WEBVTT 00:00:05.969 --> 00:00:08.470 Hello everybody and welcome to Family Tree Talk, 00:00:08.589 --> 00:00:11.529 your favourite family history podcast. I'm your 00:00:11.529 --> 00:00:14.050 co -host Nathan Ward and with me as always is... 00:00:14.050 --> 00:00:18.149 Helen Tovey. Hi Helen, you alright? I'm very, 00:00:18.210 --> 00:00:20.230 very well. Yeah, how are you? I'm good, thank 00:00:20.230 --> 00:00:23.350 you. Yeah. Do you know what? I had a lovely email 00:00:23.350 --> 00:00:27.309 from a podcast listener and he said that he liked 00:00:27.309 --> 00:00:31.089 our apparently... unscripted conversations and 00:00:31.089 --> 00:00:34.689 I'd be like, that is definitely unscripted conversations. 00:00:36.369 --> 00:00:39.990 Yes, our conversations are definitely unscripted. 00:00:40.469 --> 00:00:42.490 Yes. That's why it sounds like nonsense most 00:00:42.490 --> 00:00:45.009 of the time. Yes, but it gets worse. If we try 00:00:45.009 --> 00:00:46.670 and script it, it only gets worse, doesn't it, 00:00:46.670 --> 00:00:49.149 Nathan? We turn into robots, yes. Yes, we have 00:00:49.149 --> 00:00:51.409 tried very occasionally, not for the podcast, 00:00:51.549 --> 00:00:53.549 but we have tried for other things, doing a little 00:00:53.549 --> 00:00:55.090 script and having a plan what we're going to 00:00:55.090 --> 00:00:58.520 say and for whatever reason... It doesn't work 00:00:58.520 --> 00:01:01.420 with Nathan's character or my character. We're 00:01:01.420 --> 00:01:03.619 better off. You might think it's waffle, but 00:01:03.619 --> 00:01:06.219 it's better than it would be otherwise. So this 00:01:06.219 --> 00:01:10.359 is, we're doing our little best. Yep. You're 00:01:10.359 --> 00:01:14.180 getting it unfiltered. Yes. The reader was Christopher. 00:01:14.280 --> 00:01:17.760 Can I read you about what he was writing about? 00:01:18.180 --> 00:01:22.040 Of course you can. So although he does love listening 00:01:22.040 --> 00:01:24.500 to the podcast, when he says it feels like he's 00:01:24.500 --> 00:01:27.530 having a cup of coffee with us. tuning into our 00:01:27.530 --> 00:01:30.430 waffle he also has loads of things he loves about 00:01:30.430 --> 00:01:33.829 the magazine as well and first on his to read 00:01:33.829 --> 00:01:36.650 list when he gets um a copy of family tree magazine 00:01:36.650 --> 00:01:40.989 is diane lindsey's piece he says she always cheers 00:01:40.989 --> 00:01:43.769 him up and where does she get her inspiration 00:01:43.769 --> 00:01:46.109 from And then he scanned through the rest of 00:01:46.109 --> 00:01:48.469 the magazine. And then in this particular issue, 00:01:48.629 --> 00:01:52.670 he noticed a book review by David Annell about 00:01:52.670 --> 00:01:56.430 Professor Thierry King's new book on DNA. So 00:01:56.430 --> 00:01:58.450 that's on his to shop for list the next time 00:01:58.450 --> 00:02:01.930 he passes Waterstones. So it's just interesting. 00:02:02.090 --> 00:02:04.390 Like within Family Tree, there's some really 00:02:04.390 --> 00:02:06.650 big articles, there's some little articles, there's 00:02:06.650 --> 00:02:09.110 reviews, there's little thought pieces, there's 00:02:09.110 --> 00:02:12.229 all sorts of things, obviously all to do with 00:02:12.229 --> 00:02:14.740 family history. And I just, I just. was found 00:02:14.740 --> 00:02:17.319 it interesting, a reader's take on it, what they 00:02:17.319 --> 00:02:20.039 find interesting first. So when you come to design 00:02:20.039 --> 00:02:21.780 the pages, putting you on the spot now, Nathan, 00:02:22.000 --> 00:02:25.120 do you have anything which, what sort of thing, 00:02:25.240 --> 00:02:27.419 what catches your eye when you're putting the 00:02:27.419 --> 00:02:30.199 pages together on the magazine? I think for me 00:02:30.199 --> 00:02:33.780 it's always the super practical ones, like the 00:02:33.780 --> 00:02:37.199 ones that give me facts straight away or places 00:02:37.199 --> 00:02:40.259 to go. Like recently that Phyllis Sherwood one, 00:02:40.379 --> 00:02:43.599 I can't even remember what it was. Which one 00:02:43.599 --> 00:02:46.020 was it, Helen? No, you're putting me on the spot. 00:02:46.120 --> 00:02:47.840 It was hard to find Missing Ancestors, wasn't 00:02:47.840 --> 00:02:50.259 it? That's the one, yeah. It was brilliant. It 00:02:50.259 --> 00:02:52.539 was just like a real practical guide. It's like 00:02:52.539 --> 00:02:54.259 I could literally see myself going, right, I'm 00:02:54.259 --> 00:02:55.759 going to read this and I'm going to go do it. 00:02:56.099 --> 00:02:59.819 And I think the sort of the how -to really draws 00:02:59.819 --> 00:03:03.639 me in. It makes me feel like I'm getting somewhere 00:03:03.639 --> 00:03:08.939 and I like those ones. And amusingly, was it 00:03:08.939 --> 00:03:11.500 the last issue or is it the current issue I'm 00:03:11.500 --> 00:03:13.810 working on? There's an article about, oh, no, 00:03:13.870 --> 00:03:15.550 it's the issue you're working on. It's all about 00:03:15.550 --> 00:03:18.909 forenames. And there was a little section of 00:03:18.909 --> 00:03:22.250 it saying about how some children were named 00:03:22.250 --> 00:03:25.229 after famous battles or et cetera. And obviously, 00:03:25.330 --> 00:03:28.069 I've got my George Horatio Nelson. So I was like, 00:03:28.129 --> 00:03:30.610 that's very interesting. I mean, the bonus joke 00:03:30.610 --> 00:03:33.469 is that the surname there was Nelson. So that's 00:03:33.469 --> 00:03:35.889 cool. But yeah, that drew my attention. So those 00:03:35.889 --> 00:03:40.280 sort of things. Quirky or factual? Everything 00:03:40.280 --> 00:03:43.780 in there is quirky or factual, but is it? Brilliant. 00:03:43.979 --> 00:03:46.539 Yes. I'd subscribe if I didn't have to cheat 00:03:46.539 --> 00:03:51.360 and read it anyway. Yes. And over the years, 00:03:51.460 --> 00:03:53.819 so Diane Lindsay's been writing her column in 00:03:53.819 --> 00:03:56.479 Family Tree for a long, long time. I'd say decades. 00:03:56.900 --> 00:04:00.539 And it's just one page long and it's at the back 00:04:00.539 --> 00:04:03.819 of the magazine. And when we've done surveys 00:04:03.819 --> 00:04:05.060 in the past, we haven't done a reader survey 00:04:05.060 --> 00:04:07.129 for a while, but when... we have done surveys, 00:04:07.349 --> 00:04:10.689 then she very often comes up at or near the top 00:04:10.689 --> 00:04:13.930 of the list. I think it's because it feels as 00:04:13.930 --> 00:04:16.589 though, and she is, she's just a dyed -in -the 00:04:16.589 --> 00:04:19.649 -wool family historian and she's just got so 00:04:19.649 --> 00:04:22.889 much to offer, so many reflections on family 00:04:22.889 --> 00:04:24.230 history, what it's like doing family history. 