Hello and welcome to Family Tree Talk. My name
is Helen Tovey and with me is... Nathan Ward.
Hello there. Hi Nathan, how are you? I'm alright,
thank you. I'm full of busyness, but yeah, I'm
good. And more importantly, how's your family
history going? It's going better than it was
last week. It's better? Well, I did terribly,
didn't I, last week? I failed in my task to do
the research journal or whatever you want to
call it. Genealogy journal, because it rhymes.
Genealogy journal! And I was a little bit upset
with myself. Anyway, as soon as we finished last
week, I went away and ordered myself a lovely
new journal, which I can now show you, but I
can't show anyone else. It's beautiful. So it's
a beautiful burgundy colour which just says history.
It's got an elastic band, so if you... tucks
any little useful things in there they don't
get lost it's hardback i've got stationary envy
it's all bad it's nice it's nice it actually
took me longer i ordered this online and then
the following day i went to a popular bookstore
and they had an entire two or three shelves full
of notebooks and i was like oh my god i need
all of them but that wasn't the point that's
not why we bought it it wasn't just to have more
it was so we could do our little journal thing
And have you filled in anything in your journal
yet? Oh, I have. I've done a mission statement,
which is the most pretentious bit of writing
I've ever done in my life. And then I've also
done my first week of family history. Wow. We're
going to talk about this in a moment. First of
all, I want to tell you that although we're going
to be just chatting as normal for the minute,
in a little while we're going to be joined by
a very special guest. We don't often have a guest,
do we? Not recently. No, not recently. And shall
I tell you who it is? Please do. OK, so it's
Dr. Sophie Kay. Lovely. Yeah, very, very cool.
So we're going to speak about that later on in
the podcast. For the moment, we're going to catch
up with Nathan and find out. how he's getting
on. And I have got a bit of family history news
just to do with me, my own little cliffhanger
that I want to share with you, Nathan, and anyone
who's willing to listen to it. So if there's
time for that, I'd love to share that. Anyway,
so tell me about your genealogy journal and are
you brave enough to read out this mission statement?
I mean, I am, but I don't want anybody to judge
me because it's pretentious. It's so pretentious.
But I thought I need something that any time
that I'm lost in my ways, don't know what I'm
doing, I can refer to this mission statement
and be like... that's what i'm here for that's
why i'm doing it so i needed it to be like a
bit a bit more umphy and g me up again i apologize
so mission statement this is my family history
log each week i will report in not with perfection
but with progress i am uncovering the lives that
came before mine one detail at a time this journal
is my space to gather what i found to reflect
on what it means and to decide where to go next
i will capture both discoveries and questions
knowing that each will move me forward. This
is more than research. It's connection, understanding
and legacy. And I will keep going. That is awesome.
It's nonsense. It's not nonsense. It literally
is like a little distillation of what we're all
about when we do our family history. And you've
put it there in a few words. We're all going
to want to copy those words. If we copy them,
can we put a little statement going, put it in
quote marks and put Nathan Ward. 26. Yes. I was
literally writing it and I thought, right, what
I want to happen is in like three or four generations
time, somebody finds this book in my family.
What was he like? And then you get this really
pretentious waffle. It's not pretentious. It's
fantastic. I just love it. I love it because
it's precise and it's hard working and it's heartwarming.
It's everything. Yeah, well, thank you. It's
just there to push me forward, basically. Like,
in case I forget what I'm doing or what the moats
are writing this book thing. Yeah, so I've only
done one week's entry. I sort of, I wasn't sure
whether I was just going to write it all in a
summary, like one big long summary or what. As
it is, I've put it into four categories for some
reason. So at the top, I've got the date range
for the one week I'm working on. And then I've
broken the page down into mission, discoveries,
story and questions. So good, Nathan. It's so
good. Oh, man, I'm such a geek. No, you're brilliant.
Keep going then. Tell me more. Literally, I'm
going to read this out. It's working well for
me because now me talking on the podcast is actually
just me reading this log to you. Brilliant. So
my mission was to find the death dates for the
three remaining two -time great -grandparents,
starting with Joseph G. Ward. Right. So that
was my mission. So I went away to do that, and
the discoveries I got from that are that I still
don't know his death date. I followed the trail
on the 1911 and 1921 censuses, and from that,
I discovered that his wife, Mary Ann Blackburn,
died in 1916, and... On one of the censuses,
it said they had a three... Oh, on the 1911 census.
I've written it down. What a good lad. On the
1911 census, they had a three -year -old boy
called Clifford. So he lost his mum when he was
eight. I was like, oh, this is really sad. So
it created a bit more of a story for me. I then
found Clifford on the 1921 census. This is where
it gets interesting. This is why I haven't found
the death date, because I got lost on this path.
I found Clifford on the 1921 census with his
dad, Joseph, but obviously not his mum. But Joseph
had remarried someone called Lena, L -E -N -A,
is that correctly pronounced? I don't know. Lena
Ward, and he was living with her and her kids.
So I'd got a new marriage out of this, which
I hadn't been looking for, but found because
I'd traced a child. So that was quite interesting.
Then from that, I found that Lena was also previously
married, having obviously had kids. And I found
her surname was Hurst, but then her original
surname was Reed. So I found lots of stuff about
her past and her parents. I actually, she was
really clear to find, like literally as soon
as I've got her name in, I found stuff about
her childhood and her parents and it just started
going back and back. So I started tracing somebody
that wasn't really on my direct line, but it
was helping me flesh out the story for Clifford,
which is cool. And then, so that was the story
part. Oh, the story part is, Leonard was a Hearst,
which I got from the kids' names. I found her
wedding certificate. She was born Reid, and I
found her parents too. And I also found out that
Clifford died in 1926, so he was really young
when he died. And then the questions, which is
what I will follow up for this week, were find
the death record for Clifford, and obviously
still find the death record for Joseph. And in
and amongst all that, I found out a reference
where Joseph had enlisted perhaps in 1886. So
that's obviously then involving, is it fold something
or other? Well, it might not do, but it could
do. Fold three is the Ancestry military records.
So that has also given me an idea that I'm going
to start using tags because I keep on getting
these people that are war related. So I'm going
to tag him with a war notice. And I'm going to
do that with everybody else who appears with
a war -related paraphernalia. And then when I've
got enough, I'll sign up for it and be like,
right, I'll spend a week. But also before you
totally, totally agree with the tags, totally
agree with you making a list of everyone related
to war stuff and military stuff. But so did you
say 1886? Oh, yes. Yes. So I think what you need
to be really clear before you go signing up for
anything is just check which country this person
is serving in. Be really careful of the dates
that they're serving. And then before you sign
up for something, see which record collections
that subscription is going to provide you with.
