Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Parish Searches

Expand Messages
  • Janet
    I have recently asked the Montrose Library to further search on payment of a fee because I have been unable to trace my line back earlier than 1776. I needed
    Message 1 of 17 , Aug 9, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I have recently asked the Montrose Library to further search on payment of a fee because I have been unable to trace my line back earlier than 1776. I needed a birth date and the identity of parents. The search results have come back and in a letter they say " .... both William and his wife Mary Gordon are from the parish of Montrose. Therefore it is logical to conclude that there are no Montrose baptismal/birth entries for your William Dun available." Why?

      I wonder if someone can explain this position please?.


      Janet
      Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
      Sherret, Kincardineshire
      Chester, Glasgow
      Rowat, Campbell, Argyll
    • gordon crooks
      Janet: Its possible your Dunn immigrated. There were Dunns IN Pennsylvania in the early 1700 s. Gordon ... From: Janet To:
      Message 2 of 17 , Aug 9, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Janet: Its possible your Dunn immigrated. There were Dunns IN Pennsylvania
        in the early 1700's.

        Gordon
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Janet" <wightway@...>
        To: <scots-origins@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 10:38 AM
        Subject: [scots-origins] Parish Searches


        >I have recently asked the Montrose Library to further search on payment of
        >a fee because I have been unable to trace my line back earlier than 1776.
        >I needed a birth date and the identity of parents. The search results
        >have come back and in a letter they say " .... both William and his wife
        >Mary Gordon are from the parish of Montrose. Therefore it is logical to
        >conclude that there are no Montrose baptismal/birth entries for your
        >William Dun available." Why?
        >
        > I wonder if someone can explain this position please?.
        >
        >
        > Janet
        > Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
        > Sherret, Kincardineshire
        > Chester, Glasgow
        > Rowat, Campbell, Argyll
        >
        >
        >
        > -------------------------------------------------------
        > This message comes from the Scots Origins Discussion Group, sponsored by
        > Scots Origins (www.scotsorigins.com). The group has been set up so that
        > members can share genealogical information about Scotland, to reply send
        > an email to scots-origins@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > To unsubscribe send a blank email to:
        > scots-origins-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Alistair Cameron
        ... They should have been more helpful. In these word processing days, assume they may have inadvertently deleted earlier vital sentences!! You should ask, and
        Message 3 of 17 , Aug 9, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Janet wrote:
          >
          > I have recently asked the Montrose Library to further search on payment of a fee because I have been unable to trace my line back earlier than 1776. I needed a birth date and the identity of parents. The search results have come back and in a letter they say " .... both William and his wife Mary Gordon are from the parish of Montrose. Therefore it is logical to conclude that there are no Montrose baptismal/birth entries for your William Dun available." Why?
          >
          > I wonder if someone can explain this position please?.

          They should have been more helpful. In these word processing
          days, assume they may have inadvertently deleted earlier
          vital sentences!! You should ask, and invite suggestion as
          to a next step.

          Montrose parish bapts are on film from 1615. It is best by
          far to NOT search for birth until <after> you know parent
          names for the bairn. Otherwise there's a strong chance of
          "adopting" an incorrect family.

          There are MIs published for Montrose but do not assume those
          will help you. But do not limit your interest to just that
          parish! There are three other parishes on its border. People
          did not always worship at the closest church!


          Cheers,

          ALISTAIR M. CAMERON A.A.G.R.A.

          Professional Genealogist
          http://quozl.netrek.org/cameron-research/

          PO Box 215 BUNDANOON NSW 2578 AUSTRALIA
        • Andrew Paterson
          Hi Janet, There are records of baptisms in Montrose Parish going back to 1616. If they were baptised in Montrose and (more importantly) if a record was ever
          Message 4 of 17 , Aug 10, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Janet,

            There are records of baptisms in Montrose Parish going back to 1616. If they
            were baptised in Montrose and (more importantly) if a record was ever made
            of the births/baptisms, then the OPR for that period is the place to be
            looking (should be indexed on the IGI). Remember also that a lot of
            births/baptisms went unrecorded, particularly if the people were not of the
            Church of Scotland (who kept the registers that became the OPRs).