00:04:24.610 --> 00:04:27.370 Very much in tune with her ancestors. You get 00:04:27.370 --> 00:04:29.009 the feeling she communes with her ancestors. 00:04:29.470 --> 00:04:32.490 Okay. She knows a lot about them. They're very 00:04:32.490 --> 00:04:36.610 real to her. That's lovely. Yes. Well, that's 00:04:36.610 --> 00:04:38.610 conjuring up weird images of seances and things 00:04:38.610 --> 00:04:40.769 for me. What I mean is they're just definitely 00:04:40.769 --> 00:04:44.569 not just names and dates. They're all about the 00:04:44.569 --> 00:04:47.910 stories and adventures and the mishaps and everything 00:04:47.910 --> 00:04:50.290 that they've gone through. Yeah, that's great. 00:04:50.370 --> 00:04:52.250 I can relate to that. It's really good, isn't 00:04:52.250 --> 00:04:56.170 it? Yeah. So I'm sure she'll continue to be at 00:04:56.170 --> 00:04:57.750 the top of any survey. Do you ever do a survey 00:04:57.750 --> 00:04:59.550 again? There's also Jill Shores. Do you ever 00:04:59.550 --> 00:05:01.829 read that? Because Jill Shores is kind of a two 00:05:01.829 --> 00:05:05.160 -page version and it... It just looks as though 00:05:05.160 --> 00:05:07.259 it's two pages of writing, but when you read 00:05:07.259 --> 00:05:09.279 it, I don't know how she manages to pack so much 00:05:09.279 --> 00:05:11.759 into those two little pages. And again, it's 00:05:11.759 --> 00:05:13.579 just her take on family history. But I think 00:05:13.579 --> 00:05:14.959 as family historians, we're definitely nosy. 00:05:14.959 --> 00:05:16.839 We like to know how other people do things, don't 00:05:16.839 --> 00:05:18.800 we? Definitely. There's always, like, different 00:05:18.800 --> 00:05:21.180 and better ways, isn't there? And it is amazing 00:05:21.180 --> 00:05:23.480 how we are also very different with how we do 00:05:23.480 --> 00:05:26.139 our research or don't do our research, as the 00:05:26.139 --> 00:05:29.800 case sometimes is. Recently, we had quite a cool 00:05:29.800 --> 00:05:34.819 discussion in reading a... an AI brick wall club 00:05:34.819 --> 00:05:38.519 well brick wall series of webinars over four 00:05:38.519 --> 00:05:42.379 weeks and there was a bit of a discussion about 00:05:42.379 --> 00:05:45.079 the impact that AI is having on our research 00:05:45.079 --> 00:05:47.300 because obviously we get told over and over again 00:05:47.300 --> 00:05:49.019 we've got to make sure that it's not making up 00:05:49.019 --> 00:05:51.420 things make sure it's not leading us down the 00:05:51.420 --> 00:05:54.300 garden path but equally it does come up with 00:05:54.300 --> 00:05:57.949 really cool clear -minded tactics and strategies 00:05:57.949 --> 00:06:00.089 as little humans we might not necessarily think 00:06:00.089 --> 00:06:02.490 of. And apparently there is already evidence 00:06:02.490 --> 00:06:05.449 coming out. This is what tutor Carol McCulloch 00:06:05.449 --> 00:06:08.089 told us, that AI, not just in family history, 00:06:08.149 --> 00:06:10.470 but within family history as well, is having 00:06:10.470 --> 00:06:13.910 a positive impact on how we use our brains. And 00:06:13.910 --> 00:06:18.329 it is making us be more strategic and methodical. 00:06:18.329 --> 00:06:20.649 So we're learning rather than just having our 00:06:20.649 --> 00:06:24.670 kind of scattergun human. tangled loads of thoughts 00:06:24.670 --> 00:06:26.589 we're able able to think more clearly and able 00:06:26.589 --> 00:06:28.829 to think better so it's not dumbing us down it's 00:06:28.829 --> 00:06:30.730 actually giving us a little bit of a mental upgrade 00:06:30.730 --> 00:06:33.550 right we've been a bit more focused and succinct 00:06:33.550 --> 00:06:36.410 yes definitely more focused i don't know about 00:06:36.410 --> 00:06:39.290 succinct because at ai it churns out so much 00:06:39.290 --> 00:06:41.470 waffle and chat doesn't it like long answers 00:06:41.470 --> 00:06:44.110 unless you tell it not to but if i find if i'm 00:06:44.110 --> 00:06:48.389 asking a question if i am direct and succinct 00:06:48.389 --> 00:06:51.250 and like really on point with it I'll get the 00:06:51.250 --> 00:06:53.449 results I'm after. Whereas if you're a bit waffly 00:06:53.449 --> 00:06:56.610 or a bit floaty, it might take you three or four 00:06:56.610 --> 00:07:01.230 attempts to get to where you want to be. That's 00:07:01.230 --> 00:07:03.870 interesting. It is interesting, isn't it? Yes. 00:07:04.649 --> 00:07:08.250 I'm not talking about AI. Are you not? I've sat 00:07:08.250 --> 00:07:10.589 on my soapbox too much about it already, I think. 00:07:11.389 --> 00:07:12.829 It's not going to go away though, do you think, 00:07:12.829 --> 00:07:15.430 is it? No, it isn't. And I need it for all my 00:07:15.430 --> 00:07:17.149 board games that I don't understand, so it's 00:07:17.149 --> 00:07:20.480 fine. Okay. That's a good use of it then. It 00:07:20.480 --> 00:07:23.600 is a good use. Yes. So what, have you been up 00:07:23.600 --> 00:07:26.879 to family history -wise this week? Well, I've 00:07:26.879 --> 00:07:30.540 just been doing my homework for the course. That's 00:07:30.540 --> 00:07:33.300 been the main thing. So that has been fun because 00:07:33.300 --> 00:07:36.399 Carol's such an organised teacher. So she kind 00:07:36.399 --> 00:07:38.199 of, she said, first of all, I thought this is 00:07:38.199 --> 00:07:40.209 really good. So, you know, you go, oh, I've got 00:07:40.209 --> 00:07:42.509 a brick wall. And she's saying, rather than just 00:07:42.509 --> 00:07:44.009 saying you have a brick wall, you need to come 00:07:44.009 --> 00:07:48.370 up with a one sentence version of what your brick 00:07:48.370 --> 00:07:50.610 wall is. So you can just sum up in one sentence 00:07:50.610 --> 00:07:52.970 exactly what your brick wall is. And it needs 00:07:52.970 --> 00:07:55.050 to include the who, when, where, what. So it 00:07:55.050 --> 00:07:57.029 needs to include those key details. And that's 00:07:57.029 --> 00:07:59.050 actually really clarifying because rather than 00:07:59.050 --> 00:08:01.329 thinking, oh, I've just got a waffly old brick 00:08:01.329 --> 00:08:04.649 wall and just being generally waffly stuck, you 00:08:04.649 --> 00:08:06.610 have to think really clearly, what precisely 00:08:06.610 --> 00:08:09.949 am I stuck on? precisely do I want to get unstuck 00:08:09.949 --> 00:08:13.889 on? What have I already looked at both before 00:08:13.889 --> 00:08:16.250 and after the period I'm stuck on? What do I 00:08:16.250 --> 00:08:19.069 know about the other people surrounding my brick 00:08:19.069 --> 00:08:21.910 wall candidate? All these other things. So it 00:08:21.910 --> 00:08:24.949 does, it doesn't give