have been scanned and put online for free at the CityArk website.  That's why those families have the biggest, thickest binders.

I've had very little luck tracking my London-area folks.  If I had access to the baptismal records online (either for free or on a subscription basis), perhaps I would have better luck.

That's why I don't like pay-per-view:  I have been through the parish registers for Gillingham and Chatham so many times, looking for more baptisms and marriages as I go along.  The only way to find the babies is to search through page by page.  The same can be true of marriages, as well.

That's how I found a lot of my father's family in Calais, Maine:  by going through each census year, page by page.  It's really time-consuming and I guess some would say you'd have to be a bit obsessive... although I prefer to say "determined"!  ; )

Regards,
Josephine

[jinks]

I think it must be a case of ALL or nothing.

I find it quite amusing when people ask how
far back have you got?

On which line?

On My Maternal Grandfathers I have done quite
well mid 1600s but as for my Paternal
Grandmother (umh!) maybe late 1700s but I could
be pushing that abit.

I find that because my Maternal Ancestors seem
to be more interesting and easier to find I have
concentrated on them, it is only when I have
PLENTY of time I will delve onto my paternal
line  and maybe find a snippet (but it is still
very satisfying).

Jinks

[Josephine]

Jinks,

I am amazed by anyone who has been able to go back that far!  Even on my "best" lines, I can't get back past 1800.

The worst offender is Barnett Barnett, born about 1796 in Chatham, Kent.  That should be easy, except it turns out he was Jewish and it's quite possible that his parents had a different surname and were from another country. 

I can't find a death for him in Medway (some time after the 1891 census).  If I could find out when he died, maybe I could request a look-up in the appropriate cemetery, in case his father's name was recorded on his headstone.  (I've gone through several years on the ancestry bmd and found nothing.)

And so on and so on...

What is the secret of your success?  Have you visited the areas in person and gone through the local records one by one?

Regards,
Josephine

[Chasing-fireflies]

Sounds like Chatham is the problem area. I cant get past William Pinn a Chatham tailor born 1774. There seems to be a bit about him and his son on google but still stuck. Curses to Chatham!!!
 

[Josephine]

badgirl,

Have you gone through the parish records at CityArk?

http://tinyurl.com/cumtk

Chatham would be just fine if my Barnett Barnett had been Anglican!  Lucky for me (in terms of finding info), most of his children married Anglicans!

Regards,
Josephine

[Chasing-fireflies]

Yep!! Thats where i found him and his son!I just cant seem to get back further than him as it does not say where he was born. Thanks for the info though as sometimes people look in different places. Double curses to Chatham.