            However, I think you have been misled by the marriage record. It says the
            the couple were both "of that parish". My understanding is that was the
            parish they were resident in at the time of them proclaiming the banns, not
            necessarily the parish they were born in.

            I am presuming the librarian has assumed that Montrose was the parish of
            their births and that they have found no corresponding entry in the Montrose
            OPRs.

            All the best,

            Andrew Paterson

            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "Janet" <wightway@...>
            > To: <scots-origins@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 10:38 AM
            > Subject: [scots-origins] Parish Searches
            >
            >
            >>I have recently asked the Montrose Library to further search on payment of
            >>a fee because I have been unable to trace my line back earlier than 1776.
            >>I needed a birth date and the identity of parents. The search results
            >>have come back and in a letter they say " .... both William and his wife
            >>Mary Gordon are from the parish of Montrose. Therefore it is logical to
            >>conclude that there are no Montrose baptismal/birth entries for your
            >>William Dun available." Why?
            >>
            >> I wonder if someone can explain this position please?.
            >>
            >>
            >> Janet
            >> Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
            >> Sherret, Kincardineshire
            >> Chester, Glasgow
            >> Rowat, Campbell, Argyll
          • Janet
            Gordon: Whilst I see that one should search all avenues, my point is that I have a full tree after 1776, a marriage of the couple, one of whom I need a birth
            Message 5 of 17 , Aug 10, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Gordon: Whilst I see that one should search all avenues, my point is that I have a full tree after 1776, a marriage of the couple, one of whom I need a birth date for so that I can find his parents, and where nine children were born all in the same parish. I would have thought therefore that if someone was going to emigrate, it would be to find a future for their family, not to move away from it.


              Janet
              Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
              Sherret, Kincardineshire
              Chester, Glasgow
              Rowat, Campbell, Argyll



              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "gordon crooks" <glcrooks@...>


              > Janet: Its possible your Dunn immigrated. There were Dunns IN Pennsylvania
              > in the early 1700's.
              >
              > Gordon
            • Janet
              ... From: Andrew Paterson ... Hello, ... What you ve said here I think sums up the situation in which I find myself that
              Message 6 of 17 , Aug 10, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Andrew Paterson" <adp@...>


                > Hi Janet,
                Hello,
                >
                > There are records of baptisms in Montrose Parish going back to 1616. If they
                > were baptised in Montrose and (more importantly) if a record was ever made
                > of the births/baptisms, then the OPR for that period is the place to be
                > looking (should be indexed on the IGI).

                What you've said here I think sums up the situation in which I find myself that big "IF".

                >Remember also that a lot of births/baptisms went unrecorded, particularly if the people were not of the
                > Church of Scotland (who kept the registers that became the OPRs).
                >
                > However, I think you have been misled by the marriage record. It says the
                > the couple were both "of that parish".

                Montrose Library produced to me a copy of the entry, but it is almost illegible, yet confirms. Its reasonable to assume so when there are decades of Dun/Dunn folk remaining, living, marrying, and dying in Montrose.


                >My understanding is that was the
                > parish they were resident in at the time of them proclaiming the banns, not
                > necessarily the parish they were born in.

                This possibility does exist, but where does one go next when I have exhausted all enquiries? I would not have paid money for searching unless I had drawn a blank and that blank has been over a period of 18 months.
                >
                > I am presuming the librarian has assumed that Montrose was the parish of
                > their births and that they have found no corresponding entry in the Montrose
                > OPRs.
                >
                > All the best,
                >
                > Andrew Paterson

                Well I'm £50 worse off for knowing what I felt was so. I'm prepared to share this information with the subscribers of this group to show that really, there is a time when we have to sit back and say we've done the best we can achieve. I will keep looking but as I have said, unless one is prepared to pay a lot of money searching for a needle in a haystack one has to accept the situation at some time.

                I realise that for those of you outside of the UK who are related to those who left this country for a better life, this might sound defeatist, but I do have a complete tree from 1776 to the present day - me - for my maternal line.