you a quick and easy answer, 00:08:25.050 --> 00:08:27.529 but it does give you a really methodical set 00:08:27.529 --> 00:08:29.970 of steps to start getting unstuck and making 00:08:29.970 --> 00:08:35.159 checklist methodical progress. With Carol, obviously, 00:08:35.220 --> 00:08:37.740 it's all about AI. So we're using these things, 00:08:37.840 --> 00:08:41.720 using the AI models to help us generate research 00:08:41.720 --> 00:08:44.860 plans and different ways of thinking about it. 00:08:45.379 --> 00:08:48.620 But you could use it, just the sheer fact of 00:08:48.620 --> 00:08:50.759 making a little inventory about your brick wall, 00:08:50.860 --> 00:08:52.080 going what you're stuck on and what you need 00:08:52.080 --> 00:08:55.120 to do and working through, coming up with a research 00:08:55.120 --> 00:08:57.879 plan to help you move forward on it. It's good. 00:08:58.000 --> 00:09:00.539 It's really good. It's a lot of thinking in my 00:09:00.539 --> 00:09:02.799 head, but it is very, very good. Well, that sounds 00:09:02.799 --> 00:09:05.799 like positive progress, doesn't it? Like you 00:09:05.799 --> 00:09:08.000 were saying at the beginning there, if I get 00:09:08.000 --> 00:09:11.100 a brick wall, I literally like, oh, I'm stuck. 00:09:11.700 --> 00:09:14.059 I'll just jump somewhere else on the tree. I 00:09:14.059 --> 00:09:17.240 won't actually analyse why I'm stuck. And even 00:09:17.240 --> 00:09:18.879 though you might not know the answers from analysing 00:09:18.879 --> 00:09:20.480 it, if you do have a list of things to do and 00:09:20.480 --> 00:09:23.019 try, you're partially on your way to unstucking 00:09:23.019 --> 00:09:25.620 yourself, aren't you? Unstucking yourself. It's 00:09:25.620 --> 00:09:27.559 true. It's true. Partly you're on the way to 00:09:27.559 --> 00:09:29.819 unstucking yourself. Partly you can make... concrete 00:09:29.819 --> 00:09:31.700 progress partly if you don't find the answer 00:09:31.700 --> 00:09:35.940 the way we're going with carol we will have a 00:09:35.940 --> 00:09:38.460 clear set of things that we have tried you can 00:09:38.460 --> 00:09:40.179 just write that up and go this is as good as 00:09:40.179 --> 00:09:43.080 it gets it's a bit of a pain but at the moment 00:09:43.080 --> 00:09:46.320 this is as good as it gets in my research which 00:09:46.320 --> 00:09:48.259 is a bit of an annoying thing to have to say 00:09:48.259 --> 00:09:52.379 but sometimes that's that's it isn't it right 00:09:52.379 --> 00:09:56.200 but i haven't lost heart i think i am going to 00:09:56.200 --> 00:09:58.059 i'm definitely going to make progress on mine 00:09:58.820 --> 00:10:01.220 And what are you researching? Are you doing that 00:10:01.220 --> 00:10:03.700 woman that has a fella that jumped out of a wagon? 00:10:04.299 --> 00:10:07.980 Not that one. I'm doing the... I can't bear to 00:10:07.980 --> 00:10:10.279 mention her name on the podcast again. It's Mary 00:10:10.279 --> 00:10:13.139 -Anne Pickering. Woo! But is this continuing 00:10:13.139 --> 00:10:16.559 with her? Yeah. She's become one of my favourite 00:10:16.559 --> 00:10:21.720 ancestors, you know. Weeding through, talking 00:10:21.720 --> 00:10:23.460 about them not being succinct, so the answers, 00:10:23.659 --> 00:10:26.200 put the prompt in, did what Carol said, write 00:10:26.200 --> 00:10:30.399 your prompt. a month which is my this is longer 00:10:30.399 --> 00:10:33.419 than one sentence popped it into prompt cowboy 00:10:33.419 --> 00:10:36.500 to get prompt cowboy to make a better version 00:10:36.500 --> 00:10:38.960 of your prompt and me being me I was like I think 00:10:38.960 --> 00:10:40.820 my prompt's very good but I'll put it into prompt 00:10:40.820 --> 00:10:42.460 cowboy because Carol said that's what you have 00:10:42.460 --> 00:10:44.059 to do and I don't want to disobey the orders 00:10:44.059 --> 00:10:46.639 so I popped it into prompt cowboy and I said 00:10:46.639 --> 00:10:48.899 oh yes Carol is completely right my prompt wasn't 00:10:48.899 --> 00:10:51.490 very good at all and now this is a much much 00:10:51.490 --> 00:10:54.850 better prompt that I can then go off and use 00:10:54.850 --> 00:10:57.889 in any of the other using any of the AI models 00:10:57.889 --> 00:11:00.610 and what's brilliant is you just you've put in 00:11:00.610 --> 00:11:03.269 your scruffy prompt so you've made it as good 00:11:03.269 --> 00:11:06.009 as you possibly can do put it into prompt cowboy 00:11:06.009 --> 00:11:08.529 you can't envisage how it could be better because 00:11:08.529 --> 00:11:09.830 you'd already think you've done such a thorough 00:11:09.830 --> 00:11:13.110 job prompt cowboy makes it clear to you you haven't 00:11:13.110 --> 00:11:15.090 done a very good job comes up with a better prompt 00:11:15.090 --> 00:11:19.649 more comprehensive lengthier but usefully so 00:11:20.299 --> 00:11:22.259 And then when you press copy, just in the bottom 00:11:22.259 --> 00:11:25.519 right -hand corner, it automatically will give 00:11:25.519 --> 00:11:26.700 you the options of whether you want to paste 00:11:26.700 --> 00:11:30.980 to chat, Claude, Complexity, Gemini. It's amazing. 00:11:31.220 --> 00:11:34.039 It's so kind of integrated. Yeah, that sounds 00:11:34.039 --> 00:11:35.940 really cool. I've not heard of that before. That's 00:11:35.940 --> 00:11:38.639 a Carol McCulloch thing. She told us about it 00:11:38.639 --> 00:11:42.740 in AI Bootcamp back in January, but I haven't 00:11:42.740 --> 00:11:44.940 really used it very much because I've been so 00:11:44.940 --> 00:11:47.759 cocksure that I was absolutely... good with my 00:11:47.759 --> 00:11:49.559 prompts and then now i'm like helen you're not 00:11:49.559 --> 00:11:52.980 just just stop thinking you know things when 00:11:52.980 --> 00:11:54.679 you don't so i've been using that that's been 00:11:54.679 --> 00:11:57.299 really good and then i've been actually i've 00:11:57.299 --> 00:11:59.620 been pasting my prompt into all of the models 00:11:59.620 --> 00:12:02.480 just to compare and contrast the answers they 00:12:02.480 --> 00:12:06.340 give me just as a little learning exercise yeah 00:12:06.340 --> 00:12:12.019 nice this all takes time because so far the answers 00:12:12.019 --> 00:12:14.820 that they've given me just simple put put the 00:12:15.230 --> 00:12:18.049 prompt into these four different models and then 00:12:18.049 --> 00:12:21.309 I've now got this is why they're not succinct 00:12:21.309 --> 00:12:22.649 I've asked them to come up with like a research 00:12:22.649 --> 00:12:26.149 plan a checklist of places I can look and whatever 00:12:26.149 --> 00:12:28.629 whatever like summarize the lie of the land and 00:12:28.629 --> 00:12:30.769 they have done but between them it's 11 ,000 00:12:30.769 --> 00:12:34.350 words which I love this because what it's between 00:12:34.350 --> 00:12:35.809 them there's going to be some overlap they're 00:12:35.809 --> 00:12:37.090 going to come up with some different points and 00:12:37.090 --> 00:12:39.149 we're busy wading through this finding out what 00:12:39.149 --> 00:12:40.570 they're doing what they're suggesting similar 00:12:41.360 --> 00:12:43.200 what they're suggesting different, but it does 00:12:43.200 --> 00:12:47.820 feel like a personalised tutorial to help me 00:12:47.820 --> 00:12:50.500 get better at doing this bit of my family history. 