So I would naturally go to find my past if I
was going to be looking for broad brush military
starting point. So you might find that's better
than. than full three because full three is renowned
for being a bit more american i think whereas
and the lots of the british military records
from q digitized you for that earlier period
pre -first world war or from my past so it's
it's like getting getting lots and lots of data
before you start spending your money okay cool
yeah i just i literally just thought it'd be
better for me instead of dipping in with with
one person i think your tactics great yeah because
It's not necessary for my current mission, but
it's interesting, isn't it? And I'd quite like
to know. So I'm going to start, like I say, using
tags a bit better on Ancestry and mark them with,
like, has military records. And then when the
time comes where I've got a gap where I want
to do that research, I can be like, right, I'll
just look for that tag and see who comes up.
And I could be entirely wrong. A full tree could
be just what you want. But it's just worth knowing
that. So that one guy in particular, he definitely
has a document that's saved on Fold3, but obviously
it doesn't let me see it. So we will see. But
yeah, I quite like my little journal because
it's obviously, it's just given me all that information.
It's clear enough that I can tell you and now
you know what I've been up to. And one more kind
of nitty gritty bit, because we're all about
the nitty gritty when it comes to this podcast.
So a whole week, so I've been doing my genealogy
journal and... At the end of the week, I write
a summary of what I've done that week. But for
me and my poor, poor memory, there's no way I
can remember for a whole week in my head what
I want to include in my journal. So I have to
have a little spider plan on my map or whatever
you want to call it. And I just jot down a few
words. And then at the end of the week, I'll
write down my summary. So how are you keeping,
have you got it on a separate piece of paper
or how are you keeping track of what you're writing
about? I mean, that does worry me now you've
said that out loud because that's very, very
true. in my head originally i was going to make
notes as i went but i'll be honest all that research
that i just did then was done over the course
of like two days so it was all really fresh in
my head and i just put it down at the end of
the second day if i'm doing it over a week that
could be a problem so yeah i mean i do i make
notes in my other notebooks so prop perhaps i'll
be fine then yes you can see one central place
you can just lift it off there and turn it into
its legacy format It just felt very tidy this
week with that one. Of course, it was done in
such a short space of time, but it's going to
be useful. I did have a few weird questions and
I feel like I've answered them myself, but it
was interesting that they came in my head, so
I'll say them and sound stupid. When I found
this Lena, is it Lena? L -E -N -A? It might be
Lena. Lena, Lena, anyway. If anybody knows, then
tell us. Email in with a voice note so we can
hear your voice or spell it out. Whether it's
Lena, Lena, Lena. Lena, yeah, could be. I think
Lena. It sounds nice. Anyway, when she appeared
on the census, she's obviously appeared as a
ward because she's married Joseph George. But
then I found her children's name out because
they were still obviously having the father's
surname still. So then in my head, I'm like,
right, her surname's Hurst, but that's her married
name. I already know the answer, so I don't know
why I'm saying this, but my reaction was, should
I have put her in my family tree at the point
she interacts with my family so she would have
been a Hurst? But actually, it's that silly.
It should be her birth name, which we read. So
I've answered it already, but it just struck
me as interesting. It is interesting. I know
it's stupid, but... It's not stupid, but also
it's the thing that when we find something, it's
a bit of evidence, isn't it? And then a subsequent
piece of evidence might overturn that. So, for
instance, let's say you didn't know she'd had
a previous name before Hearst. You might enter
her as Hearst. And then all of us need to kind
of keep flexible -minded enough that when we
do get further information, we're not so, like,
bound with the previous facts we found. We can
go, hey, I'm going to... I thought that was her
maiden name, but it turns out it's not. She was
married before. And so I'm going to change it
to her married name or her maiden name. Sorry.
And also, if you found her and you know she's
got kids and you're probably hazarding a guess
that that Hurst isn't her maiden name. But if
that's the only name you've got so far, I think
that's perfectly reasonable to enter that in
her surname slot. And you're like, I know this
is not her maiden name, but I'm entering it here
because this is the best I've got. And it will
help orientate me for future research. I do want
to pick this up again. I've got a better clue
having a surname rather than just a blank, a
kind of false blank. You do have some information
about that surname. It's just not the actual
maiden name. Yeah. OK, that's cool. I mean, I
did find her birth name of Reed. It was just
a little oddity at the time. It's fascinating,
though, as well, isn't it? Had I not looked for
the death date of Joseph, I already had him and
his wife Mary on my tree and I could have happily
carried on going backwards. Yeah. I wouldn't
have known this story about her dying and then
him remarrying and then his son dying at a very
young age. It's a massive story and it's like
it wasn't evident from the evidence that I'd
previously got. And it's only from like a little
bit of tangential research that I'm like, oh,
wow. This is completely different now. It's cool.
It's what I wanted, wasn't it? I was saying the
other week I was getting a bit bored of just
facts and suddenly a little bit more detail and
mystery comes out in the most simplest bit of
research. So that's cool. It's very, very cool.
It's very, very cool. And it is endlessly the
stories, isn't it? Yeah. Yeah. It's really, really
good. I've got one more little rant to do for
you. Oh, yeah. So this woman was born Reed and
in... In the earliest example of me finding her,
her name is clear as day, written as R -E -E
-D, as her appearance. And it's not scrolly,
it's very neat, very tidy, and it says read.
But then on all subsequent documents, it's read
R -E -A -D. It's annoying, isn't it? I didn't
know what to do because the first document looked
so official that that was how it was spelt with
the double E. I don't know. I'll be quiet. So
you're just wondering how to record in your tree
and you're wondering, let's say you save down
documents, you find census documents or whatever
about them, and you're wondering how to label
up those files, how to spell the surname. Is
that what your concern is? Yeah, I guess, and
I guess because it links to hints, et cetera,
as well. If a surname is actually R -E -E -D
and I put it as R -E -A -D, then maybe I'm getting
other people, but equally... I don't know. I
just want it to be recorded accurately, don't
I? It's just interesting that it changes so quickly
in my mind. Well, I say quickly. I'm looking
at a bunch of documents. Within one person's
lifetime. They can't even be consistent within
their own life. Is that what you mean? Yeah,
it's just so... Yeah, I think I need to just
be quiet. It's just so solid in the way that
her name was Reed. It was like, this is correct.
So if I record it as Reed... But then all subsequent
documents are R -E -A -D. Am I going to confuse
myself by not recording both names on her entry
if I come back to it at a later date, for example?