                Janet
              • Janet
                Gordon: I have thought about your earlier mail and subject to my earlier reply, if you can give me an authorative reason for thinking that the parents of my
                Message 7 of 17 , Aug 10, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Gordon: I have thought about your earlier mail and subject to my earlier reply, if you can give me an authorative reason for thinking that the parents of my William Dun and Mary Gordon who married in Montrose Parish on 30th June 1776 emigrated then I am all ears.
                  Remember I am talking their parents, and that I have established nine children or, in their case nine grand children.
                  Do you have any idea why they might have emigrated in these cirumstances? Seriously, I think this is a point that other might want to consider.

                  I realise that I have a lot to learn from you folk who may have traced their ancestry to an earlier point, so it would be enlightening to know.

                  Janet
                  Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
                  Sherret, Kincardineshire
                  Chester, Glasgow
                  Rowat, Campbell, Argyll
                • Susan Harvey
                  Hi, Not sure of your original mail but , My GT grandfather went to South Dakota to the Gold Field in 1884 .He did well and returned twice to collec-t wife and
                  Message 8 of 17 , Aug 12, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi,
                    Not sure of your original mail but ,
                    My GT grandfather went to South Dakota to the Gold Field in 1884 .He did
                    well and returned twice to collec-t wife and children to return with him. My
                    GTgrandmother refused and stayed in local village until her death.

                    Her husband returned to Gold Field Don't know if he intended to make fortune
                    and return or was fed up with wife --attention in sending money home does
                    not indicate this .He died in Lead City SD in 1904.

                    So odd emigration situations did arise even in happy families.
                    Not sure that this is any help to you !
                    Cheers,
                    Sue H
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Janet" <wightway@...>
                    To: <scots-origins@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 5:08 PM
                    Subject: Re: [scots-origins] Parish Searches


                    > Gordon: Whilst I see that one should search all avenues, my point is
                    > that I have a full tree after 1776, a marriage of the couple, one of whom
                    > I need a birth date for so that I can find his parents, and where nine
                    > children were born all in the same parish. I would have thought therefore
                    > that if someone was going to emigrate, it would be to find a future for
                    > their family, not to move away from it.
                    >
                    >
                    > Janet
                    > Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
                    > Sherret, Kincardineshire
                    > Chester, Glasgow
                    > Rowat, Campbell, Argyll
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: "gordon crooks" <glcrooks@...>
                    >
                    >
                    >> Janet: Its possible your Dunn immigrated. There were Dunns IN
                    >> Pennsylvania
                    >> in the early 1700's.
                    >>
                    >> Gordon
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > -------------------------------------------------------
                    > This message comes from the Scots Origins Discussion Group, sponsored by
                    > Scots Origins (www.scotsorigins.com). The group has been set up so that
                    > members can share genealogical information about Scotland, to reply send
                    > an email to scots-origins@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    > To unsubscribe send a blank email to:
                    > scots-origins-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > --
                    > No virus found in this incoming message.
                    > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                    > Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.6/69 - Release Date: 11/08/2005
                    >
                    >
                  • gordon crooks
                    Janet: While I agree with you to some extent, there were various reasons for moving. Mine left Paisley, Scotland in the early 1600 s to go to Ireland for what
                    Message 9 of 17 , Aug 12, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Janet: While I agree with you to some extent, there were various reasons for
                      moving. Mine left Paisley, Scotland in the early 1600's to go to Ireland for
                      what reason certainly the lure of free land was one and perhaps more
                      religious freedom was another. Then after a 100 years left again for the
                      USA, they were apparently well off to begin with and even better off when
                      the left Ireland as they and their fellow Presbyterian Covenanters purchased
                      almost a quarter of the entire county today known as Franklin Co., Pa. from
                      the Penn's who can explain this last move! It certainly wasn't for wealth as
                      they already had it, religious reasons - well maybe, foot loose and
                      adventurous more likely, especially that by the first American born
                      generation (3rd) was on the move to the West and the South for as much as
                      1,000 miles. Another possible reason is family size, my ancestor born 1709
                      in Ulster had four children two born there and two born here, just two of 16
                      grandchildren had 22 children themselves, the farms and business's couldn't
                      support litters of this size!