00:12:50.639 --> 00:12:54.580 It feels really good. That is cool. Can you put 00:12:54.580 --> 00:12:59.500 those four examples into a different AI and say, 00:12:59.559 --> 00:13:01.220 can you just collect this for me and remove anything 00:13:01.220 --> 00:13:03.620 that's duplicated? Yes, I could do that, but 00:13:03.620 --> 00:13:06.659 I want to use my human brain first and then do 00:13:06.659 --> 00:13:09.659 that afterwards with the AI brain. Yeah, human 00:13:09.659 --> 00:13:11.919 brain. I'm just too old -fashioned. I just need 00:13:11.919 --> 00:13:13.919 to keep checking it, peeping over its shoulder. 00:13:13.980 --> 00:13:16.220 I'm just a bit of a backseat driver. I just need 00:13:16.220 --> 00:13:20.279 to think about it. Yeah? Yeah, yeah. Control 00:13:20.279 --> 00:13:23.440 freak, I think, is the word you're looking for. 00:13:23.500 --> 00:13:26.759 I think I am a control freak, yes. Anyway, it 00:13:26.759 --> 00:13:29.340 is very, very interesting. So that's me just 00:13:29.340 --> 00:13:32.720 pottering around doing those things. Cool. That 00:13:32.720 --> 00:13:35.139 sounds really useful and really practical. Yes. 00:13:35.179 --> 00:13:39.200 Can I tell you the absolute gem that Carol suggested 00:13:39.200 --> 00:13:44.480 today? Please do. So you're doing your research. 00:13:44.700 --> 00:13:48.220 You've got all these, for me, for instance, those 00:13:48.220 --> 00:13:51.419 11 ,000 words of information back from the AI 00:13:51.419 --> 00:13:54.480 models. And she said at the end of each research 00:13:54.480 --> 00:13:59.919 session, then ask the AI model that you're using. 00:13:59.960 --> 00:14:02.039 Let's say I'm... Let's say I was just using one. 00:14:02.139 --> 00:14:04.360 Anyway, ask it to summarise the conversation 00:14:04.360 --> 00:14:07.080 you've had into a succinct summary, maybe of 00:14:07.080 --> 00:14:10.240 four or five sentences, which is suitable for 00:14:10.240 --> 00:14:13.960 putting in your research blog. Genius, isn't 00:14:13.960 --> 00:14:17.779 it? That's brilliant. Yes. I'm instantly jealous 00:14:17.779 --> 00:14:19.840 of this idea. That sounds like saving myself 00:14:19.840 --> 00:14:23.340 work. Yes. Well, honestly, in the chat on the 00:14:23.340 --> 00:14:25.419 course, there was a lot of positive. Everyone 00:14:25.419 --> 00:14:27.379 was like, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant. Loads 00:14:27.379 --> 00:14:29.899 of people loved it. So that is definitely going 00:14:29.899 --> 00:14:32.570 to be... being taken up by the course people 00:14:32.570 --> 00:14:34.409 and anyone else who listens to this. And Carol 00:14:34.409 --> 00:14:36.870 said it's one of those things that after using 00:14:36.870 --> 00:14:39.129 AI, the more you use it, the more you think, 00:14:39.129 --> 00:14:40.610 hey, I think I could use it for that. I think 00:14:40.610 --> 00:14:43.690 I could use it for that. So all credit to her. 00:14:43.850 --> 00:14:47.129 We shall be using it. The Carol McCulloch AI 00:14:47.129 --> 00:14:50.330 summary research log tip. That's brilliant. I 00:14:50.330 --> 00:14:53.250 like that. I like that a lot. Exactly. It's good, 00:14:53.309 --> 00:14:56.389 isn't it? Yeah. It feels like a practical use. 00:14:57.029 --> 00:15:00.340 I've done similar things, but I only... I don't 00:15:00.340 --> 00:15:02.799 really use AI seriously. I only mess around with 00:15:02.799 --> 00:15:05.340 it. And then once a blue moon, I will ask AI 00:15:05.340 --> 00:15:07.899 what it knows about me and to summarize our conversations. 00:15:08.620 --> 00:15:11.379 For no other reason than I'm curious as to what 00:15:11.379 --> 00:15:15.940 I think AI knows. And yeah, it's pointless. But 00:15:15.940 --> 00:15:17.779 actually, if you're using it practically, that's 00:15:17.779 --> 00:15:21.500 brilliant. Intriguing. I might have to take my 00:15:21.500 --> 00:15:25.440 family tree on to chat. But what are the caveats 00:15:25.440 --> 00:15:26.580 you have to watch out for if you're going to 00:15:26.580 --> 00:15:30.460 be doing family history within an AI model? What 00:15:30.460 --> 00:15:33.019 are they? Yes. It's going to lie to you. It's 00:15:33.019 --> 00:15:34.820 going to make names up. It's going to get confused. 00:15:35.940 --> 00:15:40.340 And it's going to, what do you call it, embellish 00:15:40.340 --> 00:15:43.820 all the facts. Well, it may do that, but that's 00:15:43.820 --> 00:15:46.179 not the biggest problem. The main thing you mustn't 00:15:46.179 --> 00:15:48.720 do is put in the details of living people. Oh, 00:15:48.759 --> 00:15:53.549 living people. Yeah. Okay. Yes. I wouldn't do 00:15:53.549 --> 00:15:58.570 that. No, exactly. So it's all safe. Or anonymise 00:15:58.570 --> 00:16:07.990 them in some way, whatever. Yeah. Anyway, how 00:16:07.990 --> 00:16:10.830 about you? How's your family history going? It's 00:16:10.830 --> 00:16:13.009 going okay. I'd like to say it's going better 00:16:13.009 --> 00:16:16.679 than it is. But I didn't have as much time as 00:16:16.679 --> 00:16:19.519 I wanted. It's not, I'm not stuck. I just haven't 00:16:19.519 --> 00:16:23.159 had as much time this week. So I set myself a 00:16:23.159 --> 00:16:27.019 little task to do. And as with all family history 00:16:27.019 --> 00:16:29.460 related things, you just lose yourself in it 00:16:29.460 --> 00:16:32.440 and it goes off on a bit of a tangent. I'll try 00:16:32.440 --> 00:16:34.080 and go through it now, but I've drawn a picture 00:16:34.080 --> 00:16:39.539 of a hedgehog. I just started doodling and I've 00:16:39.539 --> 00:16:41.200 accidentally drawn a hedgehog over my information. 00:16:41.440 --> 00:16:44.740 Right. Okay. So. When we last spoke, I was looking 00:16:44.740 --> 00:16:48.220 at John Hearn, who is my fourth time's great 00:16:48.220 --> 00:16:53.460 -grandfather. Mm -hmm. And I was looking into 00:16:53.460 --> 00:16:58.360 his marriage to Elizabeth, who I had him married 00:16:58.360 --> 00:17:04.319 to her on the 18... Well, he was with her on 00:17:04.319 --> 00:17:10.819 1861. and maybe the 1871 and on the 18... Oh, 00:17:11.000 --> 00:17:13.339 I can't say she was on the 1841 because we both 00:17:13.339 --> 00:17:17.099 know I've not looked at the 1841. Anyway, she 00:17:17.099 --> 00:17:19.640 wasn't on the 1851, so that was my challenge. 