Or do I need to just rely on the fact that I'm
sensible enough to know that read could be spelled
differently? So I think having some sort of record
so that you don't confuse yourself in the future
is a good idea. So things you could do, you could
add into the notes about that. that there's the
alternate surnames when you download copies of
census documents and any other documents that
you find about them and you put them in your
folder and you're labeling a file name you could
either just say right i'm going to use for the
file name i'm going to spell it exactly as it's
spelled in that document and those two spellings
aren't so far away that it's going they're going
to miss file dramatically you're going to be
able to see when you open up your folder of documents
you're going to see them filed fairly close to
each other you could even include a tag which
is called read read with the two different spellings
so you tag everyone who's a potential victim
of the spelling mistake and mary evans who's
a really organized um researcher she says she
just plumps for one spelling when she's writing
copying down all her file names so even if the
files so that then she's she's not over complicating
it herself just plump for one thing and it might
be that you want to change it subsequently to
something else but it's a kind of it's a small
detail isn't it It is, but I'm glad you've said
that. It makes me feel less silly. No, it's not
silly. It's frustrating and niggly, and there
isn't a perfect solution. So I would do the read
-read tag, because then it makes you easy. Because
half the thing is, with family history, is we're
finding so much information that we have a slightly
worried feeling at the back of our mind that
we might not be able to find something in the
future. And it's a waste of time looking for
things. It's been unnecessarily long looking
for things, isn't it? It is, and obviously...
there's a potential of there being somebody else
with the Reid surname in that way, and it's actually
not her. And with Ancestry, you'll have noticed
that you can, I think you can record an alternate
name. Yes. So you can do that as well. So that
hopefully won't mislead anyone else who's looking
at your tree and won't cause you to get wrong
hints. It will keep the kind of funnel open to
both possibilities. Yes, that sounds fab. Cool.
So that's largely my research done for the last
week. Well, Nathan, if me and anyone listening
to the podcast was here in a room with you, we'd
all be going, clapping our hands really, really
loud. I just love your genealogy journal. I love
your subcategories in it. I love your massive
sweeping statement at the start of it to set
the scene. I love it all. Embarrassing. Can I
just check, do you fill it in using our favourite
pen? I do indeed, yes. The V -Ball 0 .7 by Skylet.
It's excellent, yes. Such a smooth write. We're
not sponsored by this pen, we just love it. We
just love it and it's available in all good supermarkets.
Yes, and I think it makes you think better because
you're doing your best handwriting. It brings
out the best in you, doesn't it? Yeah, there's
just something creative about this pen. I don't
know what it is. I lost mine for a while and
my notes deteriorated drastically. I don't think
I'd have been able to carry on. Yes. Well, was
it getting like that? Go on then, tell us about
your cliffhanger. So I touched on it briefly.
So it's my great granny's uncle and I found him
in 1896 stealing a ton of coal. And I was like.
my first criminal. I was so flippant and facetious
about it. It felt like a little bit of a drama.
I said, oh, goodness, a bit of a frizzle in my
family tree to have a criminal. And then we finished
the podcast, went back to work and I carried
on researching. And then, you know, when you
suddenly start feeling really guilty because
you've made a silly comment about someone who's
going through a really bad time in their life.
Yeah. So I went back to the records and in 1894,
then His little baby, Henry, died. Yeah. And
then about a fortnight later, his wife died.
And I was like, oh, God. So now we have Henry.
I go scroll forward in time two years to 1896
when he's stealing the coal. And I have not Henry,
James. And I have a completely different view
of him because he's now a widower with a whole
bunch of little kids. Yeah. And he's trying to
look after them. Keep a job. Yeah. He's going
through a really tough time. So I felt bad about
that. So I carried on trying to piece his life
together and find out what was happening. And
by... Late 1901, he gets married. So that's really
nice. Yeah. And in August 1902, he has a little
baby. And the little baby is called Mary Jane.
They're all called Mary Jane in my family. Anyway,
the little baby's mum is called Mary Ann. The
little baby's called Mary Jane. And Mary Jane
was the name of my James's first wife. So I'm
like, did he name his baby with his second wife
after his first wife? It kind of feels very possible.
Yeah. So he has a little baby and then I was
just rummaging around trying to build it forward.
So now we're getting into quite distant territory
because this is my great granny's uncle's second
wife's baby. So it's a half relationship to me.
So on the scheme of DNA things, I'm like, OK,
we are getting into the weeds a little bit because
this great granny's uncle's second wife's baby
is the same generation as my great granny. but
it's a half to me that was my great granny they're
both so their shared ancestor is their granny
so it's my shared ancestor with any of their
future dna descendants so if i scroll forward
to this little baby's great grandchildren i think
i worked it out that me and this little baby's
great grandchildren would be half fourth cousins
so i'm like okay we're right out on the edges
of when whether autosomal dna could actually
help me yeah because by the time you get to your
fourth cousins you're going to not match most
of them. And by the time you get to a half -fourth
cousin, I'm guessing, I don't know about half
-fourth cousins, it's going to be even less likely.
Anyway, I had to find out about her because I
was trying to find out about my poor widower,
great -great -uncle or whatever. So I found the
little baby and she's travelling to America,
aged three. Neither of her parents are there.
And she's travelling with a 21 -year -old whose
surname is Gary, Bridget Gary. And I was like,
I knew that the little baby's mum's maiden name
was Gary. So three -year -old little baby, baby
Mary Jane, is travelling with a 21 -year -old
auntie to America. They're going to go and stay
with the three -year -old baby's mother. So I'm
like, what's happened here? And the three -year
-old baby's father has paid for the trip. So
to me, I'm like, I've got so many questions.
So the mother has clearly left sometime between
1902 and 1905. She's left her baby in the care
of her little sister and gone to America. The
dad... is paying for the trip, but the record
doesn't say that the baby's going to her parents.
The record strictly says she's going just to
her mother. So I'm like, has their relationship
broken down? I'm just like, I'm all over the
place. It literally feels like a soap opera and
I'm waiting for the next episode. Wow, that's
a lot of information. I'm quite impressed how
you've actually managed to piece all that together.
Well, it's not to my credit at all. It's this
incredible American passenger list. Right. Giving
loads and loads of clues all in one go. It's
just traumatic though, isn't it? It changes the
context of everything. One document can just
ruin or totally... Upend. Yeah, upend at everything
you're thinking. So I'm still in pursuit of that.
And so in my genealogy journal, let me find it,
which is not at all beautiful like yours. Mine
is a grey paperback one. Also, I've written it
at the front of my genealogy journal. Yes. So
I'm the opposite of you, Nathan. I've just written
why. So my version of your fantastic, enviable
mission statement is to keep a diary of my genealogy
rated things each week. That's it. It's to the
point. It's exact. It's not pretentious. I like
it. But it's not very, it's not very, you know,
like Henry V when they're going into battle and
getting everyone's blood up to get them to work
on the project. It's not really like that. It's
a bit prosaic and boring. Not saber rattling.
It's not saber rattling. Not at all. Anyway,
so I have been keeping it. I have been having
fun. Why am I looking here even? Because it's
what my head's like. I've forgotten why I was
looking in it. You were telling us about your
coal dude. My coal dude. I think I finished with
the coal dude. Yes. Sorry about that. Complete
brain crash. This is why I need to write everything
down. Much like me. This is exactly why you need
to write it down without any delay. Just about
life in general. Do you know what? I think we're
going to have to stop our waffle in a moment.
