A forest of family trees

I have always tried to maintain the integrity of my family tree by cross-referencing as many primary or secondary sources as possible before accepting that a person is actually an ancestor.

Searching the records can throw up many similarities and coincidences, and it is all too easy to find oneself following someone else’s family line in error… It reminds me of Sudoku, where putting one incorrect number in the grid can lead to massive errors, and in the case of ancestral research render the results worthless.

In the early days of family history, it was important for people to be able to trace their lineage back to Adam and Eve, or at least to a member of royalty. I can understand that it is tempting to join up the dots and extend one’s tree exponentially, but accuracy is essential.

Family member trees can provide great insight into the lives of ancestors, and even help to break down brick walls, but all of the information discovered must be thoroughly cross-matched before it is accepted and included in one’s own tree. My only reason for writing is that I have found several recent incidences where member trees show my ancestors and family photographs, yet when I get excited about my potential discovery and try to contact them, hoping to exchange information… no response! Nick Ford

Editor replies: You must have read our minds Nick, because your concerns are reflected in our feature on common genealogy errors ( see page 28). As for people not responding to other family historians contacting them, I’ve been an offender myself in the past so my resolution for 2018 is to respond more quickly to those who contact me about a connection.