00:17:19.680 --> 00:17:21.339 I thought, where's she gone? I'll look for her 00:17:21.339 --> 00:17:24.759 on that. I haven't done that at all. There's 00:17:24.759 --> 00:17:27.740 just been so much other bits. Oh, what have I 00:17:27.740 --> 00:17:29.819 done? So I went to... I did go to find... Oh, 00:17:29.920 --> 00:17:32.359 do you know what, Helen? Back up and give her 00:17:32.359 --> 00:17:34.920 brother room. I actually have found her on the 00:17:34.920 --> 00:17:38.220 1841, so I'm lying to you. I have done something 00:17:38.220 --> 00:17:41.859 I've never done before. So I found her on the 00:17:41.859 --> 00:17:46.519 1841. Oh, my God. So is she married to John at 00:17:46.519 --> 00:17:49.700 that point? I feel like I need to do a super 00:17:49.700 --> 00:17:52.799 recap. This would have been really helpful if 00:17:52.799 --> 00:17:57.440 we were in AI. So... Quick flashback to last 00:17:57.440 --> 00:18:00.539 week. I was looking for John Hearn and I found 00:18:00.539 --> 00:18:03.299 a document saying he married someone called Elizabeth 00:18:03.299 --> 00:18:08.519 in 1831. At that point, I wasn't 100 % sure that 00:18:08.519 --> 00:18:12.180 that was the correct marriage for my John. Now 00:18:12.180 --> 00:18:16.660 I feel it is. So he married Elizabeth, surname 00:18:16.660 --> 00:18:22.440 Thing, in 1831. But I also found a marriage for 00:18:22.440 --> 00:18:26.890 John Hearn in 1821. to a woman called Jane Scopes. 00:18:27.750 --> 00:18:30.829 So my mission was to find out what had gone on 00:18:30.829 --> 00:18:34.789 with Jane. I haven't done that either, but it's 00:18:34.789 --> 00:18:38.809 on my list of things to do. So the marriage to 00:18:38.809 --> 00:18:41.849 Elizabeth, I found a reference to it. It was 00:18:41.849 --> 00:18:44.450 in Suffolk and it was in a place called Creting. 00:18:44.609 --> 00:18:46.329 And I don't know if you remember last week, we 00:18:46.329 --> 00:18:49.279 actually saw... one of the children on one of 00:18:49.279 --> 00:18:51.000 the sentences was born in Cretan. So I was like, 00:18:51.059 --> 00:18:52.900 ooh, common name, et cetera, blah, blah, blah. 00:18:53.019 --> 00:18:57.519 It all was tying up quite nicely. So I thought 00:18:57.519 --> 00:18:59.700 I'd do a little bit of a search on Elizabeth 00:18:59.700 --> 00:19:01.839 to get me further everywhere else. But all I've 00:19:01.839 --> 00:19:04.099 done is got myself further lost in Elizabeth. 00:19:06.160 --> 00:19:09.720 I still haven't found her on the 1851, but that's 00:19:09.720 --> 00:19:12.279 because I just haven't looked yet. I'm quite 00:19:12.279 --> 00:19:15.799 excited to do that. I will do. I found her on 00:19:15.799 --> 00:19:21.690 the 1841. With John. And then I also, on this 00:19:21.690 --> 00:19:26.190 1841, she was with two children that I knew of, 00:19:26.250 --> 00:19:30.529 David and Thomas, who were also on the 1851 with 00:19:30.529 --> 00:19:36.049 them. But then there was also a John and a James. 00:19:36.829 --> 00:19:41.769 Now, last week, I mentioned that I'd found this 00:19:41.769 --> 00:19:45.680 John Hearn Jr. That's why I call him Jr. But 00:19:45.680 --> 00:19:48.119 I wasn't 100 % sure it was related to my John. 00:19:48.319 --> 00:19:52.880 And he was born in 1831. So now I think it is 00:19:52.880 --> 00:19:54.559 because everything's lining up, everything's 00:19:54.559 --> 00:19:57.880 matching. So they got married the same year this 00:19:57.880 --> 00:20:00.660 child was born. So that's cool. So I can follow 00:20:00.660 --> 00:20:04.640 that path a bit. But also in 1841, there's a 00:20:04.640 --> 00:20:07.940 James, a son called James, who is 17 years old. 00:20:08.779 --> 00:20:14.259 So he was born prior to the marriage by a long 00:20:14.259 --> 00:20:17.259 way. which would then obviously then mean that 00:20:17.259 --> 00:20:18.839 that child has come from a different marriage. 00:20:19.559 --> 00:20:22.000 Oh, that's done quite tight. Oh, no, it does. 00:20:22.279 --> 00:20:27.859 In 1841, James is 17. I have John Senior marrying 00:20:27.859 --> 00:20:32.099 this Jane Scopes in 1821. So potentially James 00:20:32.099 --> 00:20:35.880 is the child from that marriage. Potentially. 00:20:36.380 --> 00:20:40.529 So I need to dive in on that one as well. I basically 00:20:40.529 --> 00:20:42.309 have lots more questions. Every time I'm digging 00:20:42.309 --> 00:20:44.170 more stuff, I'm obviously getting more and more 00:20:44.170 --> 00:20:47.049 questions, but they're all quite fun and quite 00:20:47.049 --> 00:20:49.309 intriguing questions and not necessarily yet 00:20:49.309 --> 00:20:53.430 too hard for me to work out, but I'm enjoying 00:20:53.430 --> 00:20:57.069 it. I've also found Elizabeth Hearn as a widow 00:20:57.069 --> 00:21:05.269 in 1881, living with her son -in -law, but her 00:21:05.269 --> 00:21:09.579 son -in -law is married. To someone called Sarah. 00:21:10.519 --> 00:21:14.900 I do not have a Sarah as a daughter. So either 00:21:14.900 --> 00:21:16.900 there's a Sarah as a daughter I've not yet found 00:21:16.900 --> 00:21:21.460 or this son -in -law married. Well, at the moment, 00:21:21.480 --> 00:21:23.460 I've only got one female. I've got Emma. So this 00:21:23.460 --> 00:21:25.539 son -in -law might have married Emma and Emma's 00:21:25.539 --> 00:21:27.900 died and somehow she's like got a good relationship 00:21:27.900 --> 00:21:31.700 with him and now lives with him. So I might be 00:21:31.700 --> 00:21:34.019 overcomplicating that, but that is a potential 00:21:34.019 --> 00:21:36.220 angle that I'm thinking. That's interesting too. 00:21:36.299 --> 00:21:41.140 So how old is Sarah in 1881? In 1881, she's 45. 00:21:43.319 --> 00:21:48.880 So she would have been on the 1841 census, you 00:21:48.880 --> 00:21:53.900 would have thought, if she was Elizabeth's daughter. 00:21:54.819 --> 00:21:58.140 But then the son -in -law, I don't know who he 00:21:58.140 --> 00:22:02.829 is. But again, I've only got Emma, so I need 00:22:02.829 --> 00:22:04.650 to follow Emma's line for a bit and see if I 00:22:04.650 --> 00:22:07.069 can find if she got married and if that's that 00:22:07.069 --> 00:22:10.869 guy. It's quite a nice little jigsaw, this little 00:22:10.869 --> 00:22:14.970 family. There's lots going on. And also, Elijah, 00:22:15.130 --> 00:22:16.670 who I mentioned last week, he was in the Royal 00:22:16.670 --> 00:22:20.049 Navy. He's fast becoming one of my favourites. 