But before we do, I've got some news for you,
which I think is it's it's exciting because it
shows what's possible. But it might make you
a little bit jealous. I'm already feeling what
this is going to be. So, yeah, go on, go for
it. OK, so we have a lovely podcast listener
called Neil. And if anyone has been listening
to more than one episode of the podcast, they
know that Nathan and I sometimes talk about our
ancestry tree scores. We know that Nathan is
annoyingly hovering at 9 .9 and he's just waiting
to push himself over the finish line to get to
the elite score. Yeah. And guess what Neil's
done? Has he beaten me to it? He's beaten you
to it. He's only gone and got the elite star.
And what happens is you actually get a little
yellow star next to the word elite. Oh, I need
this. Yes. And then Neil, because he's such a
generous soul, he shared with me a secret about
how you do this. Oh, go on then. This sounds
good. Yes. Well, it does sound good, but it also
made me feel a little bit cheesed off. Okay.
Yeah. So he said that he... He wrote in to us
a while ago, and what he did was, to scroll back,
so with Ancestry, you pay for your Ancestry subscription.
You can also pay for this thing called Pro Tools,
and it will give you some extra tools and functions
for working on your family history when you're
using Ancestry. You have to have it in conjunction
with some sort of other paid Ancestry membership.
You can't just have the Pro Tools by themselves.
So Pro Tools costs £7 .99 a month. You pay it
month by month, so you could pay for one month.
And then you can cancel it again. And then six
months later or a year later or some people have
it all the time because it's really, really good
for DNA. But we're going to that now. Anyway,
so he got Pro Tools for a month. He downloaded
all the because it gives you millions of it tells
you all your mistakes, millions and millions
of mistakes. And he had 3000 people on his tree.
So he did have a lot of duplicates. He worked
with all his duplicates super methodically, got
rid of them all, checked in with his ancestry
tree. And he had got his elite score because
he had solved all the problems. Yeah. Nice. Nice.
Because he is a wise chap like us, he then stopped
his Pro Tools subscription because he didn't
want to just be paying £7 .99 a month if he wasn't
going to be actually using those Pro Tools. And
I completely think it's a great idea to do that
because you could get a bottle of wine. Or if
you're like Nathan, that won't afford you a bottle
of wine. But if you're like me, it would do.
But anyway. But anyway. Back to Neil. So then
he carried on doing his family history, checked
on his tree score, and his tree score had slipped
from elite back down to 9 .9, and all those duplicates
had come back in again. So this is where it's
a bit swizzy, because if you don't have Pro Tools
on, then his experience was that the duplicates...
somehow reactivated themselves and his you having
identified that they weren't in fact duplicates
they were just ancestors with similar names um
the algorithm you know reports to you um that
they are seemingly duplicates and so then that
demoted his tree score to 9 .9 so then he is
now face of the predicament if he wants to keep
a consistent elite score he's going to have to
keep with his frontal subscription of £7 .99
a month. But he decided, I asked him about it,
and he said, no, he's not going to do that. He's
just going to know that he's done due diligence,
he's assessed every potential problem that has
been flagged up to him, and they aren't problems,
and he's not going to pay his money. But I thought
it was interesting. So the relevance to you,
Nathan, is if you were willing to pay one month's
of Pro Tools subscription, go through all those
duplicates, and I think that could budge you
over to Elite. Yeah, I think it's definitely
worth a shot. I don't like what you're saying,
though, about the whole it's almost like pay
to win almost, isn't it there? If you have to
be subscribed for it to actually still register.
Yeah, I mean, this is only a survey of one person,
so it could be wrong. It could be like my my
tree school has gone up and down, like presumably
if I've added more and more people and haven't
been really great about adding loads of sources
to them. you know potentially as we do our research
it is a bit of a movable feast isn't it it's
not if we if we continue to touch our research
it's going to continue to change so it could
we could have made he could have excuse me neil
but i mean you could have made a mistake about
this so we we need to be clear it's just one
person's experience but neil's a very careful
researcher and it's all seemed to check out what
he said yeah no that sounds good i mean i think
for me i'm i'm teaching between 9 .9 and 9 .8
so as i add more people it'll drop And then I'll
do a few little bits and it goes up quite quickly.
But, you know, it would be awesome to reach elite.
I'm not going to lie. I'd love that. It doesn't
matter at the end of the day, does it? Like what
you're saying about Neil, should he stay with
Pro Tools just to get the elite? For that 0 .1,
it's not worth it, is it really? It's good that
he's done it. It's brilliant. But just knowing
yourself. I'll pay £7 .99 every month just so
I can know this. Get a gold star. It's quite
expensive, gold stars, isn't it? It is, yeah.
But, I mean. Great to get it once at least. So
maybe I'll try that. When I've got a bit of a
gap in my research, I'll be like, right, I'll
spend a month tidying. Although it shouldn't
take me a month, should it? Because I've got
less people on my tree than Neil. So maybe that'll
be quite a good little task. And Neil did make
another very good point. So one of the things
which encourages people's tree score to be good
is that you have sources attached to all of your
people and sources for all of the facts. You
don't have kind of unverified information there.
But because just because you attached a source
to something, it could all be mumbo jumbo. You
could have, you know, it doesn't necessarily
mean you could accidentally attach your shopping
list to a birth detail and the computer will
think you've got a fact, you know, you've got
a source attached, couldn't you? Yeah. That sounds
like a good hack, actually. I'm going to go do
that. Yeah. I am not going to go do that. So
it's lots of things, as ever. To get it right,
goodness, we try hard. I don't think it's probably
a good job. People who don't do family history
don't know how hard we try. Otherwise, they'd
never want to get into it. Well, once it gets
you hooked, that's it, though, isn't it? It all
becomes important. Anyway, speaking of very,
very high standards and excellent research skills,
shall we now talk to our very special guest?
Let's do it. OK. So now, Nathan, I'm so excited
to be introducing you to Dr. Sophie Kay. So just
in case you need to know, Sophie has so many
strings to her genealogical bow, including being
a professional genealogist and geneticist at
Chronicle. And what this means in the course
of her working day, sometimes she's literally
up to her elbows in the archives, wading through
those famous dusty documents. And other times
she's working on DNA projects for clients. So
it's literally everything. You can't believe
the sort of things that Sophie has to get up
to working as a professional genealogist. And
of course, as she does this, she's going to encounter
challenges. She's going to get stuck. Yeah. So
even though she has all of that skill, all those
skills and all that knowledge, she too gets stuck.
what I think she can help us with. Sounds good
to me. Yeah, because she can tell us what she
does when she encounters those problems where
she just, you know, most of us go, oh, I'm stuck.