                      Gordon
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Janet" <wightway@...>
                      To: <scots-origins@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 1:08 PM
                      Subject: Re: [scots-origins] Parish Searches


                      > Gordon: Whilst I see that one should search all avenues, my point is
                      > that I have a full tree after 1776, a marriage of the couple, one of whom
                      > I need a birth date for so that I can find his parents, and where nine
                      > children were born all in the same parish. I would have thought therefore
                      > that if someone was going to emigrate, it would be to find a future for
                      > their family, not to move away from it.
                      >
                      >
                      > Janet
                      > Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
                      > Sherret, Kincardineshire
                      > Chester, Glasgow
                      > Rowat, Campbell, Argyll
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: "gordon crooks" <glcrooks@...>
                      >
                      >
                      >> Janet: Its possible your Dunn immigrated. There were Dunns IN
                      >> Pennsylvania
                      >> in the early 1700's.
                      >>
                      >> Gordon
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > -------------------------------------------------------
                      > This message comes from the Scots Origins Discussion Group, sponsored by
                      > Scots Origins (www.scotsorigins.com). The group has been set up so that
                      > members can share genealogical information about Scotland, to reply send
                      > an email to scots-origins@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      > To unsubscribe send a blank email to:
                      > scots-origins-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • Janet
                      ... From: Andrew Paterson Hello Andrew, Many thanks for your interest. ... So, there is a likelihood that there wasnt? ...
                      Message 10 of 17 , Aug 12, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: "Andrew Paterson" <adp@...>


                        Hello Andrew, Many thanks for your interest.

                        > There are records of baptisms in Montrose Parish going back to 1616. If they
                        > were baptised in Montrose and (more importantly) if a record was ever made

                        So, there is a likelihood that there wasnt?

                        > of the births/baptisms, then the OPR for that period is the place to be
                        > looking (should be indexed on the IGI).

                        I've got a lot of information from IGI but drew a blank after 18 months of searching. I'm just getting nowhere, which was why I commissioned Montrose Library for the task. They have given me a lot of photographic documents to support that they have searched for the two hours I paid for. [I've only got a pension] They also gave me the names of four possibles, but as I have said to others, a "possible" isnt good enough is it?

                        >Remember also that a lot of
                        > births/baptisms went unrecorded, particularly if the people were not of the
                        > Church of Scotland (who kept the registers that became the OPRs).

                        This is why I felt inclined to accept the information supplied by Montrose Library, after all, there is going to come a time when all of us reach that unscaleable brick wall.
                        >
                        > However, I think you have been misled by the marriage record. It says the
                        > the couple were both "of that parish". My understanding is that was the
                        > parish they were resident in at the time of them proclaiming the banns, not
                        > necessarily the parish they were born in.

                        I see your point and am grateful to you for making it. As further generations were of that parish however it is easy to assume that way, would you not agree?
                        >
                        > I am presuming the librarian has assumed that Montrose was the parish of
                        > their births and that they have found no corresponding entry in the Montrose
                        > OPRs.

                        I think that appears to be so.

                        Janet
                        Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
                        Sherret, Kincardineshire
                        Chester, Glasgow
                        Rowat, Campbell, Argyll
                      • Rena McCarthy
                        Andrew Paterson said:- ... not ... Montrose ... I have come across only one ancestor who, no matter which village I find
                        Message 11 of 17 , Aug 12, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          "Andrew Paterson" <adp@...> said:-
                          > However, I think you have been misled by the marriage record. It says the
                          > the couple were both "of that parish". My understanding is that was the
                          > parish they were resident in at the time of them proclaiming the banns,
                          not
                          > necessarily the parish they were born in.
                          >
                          > I am presuming the librarian has assumed that Montrose was the parish of
                          > their births and that they have found no corresponding entry in the
                          Montrose
                          > OPRs.
                          ---
                          I have come across only one ancestor who, no matter which village I find him
                          in (child's baptisms, and even working 50 miles away) is always noted as
                          William from S, the village in which he was born. Whereas the others have
                          been noted as being from the village/parish they worked in at the time. I
                          read a piece written by a historian who outlined agents for large employers
                          (mine owners, manpower required by landowners, etc.) would inform local
                          committees of the manpower they required for a given project outside of the
                          parish. The job applicants were given a contracted length of time to work
                          away from their home and would still be registered in that place. As local
                          committees were the ones who allotted hardship money it was most important
                          to be registered in a time when serious accidents were commonplace.
                        • Janet
                          Gordon: I am glad that you have responded in this way, because it expands the thought process for others who find themselves in the same situation as I, and no
                          Message 12 of 17 , Aug 15, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Gordon:

                            I am glad that you have responded in this way, because it expands the thought process for others who find themselves in the same situation as I, and no doubt others, who are at a brick wall. I see this as being so by the responses, for which I thank everyone.