00:22:20.089 --> 00:22:22.509 And I don't know anything about him, but he was 00:22:22.509 --> 00:22:26.490 born on Christmas Day in 1843. I just think that's 00:22:26.490 --> 00:22:30.220 cool. So... I'm building quite the character 00:22:30.220 --> 00:22:32.440 for this guy even before I've actually met him 00:22:32.440 --> 00:22:37.460 in the documentation form. So with this kind 00:22:37.460 --> 00:22:40.539 of potential blended family, with first of all 00:22:40.539 --> 00:22:43.700 the children of Jane and John and then the children 00:22:43.700 --> 00:22:46.960 of Elizabeth and John, so how many kids are you 00:22:46.960 --> 00:22:51.640 up to in that family unit? Including James, one, 00:22:51.980 --> 00:22:56.440 two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Eight 00:22:56.440 --> 00:22:59.900 children. That's pretty good. And they're all 00:22:59.900 --> 00:23:04.000 born and showing up on the 41 and 51. Any other 00:23:04.000 --> 00:23:09.220 censuses? James and John are on the 1841 with 00:23:09.220 --> 00:23:15.220 family. They then disappear. 1851, everybody 00:23:15.220 --> 00:23:22.039 else is there. Yeah. Yeah. And then 1861, there's 00:23:22.039 --> 00:23:26.079 another James. That's confusing. Different ages. 00:23:26.420 --> 00:23:30.700 Yes, how old's that James then? That James is... 00:23:30.700 --> 00:23:35.500 Brief interlude. I'm going to have to open a 00:23:35.500 --> 00:23:38.039 census up here because I don't have that to hand. 00:23:38.220 --> 00:23:39.900 I might have had it to hand. It might just look 00:23:39.900 --> 00:23:43.480 like a hedgehog now. Whatever. Hot tip. Don't 00:23:43.480 --> 00:23:45.380 draw hedgehogs on your family tree research. 00:23:46.420 --> 00:23:48.740 No, don't. I mean, it's quite a nice looking 00:23:48.740 --> 00:23:51.299 hedgehog. I've done something wrong on my tree. 00:23:51.359 --> 00:23:53.380 This is an aside now. I've done something wrong 00:23:53.380 --> 00:23:57.140 on my tree because... I thought I'd put Elizabeth 00:23:57.140 --> 00:24:00.980 Thing's parents on because I'd found them. They're 00:24:00.980 --> 00:24:04.180 not appearing, so I don't know. I don't know. 00:24:04.259 --> 00:24:05.660 Oh, do you know what? It's gone nuts, actually. 00:24:06.039 --> 00:24:08.480 My tree's gone nuts. I've got Elizabeth Thing 00:24:08.480 --> 00:24:13.700 married to John Hearn. This is an aside. I do 00:24:13.700 --> 00:24:17.519 apologise. But also, it's got a potential match 00:24:17.519 --> 00:24:20.460 of Elizabeth Thing. You know, like when Ancestry 00:24:20.460 --> 00:24:23.960 gives you its own matches. It doesn't think my 00:24:23.960 --> 00:24:29.079 Elizabeth thing is its Elizabeth thing. So now 00:24:29.079 --> 00:24:32.900 it's making it look like... It's making it look 00:24:32.900 --> 00:24:34.880 like there's two Elizabeth things and one of 00:24:34.880 --> 00:24:39.140 them isn't real. Grumble. Right. Ignore me, but 00:24:39.140 --> 00:24:42.720 that's just something for me to sort. What did 00:24:42.720 --> 00:24:46.299 I just say I'm looking at? 1851 census. Yeah. 00:24:46.559 --> 00:24:49.299 It's just interesting because whenever we look 00:24:49.299 --> 00:24:51.839 at one census, you see the parents there with... 00:24:52.119 --> 00:24:54.599 sort of a modern day number of children three 00:24:54.599 --> 00:24:56.619 or five children or whatever and then you think 00:24:56.619 --> 00:24:58.660 you've got everyone and I just love it when we 00:24:58.660 --> 00:25:00.720 look at the censuses before and after whichever 00:25:00.720 --> 00:25:03.299 particular censuses we were looking at and then 00:25:03.299 --> 00:25:05.420 you find even more children and you wait a minute 00:25:05.420 --> 00:25:08.319 this is it's not just how we have it that you 00:25:08.319 --> 00:25:10.000 have a few kids and they live in the house and 00:25:10.000 --> 00:25:13.539 then they at some point they leave home there 00:25:13.539 --> 00:25:17.420 you have lots of kids over many decades and they 00:25:17.420 --> 00:25:20.000 might leave home at all different ages so you're 00:25:20.000 --> 00:25:25.380 James who's not there in the 1851 he hopefully 00:25:25.380 --> 00:25:28.619 has left and is gainfully employed somewhere 00:25:28.619 --> 00:25:31.119 but then the fact you've got another James turning 00:25:31.119 --> 00:25:33.359 up I'm like oh no maybe you're going to be having 00:25:33.359 --> 00:25:35.160 to check in the death records for that James 00:25:35.160 --> 00:25:37.539 as well just to make sure or what else is going 00:25:37.539 --> 00:25:42.680 on there so many things each clue has another 00:25:42.680 --> 00:25:46.220 little to do task off the back of it doesn't 00:25:46.220 --> 00:25:49.700 it that's what I'm enjoying but equally This 00:25:49.700 --> 00:25:51.720 one's bringing me lots of little to -dos and 00:25:51.720 --> 00:25:54.619 little checks to go on. But yeah, the James on 00:25:54.619 --> 00:25:59.579 the 1851 is five years old. But then you're like, 00:25:59.680 --> 00:26:01.519 well, if they've named another child James, is 00:26:01.519 --> 00:26:03.819 that in honour of the first James? Has he died? 00:26:04.180 --> 00:26:06.339 It could be. I think you need to be finding out 00:26:06.339 --> 00:26:11.140 about... First of all, look for James Hearns 00:26:11.140 --> 00:26:16.640 between 1841. I think it was taken in... June 00:26:16.640 --> 00:26:21.240 wasn't it so between June 1841 and how old did 00:26:21.240 --> 00:26:24.319 you say this little lad was five or six in 1851 00:26:24.319 --> 00:26:30.079 it's five in 1851 yeah yeah so between June 1841 00:26:30.079 --> 00:26:37.700 and then 1846 47 just have a search and see if 00:26:37.700 --> 00:26:41.400 you can find a young James Hearn yeah won't hopefully 00:26:41.400 --> 00:26:44.150 there's something else going on but Yeah, the 00:26:44.150 --> 00:26:48.170 other one should be 27. But equally, that's from 00:26:48.170 --> 00:26:49.970 a potential first marriage that I still have 00:26:49.970 --> 00:26:53.069 to explore as well. Yes. Maybe Elizabeth just 00:26:53.069 --> 00:26:55.210 really wanted a son called James and she didn't 00:26:55.210 --> 00:26:58.430 care that I already had one. So many options. 00:26:59.109 --> 00:27:02.809 So many options, yes. You said you've got her 00:27:02.809 --> 00:27:08.670 dad. What was her dad's name? Well, I said I've 00:27:08.670 --> 00:27:11.009 got a dad, but like I've just said, it hasn't 00:27:11.009 --> 00:27:15.460 logged it. Oh, it has. Oh, I need to tidy this. 00:27:15.539 --> 00:27:18.980 It's gone a bit crazy. So her dad's called John 00:27:18.980 --> 00:27:22.059 Thing and her mum's called Mary Thing. What a 00:27:22.059 --> 00:27:25.359 great surname. Absolutely love it. Yeah, and 00:27:25.359 --> 00:27:28.059 I love it as well that the surname has come to 00:27:28.059 --> 00:27:31.700 be kind of true. I have to say, when you said 00:27:31.700 --> 00:27:33.819 she was called Elizabeth Thing, I was like, really? 