Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere!



Go Back   Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere! > Research > Family History General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 16-06-21, 03:16
Pinefamily Pinefamily is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: South Australia
Posts: 101
Default Barking up the wrong tree

Feeling the need to vent some frustration.
You would think that after 40 or so years of research (on and off), I would be more careful in checking every fact thoroughly. And learn not to fully trust the big two's indexing algorithms.
Using FMP's Devon resources, I was able to find a marriage for my ancestor John Harris of Hennock to Elizabeth Comynge (sic) in Bishopsteignton. So far so good. I worked out that Comynge was actually Comyns, and FMP clumped Comynge and variants separately to Comyns and variants. I made great headway with tracing the Comyns family, or so I thought.
Last night I accidentally left off the "e" from a Comynge search, and discovered that there were different results again. As a result, I discovered that the Elizabeth Comynge I had found a baptism for, was buried a year later. Back to the drawing board for me.
The lesson learned? Look through the images instead of relying on the indexing.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 16-06-21, 05:18
Janet's Avatar
Janet Janet is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Niagara County
Posts: 1,985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinefamily View Post
Barking up the wrong tree
A thread title to strike fear into the hearts of the likes of us. Methinks you're not alone.
__________________
My time and date


Janet (Niagara)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 16-06-21, 08:03
Macbev's Avatar
Macbev Macbev is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 212
Default

It is so easy to tree the wrong family.

Did it myself when I grafted a whole batch of Ryans into my grandmother's family. In my defense, my father was closely associated with several of these 'other' Ryans and there were photos of them all socialising as young people. Small wonder I assumed they were some of his cousins.
Pity I had to prune them out when I finally discovered my error
__________________
http://genealogistsforum.co.uk/forum/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=214&dateline=12521662  50
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 16-06-21, 09:05
Phoenix's Avatar
Phoenix Phoenix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,616
Default

It is so frustrating to discover that the algorithms miss some of the variants.

My Poling ancestors appear in registers as Pullen, Polling and Poulden. The IGI in the eighties organised them in no fewer than three different places, so it is very easy to miss them, and sometimes impossible to be sure that you are looking at the same family.

I think we have all been there, missing the infant burial or the second marriage. And I have several branches where the current single solution feels wrong, even if I cannot find a better one.
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16-06-21, 09:26
ElizabethHerts ElizabethHerts is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 9,274
Default

Something similar happened in my tree.

Researchers of our Quintrell family had long allocated the parents of our ancestor Thomas Quintrell before I began researching, with the father being Richard of Gerrans, Cornwall.

However, when I started researching I wanted to check everything myself and I was in contact with another researcher. We soon discovered that this Thomas died in 1720, a year after his baptism. Back to the drawing board!

We discovered that an Edward Quintrell from Gerrans had settled at St Agnes and had children baptised there. Our Thomas was baptised in 1718. When Thomas married he named one of his sons Edward, and none was Richard.

There are still trees with the wrong baptism circulating.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16-06-21, 09:59
Olde Crone Olde Crone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,766
Default

Kill 'em off first, is what a very useful old chap in the records office told me many years ago, when I was groping around with no clue what I was doing. He also told me that family history research is "10% luck, 90% look" and how right that has been.

I do sometimes think that the old research methods, pre internet, were better in some ways. Trudging through every page of a church register often prompted connections you wouldn't have made otherwise (because you don't know what you don't know) and in a surprising number of cases, deaths of small children were noted against their baptisms.

I had three candidates for my John Green born in the early 1700s. I simply could not separate these three men and two of them appeared to have married the same woman but 45 years apart. It only became crystal clear when I looked at the church register, at the back of which was a handy list of who owned which graves. John Green was but one man, married three times, wife one and three having the same names but were aunt and niece. The order in which his 19 (!) children and their mothers were buried between four graves, gave the time line and sorted very long standing mystery. That information is still not on line, as far as I know.

OC
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 17-06-21, 08:55
Kit's Avatar
Kit Kit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,716
Default

I had a small wrong branch in my tree and was very upset when I discovered I had the wrong second marriage. I'd grown rather fond of the daughter of the marriage who looked to have had a hard life. I felt like I was abandoning her too.
__________________
Toni
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:15.


Hosted by Photon IT

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 PL3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.