I've got a brick wall. But that's not good enough,
is it? When you're a professional genealogist,
you can't do that. You have to keep going. Yeah.
So, Sophie, we're really, really hoping you can
help us because, you know, brick walls are kind
of, well, something we all have, aren't they,
Nathan? They are indeed. I mean, that's the big
question, isn't it? Like, We've all got to a
point where we're stuck on our research. We don't
know where to go or how far to get, sorry, how
to get any further. Like, what is the best way
to get further? Yeah, and I think it's that feeling,
isn't it? That when, as you say, when you hit
a brick wall, there's so many things going around
our head because often, I think we've all seen
it, the longer anyone does family history for,
the more and more documents and evidence and
items and thoughts and notes we accumulate. And
getting to a point where we feel like we... are
a little bit stuck and don't know where to go
next even knowing where to start with that is
potentially quite a big brick wall to tackle
isn't it to sort of say well I mean do either
of you have particular things you do at the moment
you think like how do you know when you're stuck
i guess for me i've got like um i've got a very
rigid routine where i use the censuses and i
write a list of the people in the censuses and
then try and match them up so i'll take like
i don't know um george joseph for example i'll
take him and i'll be looking for him to appear
in every census and i'll make a note of where
he appears who he appears with and try and keep
it as methodical as i can but I know I am looking
in a limited pool in that respect because as
soon as I leave that pool, I can't find them
in the census. I start panicking. It's like,
where do I go next? Oh, that makes so much sense.
I think there's a lot of what you've described
there, Nathan, that are very much for me the
building blocks of how we problem solve because
you talked about how you like to sort of systematise
what you have, find order. amongst all of that
vast amount of information that you've already
got and then start to work out what you have
looked at and haven't looked at it sounds like
your list process is for you personally that's
what it's achieving it's giving you order it's
giving you structure and it's giving you a sense
of what you've already got And that can start
to help you define what you might not have looked
at and where the unknowns are in your problem.
Is that sort of how it feels? Yeah, definitely.
I feel like I want to create a timeline for each
person. And obviously the census helps you give
it gives you obviously 10 year blocks so you
can get a little bit in between. But then it's
right. Well, what's going on in between all those
gaps? And it's how to find that. Oh, absolutely.
I love it when people mention research gaps,
because I always like to talk about fleshing
out the narrative, because I know that for most
of us as family historians, we didn't come to
this to just get a list of names and dates and
places. We want a nice fleshed out narrative
that feels like we're capturing as much of that
story as possible. And I think in terms of our
research, when we can, as you say, timeline,
for example, I love timelines. Timelines are
a great way of visualising what we've got, but
also opening our eyes to what we don't have.
yet and i tend to find if i timeline once i've
got all of my evidence chronologically ordered
and it's it's a nice timeline whatever way you
want to do it um i think anyone stepping into
timelining has to know that there's there's so
many ways we can go about it if you love doing
it on computer by all means go for it if like
me actually even though i do loads of things
by computer and i love doing things digitally
when it comes to timelines i get a giant pad
of paper and draw it out by hand on this huge
pad of paper as soon as i've done that i then
start looking at what the gaps are so i'm so
glad you mentioned that because the gaps invite
us to ask questions about what are the limits
of our own knowledge at the moment what haven't
we looked at and as we grow as researchers as
well the ability to look at those gaps and say
okay what's what might be in those gaps what
record sets might there be out there that I simply
haven't even realised are there yet that I can
go and explore. And maybe those might complement
what I've already got. They might help me problem
solve in different ways and they might help me
populate some of those gaps in the timeline.
So, yes, I think actually what you've hit on
there, Nathan, for me is one of the key elements
of problem solving, which is finding a way to
visualise what we already know in a way that
speaks to us personally. And I think the way
we visualise our evidence in an effective way
might look different for... each researcher yeah
definitely i agree for me it is just that because
it's such a big gap the 10 year chunk you don't
know what's going on and i was speaking to helen
earlier and i've got an example where i've got
a family where the mother dies i can't remember
how i found out she dies but i couldn't trace
the husband naturally on the census so i followed
the son and when i found the son who was a three
-year -old on the previous sensor The son was
with the father, but the father had remarried
and it's opened up an entirely new avenue and
a completely different story to what I actually
had on paper before. So it's really cool to see.
Oh, that is exciting. And what you've effectively
done there from the sound of it, Nathan, is used
a technique that's known as hasping, which is
where we don't just follow one individual. You
actually say, who are the people in the wider
domestic unit or some other people that this
individual I'm interested in might have a connection
to. And by identifying where they are, sometimes
we can reclaim the person that we've been finding
so difficult to unearth. So, yeah, I think sometimes
we can be using some of these techniques without
even realising it as well. Yeah, it's really
exciting as well, because I literally thought
this guy was lost, I'm not going to find him.
And then you feel so proud of yourself, don't
you, when you're like, oh, I've got back on track
now. Oh, the breakthroughs make the effort of
tackling a brick wall. absolutely worthwhile
i think it's it's sort of that thrill of the
chase and then seeing you as you described it
the research opening up into an avenue you might
not have foreseen and then suddenly having that
moment of realization of oh there's a whole dimension
to this story that i hadn't conceived of before
and now i've got the evidence of it let's explore
it further we love new finds i think for the
potential that they hold 100%. That's the exciting
part, isn't it? Nathan and I, we're obsessed
with the new dimensions, aren't we? That's kind
of another door opening on a story. And it's
like watching a TV series, isn't it? You think
you know what's happening and then you're like,
I can't believe what happened in the next episode.
Because, you know, unexpected. Plot twist. Yes,
a plot twist. And it happens the whole time with
us. Every week, the tiniest detail can kind of
result in a plot twist. So Nathan touched on
there about not being able to find somebody.
But sometimes, Sophie, we... We're searching
for an ancestor and we come up with several people
and we're like, we don't know which one of those
search results are relevant to our ancestor.
Are they all relevant to our ancestor? Are there
a few people who are perhaps namesakes? So that
can be quite a frustrating situation. It's not
that you've got nothing. You've kind of got too
much and you don't know what to do next. So what
do you recommend if we find ourselves like that?
Oh, picking your ancestor out of a crowd. Yes.
That's the sort of classic genealogical conundrum,
really. I think ultimately what we all end up
having to do before we add a new individual to
our family tree is say, is this really my ancestor
or someone that just looks like them on paper?