00:27:35.359 --> 00:27:39.599 But it is proving to be a proper surname. Yeah. 00:27:40.259 --> 00:27:42.400 Yes. I have cheated a little bit, but I've been 00:27:42.400 --> 00:27:44.019 talking about it. I was like, let's find out 00:27:44.019 --> 00:27:46.099 about the thing surname. And it says that it 00:27:46.099 --> 00:27:49.839 is potentially can have several origins, but 00:27:49.839 --> 00:27:52.839 one of them is a place name surname originating 00:27:52.839 --> 00:27:58.640 from Shropshire or Suffolk. Suffolk name. It's 00:27:58.640 --> 00:28:01.299 pretty cool, isn't it? Perfect tie in that. That 00:28:01.299 --> 00:28:04.339 makes me feel even more confident. Yeah. Yeah. 00:28:04.460 --> 00:28:06.299 I mean, I've not done any of the map research 00:28:06.299 --> 00:28:08.589 that you told me to go do, which. I think I'm 00:28:08.589 --> 00:28:10.269 going to have to do, because clearly I'm going 00:28:10.269 --> 00:28:12.950 to be hanging around in Suffolk for a bit. Yeah, 00:28:13.990 --> 00:28:16.930 that's good. I'm a little bit confused by what 00:28:16.930 --> 00:28:19.869 Ancestry's done to me, though. It hasn't created 00:28:19.869 --> 00:28:22.109 duplicate entries. It just hasn't registered 00:28:22.109 --> 00:28:27.690 Elizabeth as the natural spouse. Let's have a 00:28:27.690 --> 00:28:29.990 look, then. Can you share your screen? I can 00:28:29.990 --> 00:28:34.309 share my screen. Can you see my screen? I can 00:28:34.309 --> 00:28:37.380 see your screen, yes. This is Elizabeth. She's 00:28:37.380 --> 00:28:40.319 very naughtily got parents John Thing and Mary 00:28:40.319 --> 00:28:43.799 Thing. I need to find Mary Things. You need to 00:28:43.799 --> 00:28:48.440 edit Mary Thing's surname away. Oh, I just love 00:28:48.440 --> 00:28:52.099 it. Do it now, naughty Nathan. And you can do 00:28:52.099 --> 00:28:54.059 that Krista Cowan hack. You can just put five 00:28:54.059 --> 00:28:56.000 underscores in there because then it means you 00:28:56.000 --> 00:28:58.240 can search for everyone. It means you've actively 00:28:58.240 --> 00:29:00.799 know. Let's say you didn't put any surname in 00:29:00.799 --> 00:29:03.819 there. then you might just think you forgot to 00:29:03.819 --> 00:29:06.079 add it in. Whereas if you add in five underscores, 00:29:06.079 --> 00:29:10.140 you're showing that that maiden name hasn't been 00:29:10.140 --> 00:29:14.119 findable for that ancestor so far. But get rid 00:29:14.119 --> 00:29:15.740 of the word thing as well. Get rid of the word 00:29:15.740 --> 00:29:18.059 thing. Remove the word thing. Oh, my good God. 00:29:18.220 --> 00:29:22.400 Maiden name. But what if I have two Marys in 00:29:22.400 --> 00:29:24.960 my tree at some point and they're both Mary with 00:29:24.960 --> 00:29:27.460 five underscores? Okay, leave it in then. That 00:29:27.460 --> 00:29:29.859 could be your system. I'm just going to put it 00:29:29.859 --> 00:29:34.970 back. It's a thing. I mean, what are the chances 00:29:34.970 --> 00:29:37.009 of having someone called Mary in your tree anyway? 00:29:38.609 --> 00:29:43.230 They're everywhere. Right. So if I go to my actual 00:29:43.230 --> 00:29:47.029 tree, you normally have your person and then 00:29:47.029 --> 00:29:52.369 their potential wife or husband. It hasn't put 00:29:52.369 --> 00:29:54.869 Elizabeth thing in the potential wife or husband. 00:29:54.950 --> 00:29:57.390 It's put her as like a second marriage. I mean, 00:29:57.410 --> 00:30:01.089 she's a second marriage, but... Ancestry still 00:30:01.089 --> 00:30:05.690 firmly believes that Elizabeth Thing is the wife. 00:30:06.170 --> 00:30:07.890 Would you want to click on that potential one 00:30:07.890 --> 00:30:10.890 and see what it's going to tell you? Found the 00:30:10.890 --> 00:30:15.309 mother of David Hearn. Review details. Yeah, 00:30:15.329 --> 00:30:17.650 yeah, all these facts match with everything I've 00:30:17.650 --> 00:30:22.289 got. I think it's the same person. Maybe I'll 00:30:22.289 --> 00:30:26.670 delete my Elizabeth. No, just put, um, just click 00:30:26.670 --> 00:30:31.839 yes. I'm not clicking yes. Not without all the 00:30:31.839 --> 00:30:34.960 facts. It's all matching up to everything you've 00:30:34.960 --> 00:30:37.079 just been talking about. I know, okay. But this 00:30:37.079 --> 00:30:41.700 is the 1841 census. Yes. Okay. Well. You can't 00:30:41.700 --> 00:30:43.640 see me right now because this is a podcast, but 00:30:43.640 --> 00:30:45.619 I have my hands over my eyes as I press yes. 00:30:46.519 --> 00:30:52.839 And then merge them. Merge them? Oh, look. Mary 00:30:52.839 --> 00:30:57.339 Hall. It thinks her name's Mary Hall. And who 00:30:57.339 --> 00:31:00.059 does it think that your other Elizabeth Thing's 00:31:00.059 --> 00:31:03.200 parents are then? Because it's got them. So click 00:31:03.200 --> 00:31:08.400 on her and see. John. Oh, sugar. John Thing and 00:31:08.400 --> 00:31:10.579 Mary Thing. That was the closest I've ever come 00:31:10.579 --> 00:31:13.500 to swearing on a podcast. It doesn't even have 00:31:13.500 --> 00:31:15.559 an up arrow for her to have parents yet. I've 00:31:15.559 --> 00:31:18.980 got John Thing and Mary underscore. It's because 00:31:18.980 --> 00:31:21.700 she wasn't your main line on the book you'd selected. 00:31:21.839 --> 00:31:26.299 I think you had her husband. So her little side 00:31:26.299 --> 00:31:28.299 branch of the tree was just showing their tiny, 00:31:28.440 --> 00:31:31.539 wasn't it? It's just annoying because I've put 00:31:31.539 --> 00:31:34.960 in one, two, three, four, five sources already. 00:31:35.880 --> 00:31:37.640 It doesn't even have all the kids either, does 00:31:37.640 --> 00:31:44.839 it? I am vexed. Merge. Do I merge here or do 00:31:44.839 --> 00:31:48.140 I merge the proper one? I don't think it matters. 00:31:48.940 --> 00:31:52.119 Okay, you're dangerous. Maybe I'm in a bit of 00:31:52.119 --> 00:31:55.259 a dangerous mood today, aren't I? There's no 00:31:55.259 --> 00:31:58.759 logical reason to think why you haven't got them 00:31:58.759 --> 00:32:01.240 both. Maybe you shouldn't trust me. Maybe I'm 00:32:01.240 --> 00:32:06.019 in a strange mood. I do need to do this. I do 00:32:06.019 --> 00:32:09.440 agree with you. I just won't do it live. Let's 00:32:09.440 --> 00:32:15.200 not rush. Okay. Let's be methodical. Okay. You're 00:32:15.200 --> 00:32:19.319 dangerous, right? Yeah. Yeah. Feeling a bit reckless. 00:32:20.329 --> 00:32:22.630 You don't have to be reckless with someone else's 00:32:22.630 --> 00:32:24.109 family tree, is it? I'm sorry about that, Nathan. 