Secondary Hints

 

                         I once wrote a post about a sister who was addicted to family history (see here).  She enthusiastically shared her passion with others and would strongly advice to look for primary sources about our ancestors and not rely so much on the secondary sources.  So primary sources are like birth certificates, marriage certificates, death certificates, etc.  A secondary source would be an obituary, announcement, burials, etc.  I’m not sure where the census and public records fit in.  Even the certificates that were recorded 100 plus years ago can and do get mistranslated (see here)  not because of the language barrier but the ability to decipher the handwriting regardless of what language it is written. Also lot of misspells.  It could be the same person.  Maybe.  Maybe not.

        I’d gone into Ancestry the other day.  There was a red dot over my hints – not a green leaf but a red dot.  Apparently they changed the appearance.  The red dot told me I had over 170 hints.  Awwww . . . . I don’t even recognize more than half the names that appear.  Lot of census.  I have had my own name come up and tell me that I was in a resident in areas that I wasn’t – or else the dates were wrong.  What?  Do I really need that information for people I may or may not be related to?  No.  Not important.  I decided I would weed out my “hints” by ignoring or marking undecided.  That way when I really am curious about certain individuals I can go through whenever I get the desire.

        Family history is definitely time consuming – just weeding them out is time consuming.  Richard has been getting a taste of my frustration – though at a much larger degree.  At least I have rare family names like Fish, Gloppen, Dodds, Gullicksen and Purdie (to name a few).  He’s got names like Rivera y Cortijo, Landor y Martinez . . . might as well be Smith and Young.

        As my few readers can tell – I still don’t have the passion.  Sorry.  Kudos to all of you that do.  That is really awesome.