So I think first course of action, I think, for
each and every one of us has to be return to
what we already know. Every bit of our process
in genealogy is based on saying, what do I have
evidence for? What can I prove using whether
that evidence happens to be oral history from
the family or historical records or in some cases,
you know, DNA evidence as well. But returning
to what we know and have evidence for and saying,
what's that evidence telling me? And using that
as a sort of foundation for what we do next,
because that evidence we already have, we're
going to use as a point of comparison or many
points of comparison against all of those individuals
in your search results. So start by going back
to what you already know. And I think sometimes
that can help ground us because when you're faced
with potentially, you know, a list of maybe,
you know, let's say 10, 20, maybe even more namesakes
and you're thinking. well, which one of these
is my person or are none of them the person I'm
looking for? So going back to your evidence,
make sure you've got a firm foundation of evidence
to compare against and then start systematically
working through those individuals in your search
results and comparing them against what you've
already got. So there are some methods that do
this in a particularly systematic way. There's
one method that Helen Osborne wrote about. really
beautifully in her book on genealogical research
techniques. It's called the extract method. And
that's where you perform a comprehensive or as
near as possible to a comprehensive, thorough
search for your person. Drag down a big, long,
potentially, list of search results. And then
you start stepping out into other sort of record
sets in parallel and saying, can I use some other
complementary record sets to this to trace some
of these individuals from my search results and
maybe start. crossing some of them off based
on what I can find out about them once I compare
that extra knowledge about these search results
against what I already know from the evidence
for my person of interest. Sometimes it can be
quite a long process, but I think we learn a
lot about... the environment that we're researching
in as a result. And I think often that really
wonderful deep process of how much we have to
think about not just our person of interest,
but their wider family unit, the context that
they sit in, the location that they're in and
things like that. I think that doesn't just make
us a better researcher. It actually has the potential
to bring much richer stories to the fore as well,
as well as having that satisfaction that Nathan
talked about of the moment when the brick wall
comes down. And if you've had to battle through
a list of search results and you've really worked
with them, you feel that you practically know
and have met those people from, you know, a century
or more ago, then I think you can really feel
comfortable and satisfied that you have. performed
a systematic work through those results and you
really are happy with the conclusions you've
come to it does sound good i like the fact because
it's it's quite kind of confusing and baffling
and and it's a big obstacle isn't it when you've
got lots of people so having a clear system even
if it is you know, time consuming. It doesn't
matter. At least you've got something that you
can take your research forward. You're no longer
stuck. You've got a plan. You can work on it.
Particularly if you throw it into an Excel, you
can gradually strike through everyone who is.
It's about breaking down that what seems like
an insurmountable task into smaller bits. And
I would say what I just described with the extracts
method isn't something you have to bring into
your research every single time. That could be
a sort of a really let's get stuck. in method
if you've got one of those really tricky problems
with an ancestor that just does not want to be
found and that can give you a really good clarity
check on have i have i looked everywhere have
i really considered all the people that might
be my person you can do a sort of smaller scale
version of that if if somebody if it's a sort
of less challenging brick wall but you want to
know that you've been thorough so i think there
are lots of different approaches one can take
and bringing multiple record sets in as well
to say rather than just taking my list of search
results and based on looking at that individual
in one record deciding whether or not it's my
person starting to expand your research you might
want to sort of whittle down that long list into
a short list of a small number of candidates
and say I think I think these are probably the
ones I need to look at and then do some wider
research on them to see do they fit with being
my person or not and where where are the little
discontinuities and things inviting me to ask
more questions I like it I did actually start
doing this so a few years ago this is my mini
anecdote There's an ancestor called Janet McLaren
on our family tree. She's very exciting because
her dad is called Donald McLaren. Donald McLaren
got captured. He was a Jacobite and he was on
the wagon going off to go and get tried. And
he jumped off the wagon, down the cliff, into
the mist and was never seen again. And so...
We have this ancestor, Janet McLaren, who fits
the right time frame. And on a billion and one
trees on Ancestry, there's Janet McLaren with
her dad, Captain Donald McLaren. And she's born
in Balquida in 1783 or something like that. That's
right. Yeah. And anyway, but there's no evidence
that there's that this Janet McLaren. We do have
a Janet McLaren and we have her, you can trace
her children, trace her marriage. But getting
back beyond that, I haven't managed to do this.
So I pulled up a short list of 83 Janet McLarens
who were born in a rough time frame. And I started
working through it on an Excel file back in lockdown.
You know, we all had a bit more spare time and
I haven't got back to her. This is what I need
to do to establish, because all of us, we all
dearly want our ancestor to be Captain Donald
McCarrick. It's so exciting. But as far as I
know, none of us have got any proof. I think
that's a brilliant point, Helen, because I think
each and every one of us has the power to be
swayed by. I think it's like our inner raconteur
is thinking this will be a great story to share
with people. And I think it's understandable
when we see a sort of very tempting potential
ancestor there. there can understandably be the
feeling, as you said, of, oh, you know, surely,
please let this be the person because it'd be
really exciting to have them in the family tree.
And I think... We shouldn't be afraid to take
potential ancestors and leave them in a holder
zone and say, you're very exciting. I'm going
to leave you in that little playpen over there.
Just stay put there in the pen for a while. I'm
going to do some more research and I'll decide
if you're really mine. And I think that could
be one of the most difficult things to do when
a tempting ancestor enters the picture. But I
think, as you said, Helen, having the patience
to say, do you know what? I'm going to take this
over time. I'll be systematic about it. And actually
what it can end up almost turning into is practically
a one name study, can't it? Where you think,
I feel like I've looked through all of these
different people. And learn so much about them.
Sometimes the side effect of that is you manage
to sort of reconstitute family groups for a surname
in the process of working through your search
results. And sometimes that can unlock other
parts of your research where you might go, oh,
well, maybe I've not necessarily found my ancestor,
but possibly I found a collateral branch of the
family and I've worked out how they all relate
to each other. So sometimes there can be unexpected
benefits of that thorough approach as well. That's
a really cool story as well, Helen. We need to
know more about that one. I need to know how
it ends, yes. It might be entirely irrelevant
to mine. The story's cool. He's cool. It's just
like, is he ours? Right. A bit like my bandit
guy from Australia. Again, he was... Somebody
tempted me with a bandit from Australia that
might have been related to me. It's like, probably
not, but it sounds cool. Would you say that there's
a good reason to learn about location then when
it comes to doing your family research? Always.
One of the things I'm a great fan of saying in
my talks, I think you could make a good case
for context being the most important word in
genealogy. Because I think it's not only about
understanding the physical environment that our
ancestors lived in. It's about going back to
those building blocks of our family tree, the
historical records that we're working with. If
we're really going to understand the information
that's on those records, we do actually need
to understand the provenance of the record. Who
created it? Why? Where were they at the time?