                            Let me try and illustrate why I think as I do that I can dismiss that my folk emigrated.

                            First Generation:

                            My own family from William Dun and Mary Gordon who married in 1776 produced six children in their line, one of whom was still born. Their first born was christened on the same day and its possible it was he, named George. As some who have pointed out to me, not a Scottish name in that period of time; I don't know as yet if their first child survived and whether or not gaps in succession between their children might be proven to be still born births, or, as Rena McCarthy has drawn to my attention, the possibility of a second marriage. All this has to be taken into consideration - I know this because my paternal grandfather marred 3 times and my grandmother predeceased him, dying in childbirth. Its something we don't know of today and those younger than I might not consider the possibility, which is why sharing information on these groups is so important.

                            Next generation:

                            William & Mary's second son produced eleven children, the second of whom was the Editor of The Montrose Review - still publishing today - until he died in 1871 - I know his gravestone is in the Parish Kirkyard. I have purchased his death certificate in the hope it might give me some information but as his wife survived him, unless I am mistaken the informant could be her. His marriage to Martha Simpson produced four children and his first son, William Simpson Dunn born in Scotland married a Mearns [Kincardineshire] lassie, Sarah Sheret/Sherret/Sherrett/Sherit/Sherratt and as many combinations as you will find. I have taken that line back to 1745

                            William Simpson Dunn - note the additional "n" consonant, met Sarah Sheret, from Kincardineshire, and both went to London where he was a Compositor Printer. At that time the printing industry was buoyant, and succeeding and I am quite sure that he sent information to his father who was still Editing in Montrose. After his death Sarah was "a lady of independent means", and that was unusual at that time. I've heard from others in groups that the printing industry was taking off there and that a lot of Scots were involved in it in London.

                            Next generation:

                            From William and Sarah, there were five children, born London, and from his second son, my grandmother and her siblings, there were seven. And you will understand, I know the rest, but, there was a "foundling" from his first Son, mother unknown, the child left on the doorstep, Mother unknown, before his marriage, who did not live beyond 18, and six Gt relatives of mine. The foundling was of Spanish origin we think and my Gt Grandmother said that if the bairn was not a redhead it was not "one of ours"

                            My reasoning, when I first responded to you was "why, when there were generations and decades of the same family would my illusive William Dun and Mary Gordon emigrate?"

                            The fact is, as you have illustrated, we must realise, there is "nowt so queer as folk" as they say in Yorkshire. In other words, we cannot predict what people should do and in genealogical circles we should have an open mind. In my case however, I think I am justified in thinking this was not so and that somewhere in Scotland I ought to be able to find the parents of my William Dun, born ca 1757.

                            I think you will see why in a group such as this I could defy your reasoning, and I think it worthy of airing here when members give us information that is not accepted. So often no reason is given and it may seem that suggestions fall by the wayside; I don't think that is necessarily so.

                            The snag is, at this point I have to realise that if I select the people who I think might have been parents of William, I could make a mistake, because copy documents in Scotland are nigh illegible, and my family tree really isn't proven. Therefore, some of us, at some time or another, depending on our age, have to accept we have achieved as much as is realistically possible. That is not to say I will give up but in my seniority, there has to be a realisation that time is not on my side because secure records are just not searchable.

                            If anyone has an interest in the names that are listed below my signature line, I have a seven page workbook in spreadsheet form and would be willing to share it, because, this way, only, will we be able to make progress; after all its the same process that is taking place in FamilySearch - aka LDS. I have shared one or two pages and other than Rena McCarthy, I have to say there is a slight disappointment in those who have received it not giving feedback. I suppose this is the effect of so much information not being ours and we should not have high expectations.