And how does that local context or regional or
even national context? influence what's actually
going into that record and how we need to interpret
it so i would say yeah context so important and
as a result a lot of location studies and beautiful
historical maps bring them in at every turn not
only are they gorgeous things to have in your
research i think um i think historical maps get
us asking different kinds of question about our
ancestors and about how much we understand about
our ancestors' worlds. Because I think it's easy
to rattle off a list of locations that are in
our family tree. But then if we ask ourselves,
if somebody took a time machine and magically
dropped me into this ancestral location in that
time and place, would I be able to find my way
around? And I think that's the kind of level
of knowledge we all want to aim for. Do either
of you have any locations in your family tree
where you think, oh, if somebody parachuted me
into that, I think I'd know where I was and be
able to find my way around? I mean, unfortunately
for me, most of my family is so local for the
last few years. I literally know every single
place and street. That's brilliant. I think that
must feed into the richness of your research
so much, though, Nathan, when you're sort of
seeing something from potentially centuries ago
and you go, oh, oh, hello. Yes, I know that bit
of town. It does, because I'm like, oh, I was
there last week. But equally, I create the excitement
of different locations. But again, I guess what
you were saying, looking at the context of the
location. everybody in my tree is coming to Yorkshire
so there's a reason for that isn't there and
it's like obviously a bit of research it's industry
etc and jobs As you say, that idea that you just
mentioned of context and location, it can help
us understand the sort of socioeconomic dynamics
of an area. Why were people employed in certain
lines of work in that place? What's that telling
us? If we understand the ebb and flow of certain
industries in that area, what's that telling
us about ancestral migration? Because coming,
of course, originally from the other side of
the Pennines, I'm from southeast Lancashire.
So, of course, I've got my tree, part of my tree
is chock full of ancestors. from the cotton industry.
But there's the point in the mid -19th century
where some of them disappear from the town they're
usually in because the Lancashire cotton famine
has happened and temporarily the bottom falls
out of the cotton market up in the northwest.
And so some of my ancestors disappear off actually
to Belfast. They go over. over to Belfast, and
they take their existing skills and they go and
work in the flax and linen industries over there
until the cotton industry around Manchester is
back on its feet again. So I think, as you said,
understanding the local context and how that
feeds into industries and occupations can also
tell us about ancestral migration. That's a big
brick wall for so many of us, isn't it? Where
you go, oh, well, my ancestor was here. Where
have they gone? And when migration hits, knowing
where on earth to even go looking for them can
be a really big conundrum. So I would say, yes,
location feeds into that so much. So we're talking
about all the different ways we can kind of...
overcome obstacles and sometimes we are gathering
our information and there's always that kind
of little worry at the back of our mind like
do these details stack up or are there bits which
are jarring with each other so Sophie you know
how do we deal with that how do we kind of we
don't want to overlook the things which are jarring
how do we we've got our set of facts how do we
know what to kind of pick and choose that are
true and which ones are to be wary of? Oh, I
love that. I love that question, Helen. I think
that really cuts to the heart of what a lot of
us have to do when we're solving any problem,
actually, in genealogy, but particularly the
difficult problems, that idea of evidence conflicts.
If you've got a basis of evidence for your person
of interest and you found a new item that might
be them and you're thinking, oh, it could be
them. But there's some little biographical details
or some big biographical details that don't seem
to be matching up. Why is that happening? And
I think sometimes because conflicts of evidence
can feel a bit scary, like things we think, how
on earth am I going to overcome this? And we
know in research we can't always overcome every
single evidence conflict. But I would say. conflicts
of evidence are the seeds of progress. Again,
because they're inviting us to ask questions
about what do I know about my person of interest?
Am I making too many assumptions about how they
might appear in the records? And so I would say
if you find a conflict of evidence in something
that's cropped up. Never ignore it. There's a
reason why many years ago now, a group of genealogists
over in the States developed the genealogical
proof standard that has five different aspects
that have to be satisfied before you can say
you have proven something. And one of those five
pillars of proof is resolving evidence conflicts.
So effectively, you haven't got your proof over
the line until you've resolved those conflicts.
And sometimes you can have a conflict of evidence
like. For a really simple reason, it can be just
a little spelling error in somebody's name or
a natural variant of the name. It could be somebody
using a nickname instead of the name you're used
to seeing them by. Sometimes that evidence conflict
could be speaking to a part of your ancestor's
story that you simply don't know about yet. And
so you see it as a conflict. It's actually inviting
you in. to take a more expansive view on what
their story is and say, oh, if I really delve
into this record that seems to conflict with
the evidence I've got for this person, can I
do some more extensive research about the person
in this new record? And maybe that will either
cast up new information that helps me resolve
the conflict, or it might give me new information
that says, oh. I can see this person isn't actually
the one I'm looking for now. So that's why I
think of conflicts as the seeds of progress.
They will actually, if we're willing to sort
of really tackle them head on, they will help
us discover new things, either about our ancestor
or rule them out of the picture. And there's
a reason why evidence conflicts have to be resolved
before you get that proof over the line. So I
think in the world of kind of training ourselves
up for genealogy, every single day when we tackle
that ancestral research. Learning not to shy
away from those difficult little conflicts. There's
always a wonderful opportunity to learn more,
I think, where we see them. That's really useful.
Yeah, really useful. I just found somebody, so
I'm looking for my, Nathan knows this, my great
-granny's uncle, and they're trying to find his
death. And the only possible entry I can find
in the Irish death records is for a 60 -year
-old confectioner in the north of Ireland in
about 1910. So that sounds, why should I be worried
about this? The reason I'm worried about it is
because the last time I find him, or the second
last time I find him, he's... nicked a ton of
coal and so i'm just like he's had quite a kind
of turnaround in those 15 year that 15 year period
he's gone from coal thief to marrying to potentially
we didn't know where his wife and child are and
then is he really ending his days as a confectioner
i mean that sounds very I hope it is him. That's
a lovely ending to his life, but it's not looking
plausible at the moment. It's looking like a
conflict with a bit capital C. I love that, though,
Helen, because as you say, you've really hit
on that. That's a very obvious conflict, isn't
it? For all the reasons you've described, it
could be somebody who's effectively ended their
days as a sort of, if you will, reformed character.
Do you think that's fair to say? Or as you say,
it could be that it's not the person you're looking
for. So at that point, I would absolutely want
to do more research into this confectioner and
say, ooh. What can I find out about him? What
record sets do I have that might help me tap
into that particular person? And you say there's
migration. If this person is the one that you're
looking for, there's also migration involved.
Is that right? And so looking at the logistics
of that, there's a wonderful part of the CAMPOP
website. It's the Cambridge Institute for the
Study of Population, I think. They've got a wonderful,
they've got so many wonderful resources, including
an interactive map that allows you to plot different
points in the country. And it will tell you at
different... points in time how long it would
take to move between those points and even plot
a route for you based on whether it's a railway
journey whether you're using turnpike roads whether
you're going on just regular horseback whether
you're going on foot in different eras so that's
also a great tool that you can use to see Is
this migration story I've got in my head for
this possible ancestor, is it even viable? So
that's a great way to sort of cross whether or
not you think it's actually really, really them.
Alongside, of course, wider, wider genealogical
research into the person of interest. So thanks,
Sophie. We've talked about so many different
possible ways to stop feeling stuck and to get
started again, different techniques we can weave
together. So do you when you do your research,
do you have a kind of clear set of steps or do
you you know, you've kind of got your your toolbox
and then when you get stuck, you look in the
toolbox and think, what tools am I going to use?
How do you go about it? I would say it's the
toolbox analogy, Helen, because I would say,
you know, we can all have lots of wonderful genealogical
techniques to apply to those really tricky brick
wall problems. We've talked about various ones
in this conversation, haven't we? But I don't
think any of us should ever expect that a particular
genealogical method or tool. should be applicable
to every single research scenario. So I would
absolutely encourage everyone to explore lots
of different techniques, see which ones particularly
sit well with you, and then understand the best
places in which to use those in your research.
So there are certain techniques that might work
really, really well if you've got an abundance
of record sets to work with and you can do lots
of detailed extensive searches. And you might
find that the... There are other methods where
if you don't have abundant resources, you simply
won't be able to apply that method in a really
rigorous way. So I would say choosing the best
course of action is really important. If I've
got a particular research problem and it's a
brick wall, I will step back. And as well as
saying, what evidence do I already have? I'll
say, what is the time and place of this particular
research problem? What's that telling me about
the resources I have available to help me tackle
it? You know, which record sets are available
and workable? What can I access? What can I work
through and how reliable are those particular
resources? And from there, I will then choose
a particular. method of tackling the research
problem depending on what I think is best for
that particular time and place and then I know
I'm using a nice robust method that's going to
most likely stand the best chance of success
and you know what if the first method doesn't
yield an answer I'll then choose a different
item from the toolbox as it were and say okay
let's try something different and I think it
also comes back as well as having good research
methodology. and good tools and techniques to
use, having a good way of visualising our evidence.
Because I know earlier on, Nathan, you talked
about timelines. And we said how I think for
you, and I would also say for me, timelines work
really well, but they don't necessarily work
for everyone. So I would say to anyone listening,
actually. If timelines don't work for you, find
a different way of visualising your evidence,
whether it's an evidence wall, whether it is,
I don't know, sort of printing out big pictures
of particular records and pinning them up on
your wall and really scrutinising them. Finding
some way of visualising your evidence that works
for you, I think, helps you move through that
evidence, see the bigger picture of what you've
got, whether it's an evidence wall, a timeline,
a spreadsheet, a mind map. Getting the bigger
picture is always going to help. And then factoring
in time and place considerations and what records
and techniques are available to you to use. And
then you can start moving through your research
with a way that's going to help the problem most
and talk to people. I think even in these conversations,
we can we can sort of really pick apart our research
problems. Can't we? And I think when we ask questions
of each other, I'd say get get a genealogical
friend and talk to them about the research that
you're struggling with. And sometimes they will
just ask slightly different questions that pull
you out of your current mindset and get you looking
at the problem in a whole new light. And I don't
think that is ever something we should leave
to one side. Conversation helps us. Definitely.
This helps me loads that I think just the word
question, to be honest, is really useful. If
you get stuck, if I'm doing my regular method
and it is very meticulous and organised, I'm
following a very particular structure. But you
just saying when you get stuck, instead of just
being stuck, ask a question that's related. It
opens it up, doesn't it? Straight away. Absolutely.
There's a method I like to use that I call flights
of fancy, where if I'm really stuck and it only
takes five minutes, I think we rely on logic
for very good reasons in our research because
we have to be evidence based and logic helps
us make good decisions. But then sometimes we
can have an underlying assumption about the scenario
that we're researching that is actually holding
us back and we're a bit blinkered. And flights
of fancy for me helps the blinkers come off.
So you set a timer for five minutes. During that
five minute window, you have a pad of paper or,
you know, a... sort of word document or whatever
in front of you and you just write down free
form any thoughts that come to mind about why
you're not solving that research problem at the
moment what what might have happened in the story
you can be as whimsical and silly as you like
the example i like to give is if if you imagine
you've got a migratory ancestor that seems to
have disappeared from the records during that
flights of fancy session You might make some
very sensible remarks about your research approach
and why you think that's maybe not covered all
of the records. But you might equally have a
really whimsical statement of, oh, has John run
away and joined the circus? And that might not
be something that you think has remotely happened.
But within that five minute flights of fancy,
it's OK to do that because I think flights of
fancy allows us to be a bit silly. It allows
us to be a bit playful and it engages the creative
mode of our brain. And that creativity, once
we then after the five minutes are up, you take
your list that might have sensible stuff and
whimsical stuff and you put your sensible hat
back on and you start working through that list
methodically. And sometimes even some of those
whimsical statements can just, as well as making
you smile, make you look at the problem in a
slightly different light. And sometimes that
creativity can kick you out of the rut that you
were in and have you saying, oh. maybe I've actually
not been looking at this from the right angle.
And so, yeah, coupling creative thinking and
critical thinking brings creativity and logic
together. And I think sometimes that's the extra
little ingredient we need as well. So definitely
give that a go if you've got a longstanding brick
wall. Yeah, I love that. I'd definitely do that
one. You have to report back. Let me know how
you go. I don't know. My flights of fancy might
be a bit crazy. There's nothing that is too crazy
for flights of fancy. The whole point is it's
completely unbounded thinking. And I think by
giving ourselves the permission to not have to
be, you know, Mr. or Miss Hospital Corners getting,
you know, dotting the I's and crossing the T's,
it gives us a five or even ten minute, if you
want, ring fence space to just be a bit silly,
be a bit playful, creative. And sometimes that
can actually be the thing that gets us going,
oh. All right. I found it. Yeah. Nothing is too
silly for flights of fancy, Nathan. Just go all
out and see where it gets you. Well, that definitely
suits me then. Excellent. Yeah. As long as you
come back in at the end of the five to ten minutes
and you start being very sensible working through
that list, that brings that brings the right
amount of logical thinking in to keep everything
in check. But yeah, within those five to ten
minutes, just go wild. Nice. OK, this has been
really, really fun and so useful, Sophie. And
if anybody else would love to learn about research
techniques that can help you smash through your
family history brick walls, then we have a brand
new online five week course, which is going to
be tutored by Dr. Sophie Kay. It's called the
Family Tree Brick Walls Workshop. And with it,
you get a digital copy of a brand new workbook
that Sophie's been working on. And Nathan has
actually been designing. So it's a very, very
small team. And this starts on Tuesday, the 2nd
of June. at 7 30 and if you go over to our website
which is www .family -tree .co .uk then you can
find out more about the course find out about
the syllabus and find out how to book your place
to make sure you don't miss out so we'd love
to see you all there and thank you so much sophie
for your time and for your ideas and your enthusiasm
it's been really really fun oh you're welcome
it's a pleasure as always bye then thanks for
listening everybody lovely talking to you thank
you guys thanks bye Thank you.