                            Thank you to Rena for your help and support.

                            Janet
                            Traced: Dun/Dunn, Angus
                            Sherret, Kincardineshire
                            Chester, Glasgow, Gorbals
                            Rowat, Campbell, Argyll



                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: "gordon crooks" <glcrooks@...>


                            > Janet: While I agree with you to some extent, there were various reasons for
                            > moving. Mine left Paisley, Scotland in the early 1600's to go to Ireland for
                            > what reason certainly the lure of free land was one and perhaps more
                            > religious freedom was another. Then after a 100 years left again for the
                            > USA, they were apparently well off to begin with and even better off when
                            > the left Ireland as they and their fellow Presbyterian Covenanters purchased
                            > almost a quarter of the entire county today known as Franklin Co., Pa. from
                            > the Penn's who can explain this last move! It certainly wasn't for wealth as
                            > they already had it, religious reasons - well maybe, foot loose and
                            > adventurous more likely, especially that by the first American born
                            > generation (3rd) was on the move to the West and the South for as much as
                            > 1,000 miles. Another possible reason is family size, my ancestor born 1709
                            > in Ulster had four children two born there and two born here, just two of 16
                            > grandchildren had 22 children themselves, the farms and business's couldn't
                            > support litters of this size!
                            >
                            > Gordon
                          • IACSCOTT@aol.com
                            In a message dated 15/08/2005 11:48:48 GMT Standard Time, wightway@tiscali.co.uk writes: but I do have a complete tree from 1776 to the present day - me -
                            Message 13 of 17 , Aug 15, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              In a message dated 15/08/2005 11:48:48 GMT Standard Time,
                              wightway@... writes:

                              but I do have a complete tree from 1776 to the present day - me - for my
                              maternal line.



                              Can someone please tell me what is regarded as a complete tree? I have traced
                              ancestors back to a couple who were producing children in 1713 suggesting
                              they were born in the late 1600's but I do not regard this tree as 'complete'.
                              Although I know the husband died in 1860 I have no knowledge of his birth or
                              marriage nor the birth and death of his wife. They both must have had parents
                              so until I find them the tree is not complete, buuuuttttt, if I do the cycle
                              starts all over again.

                              Ian A C Scott


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Janet
                              I suppose it has to be a subjective point that I deem my tree as being complete because I have traced my direct ancestry, paternal and maternal, without any
                              Message 14 of 17 , Aug 16, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I suppose it has to be a subjective point that I deem my tree as being complete because I have traced my direct ancestry, paternal and maternal, without any gaps. I take your point, but, is it not so that we have to accept that at some time or another we are not going to be able to take it back any further no matter how we search?

                                Janet


                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: <IACSCOTT@...>

                                > Can someone please tell me what is regarded as a complete tree? I have traced
                                > ancestors back to a couple who were producing children in 1713 suggesting
                                > they were born in the late 1600's but I do not regard this tree as 'complete'.
                                > Although I know the husband died in 1860 I have no knowledge of his birth or
                                > marriage nor the birth and death of his wife. They both must have had parents
                                > so until I find them the tree is not complete, buuuuttttt, if I do the cycle
                                > starts all over again.
                                >
                                > Ian A C Scott
                              • Laura Doll
                                ... and such is the delight and joy that we call genealogy! Isn t it the best?! I guess for me the dream would be for all my branches to be equally filled
                                Message 15 of 17 , Aug 16, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  ... and such is the delight and joy that we call genealogy! Isn't it the best?! I guess for me the dream would be for all my branches to be equally filled back to the same year, so I could at least say it's complete to, for example, 1713. We've succeeded in tracing back to 1599 on one branch and feel pretty darn good about ourselves about that. Then, however, when we turn to another branch not so well discovered - yet - we have to remember that it's a slow process, usually a frustrating one. The delights of fitting the pieces in the puzzle and the sudden discoveries that exhume a chunk of generations at a time make it a lifelong addiction. The joys should always outweigh the frustrations, but sometimes it's just the nature of the beast that they don't and you hope for better luck tomorrow.

                                  I want to say thank you to everyone on this list. It's a very friendly list and very helpful bunch of people and not all lists are that way. It is truly an honor to be included among you and I continue to hope for a genealogical connection of my folks to you as my hunch tells me I should be able to uncover.

                                  --Laura

                                  IACSCOTT@... wrote:

                                  In a message dated 15/08/2005 11:48:48 GMT Standard Time,
                                  wightway@... writes:

                                  but I do have a complete tree from 1776 to the present day - me - for my
                                  maternal line.



                                  Can someone please tell me what is regarded as a complete tree? I have traced
                                  ancestors back to a couple who were producing children in 1713 suggesting
                                  they were born in the late 1600's but I do not regard this tree as 'complete'.
                                  Although I know the husband died in 1860 I have no knowledge of his birth or
                                  marriage nor the birth and death of his wife. They both must have had parents
                                  so until I find them the tree is not complete, buuuuttttt, if I do the cycle
                                  starts all over again.

                                  Ian A C Scott


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                                  -------------------------------------------------------
                                  This message comes from the Scots Origins Discussion Group, sponsored by
                                  Scots Origins (www.scotsorigins.com). The group has been set up so that members can share genealogical information about Scotland, to reply send an email to scots-origins@yahoogroups.com

                                  To unsubscribe send a blank email to: scots-origins-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                  Yahoo! Groups Links








                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Rena McCarthy
                                  ... Can someone please tell me what is regarded as a complete tree? Nice one Ian :-)) When I first started I thought it would be neat details in neat boxes
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Aug 16, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    > Ian A C Scott wrote:
                                    Can someone please tell me what is regarded as a complete tree?

                                    Nice one Ian :-))
                                    When I first started I thought it would be neat details in neat boxes
                                    covering a sheet of paper. I forgot a tree has the roots we can see at the
                                    base of the trunk but has many more hidden layered roots. My roots are now
                                    spread over my computer table, the dining table and chairs, an unused easy
                                    chair, the floor, into the depths of a tea chest and several drawers :-))

                                    Cheers,
                                    Rena
                                    ==
                                    > wightway@... writes:>
                                    > but I do have a complete tree from 1776 to the present day - me - for
                                    my
                                    > maternal line.
                                  • Carole
                                    Hi Ian You are so right. The thing about Genealogy is that it is never complete and whatever we do there will always be more to add. One would hope that when
                                    Message 17 of 17 , Aug 16, 2005
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Hi Ian
                                      You are so right. The thing about Genealogy is that it is never complete and whatever we do there will always be more to add. One would hope that when we are gone the next generation will be interested enough to keep digging.My dad started for us but now that he is gone. I have decided to keep on going with what he started but now we have computers it is easier to make contacts. We all still hit brick walls along the way but the best part is when we get a break through and manage to chip away at them or maybe even knock some down. Thanks for the way you help so many of us in out efforts to do this.
                                      Carole

                                      IACSCOTT@... wrote:

                                      In a message dated 15/08/2005 11:48:48 GMT Standard Time,
                                      wightway@... writes:

                                      but I do have a complete tree from 1776 to the present day - me - for my
                                      maternal line.



                                      Can someone please tell me what is regarded as a complete tree? I have traced
                                      ancestors back to a couple who were producing children in 1713 suggesting
                                      they were born in the late 1600's but I do not regard this tree as 'complete'.
                                      Although I know the husband died in 1860 I have no knowledge of his birth or
                                      marriage nor the birth and death of his wife. They both must have had parents
                                      so until I find them the tree is not complete, buuuuttttt, if I do the cycle
                                      starts all over again.

                                      Ian A C Scott


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                                      -------------------------------------------------------
                                      This message comes from the Scots Origins Discussion Group, sponsored by
                                      Scots Origins (www.scotsorigins.com). The group has been set up so that members can share genealogical information about Scotland, to reply send an email to scots-origins@yahoogroups.com

                                      To unsubscribe send a blank email to: scots-origins-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                      Yahoo! Groups Links







                                      __________________________________________________
                                      Do You Yahoo!?
                                      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                                      http://mail.yahoo.com

                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.