00:32:24.289 --> 00:32:27.190 It's fine, it's fine. It's a good job I resisted 00:32:27.190 --> 00:32:30.470 the urge. Yes. I do have one question. I know 00:32:30.470 --> 00:32:32.849 I've probably asked this question before, but 00:32:32.849 --> 00:32:37.609 looking at Elizabeth Thing... Yes. She is my 00:32:37.609 --> 00:32:42.410 fourth -time great -grandmother. Yes. But so 00:32:42.410 --> 00:32:45.890 is Jane Scopes. She's not on the tree yet. She's 00:32:45.890 --> 00:32:50.150 the marriage that I haven't fully... Sorted out, 00:32:50.170 --> 00:32:54.349 yeah. Which one of those women is my fourth time's 00:32:54.349 --> 00:32:57.930 great -grandmother? The one who is the mother 00:32:57.930 --> 00:33:02.750 of your third great -grandparent. Yeah, I realised 00:33:02.750 --> 00:33:06.250 as I said it. Yes. Which would be David, right? 00:33:06.809 --> 00:33:10.049 Yes. And that was the child. Right, roger that. 00:33:10.150 --> 00:33:12.430 That makes total sense. I don't know why I couldn't 00:33:12.430 --> 00:33:16.049 work that out. No, so you can put on Jane. That's 00:33:16.049 --> 00:33:19.740 completely fine. And you can even put on Jane's 00:33:19.740 --> 00:33:21.579 children. You can put on Jane's grandchildren 00:33:21.579 --> 00:33:26.299 or great -grandchildren. Because you're looking 00:33:26.299 --> 00:33:28.839 at your tree on ancestry, so you can see all 00:33:28.839 --> 00:33:30.519 the siblings for all of the branches and all 00:33:30.519 --> 00:33:32.980 of the people. But then let's say you had added 00:33:32.980 --> 00:33:36.660 Jane and all of her many children and grandchildren, 00:33:36.880 --> 00:33:39.599 great -grandchildren. If you switch the view 00:33:39.599 --> 00:33:43.640 so that you saw it going horizontally, so you're 00:33:43.640 --> 00:33:46.079 just seeing a traditional kind of pedigree layout 00:33:46.079 --> 00:33:49.890 of just your actual... direct lines your parents 00:33:49.890 --> 00:33:52.829 grandparents great -grandparents etc then you 00:33:52.829 --> 00:33:57.809 wouldn't see um jane visible you're only going 00:33:57.809 --> 00:34:01.670 to see elizabeth and your your main event people 00:34:01.670 --> 00:34:05.529 yeah yeah yeah that makes sense and both both 00:34:05.529 --> 00:34:08.469 some people can't stand the other way because 00:34:08.469 --> 00:34:10.670 it's too confusing seeing all of those siblings 00:34:10.670 --> 00:34:14.170 and then some people don't like this way i say 00:34:14.170 --> 00:34:16.489 some people me i don't like this way i like seeing 00:34:16.489 --> 00:34:20.059 all the relations I like the vertical tree more 00:34:20.059 --> 00:34:23.139 than the horizontal tree, but I will actively 00:34:23.139 --> 00:34:27.059 go and hide all siblings so I just see direct 00:34:27.059 --> 00:34:30.739 line. And then when I'm feeling that urge to 00:34:30.739 --> 00:34:32.719 get a bit more interested and whimsical, then 00:34:32.719 --> 00:34:34.500 I'll let some of the siblings out of the cage. 00:34:35.519 --> 00:34:39.099 But yeah, I'm enjoying this little bit of research. 00:34:39.159 --> 00:34:42.599 It's cool. It's lots of days and facts, but it's... 00:34:43.719 --> 00:34:45.800 It's intriguing. It's little bits of puzzles 00:34:45.800 --> 00:34:47.940 and everyone's connected to the other one and 00:34:47.940 --> 00:34:49.900 I can't get the fact I want without finding out 00:34:49.900 --> 00:34:53.079 about five other people beforehand. Saying that 00:34:53.079 --> 00:34:55.519 out loud sounds tiring, but actually that's part 00:34:55.519 --> 00:34:56.980 of the thrill of the chase, isn't it? It's like 00:34:56.980 --> 00:34:58.760 I need this one fact and then it's going to let 00:34:58.760 --> 00:35:02.000 me say 100 % yes and I like that. That really 00:35:02.000 --> 00:35:05.119 excites me. And also I find this really interesting 00:35:05.119 --> 00:35:07.969 because for ages... In quite a lot of podcasts, 00:35:08.150 --> 00:35:11.110 you go, I'm not touching 1841 census. It's pretty 00:35:11.110 --> 00:35:13.210 much as bad as DNA. I'm just not touching it. 00:35:13.289 --> 00:35:14.969 And then now you've just blithely been using 00:35:14.969 --> 00:35:19.070 it. You've been looking at records that predate 00:35:19.070 --> 00:35:21.349 it and just happy, happy. You haven't even worried 00:35:21.349 --> 00:35:27.190 about it. I mean, yeah. I wouldn't say I'm happy 00:35:27.190 --> 00:35:30.590 with it, but I've used it. I was quite excited 00:35:30.590 --> 00:35:34.389 to find what I wanted from it. I've made notes, 00:35:34.429 --> 00:35:36.110 though, that I need to add people because the 00:35:36.110 --> 00:35:39.329 1841, like you've said before, won't let you 00:35:39.329 --> 00:35:41.610 add wholesale. You've got to go in individually 00:35:41.610 --> 00:35:45.230 to each person. So, like, for this James and 00:35:45.230 --> 00:35:48.349 this John that only appear in the 1841, I don't 00:35:48.349 --> 00:35:50.969 actually have them on my tree yet because when 00:35:50.969 --> 00:35:54.489 I added Elizabeth from 1841, it didn't pull them 00:35:54.489 --> 00:35:57.809 in. I need to go back and do that. I think that's 00:35:57.809 --> 00:36:00.429 just it. I'm just really lazy. So that's what 00:36:00.429 --> 00:36:04.670 the 1841... Makes me feel... But yeah, it has 00:36:04.670 --> 00:36:07.349 been good. It spurred me on to try and get further 00:36:07.349 --> 00:36:09.170 back and not be scared of the records. Like, 00:36:09.170 --> 00:36:13.849 I've had a lot of baptism records appear that 00:36:13.849 --> 00:36:16.869 predate the 1841 and a few wedding certificates 00:36:16.869 --> 00:36:19.550 which are completely different out there to what 00:36:19.550 --> 00:36:22.889 we're used to, which is quite fun to see. I've 00:36:22.889 --> 00:36:26.170 enjoyed that. I say I've enjoyed it. It has given 00:36:26.170 --> 00:36:29.349 me a little bit of terror, but... It looks like 00:36:29.349 --> 00:36:30.849 someone's just written something on a piece of 00:36:30.849 --> 00:36:34.650 paper. This is a fact, have it? That is exactly 00:36:34.650 --> 00:36:36.150 what's happened. They have just written it on 00:36:36.150 --> 00:36:38.070 a piece of paper. Just a very special piece of 00:36:38.070 --> 00:36:41.730 paper. Yeah. I'm slowly sort of having a bit 00:36:41.730 --> 00:36:44.289 more faith and believing that it is real. But 00:36:44.289 --> 00:36:47.449 yeah, that's been good. Yeah, I think it's impressive. 00:36:48.289 --> 00:36:51.789 Next week, DNA. Do you know, I think you might 00:36:51.789 --> 00:36:55.489 actually do that. No, let's not be silly. I mean, 00:36:55.510 --> 00:36:56.889 maybe you won't because you're just having too 00:36:56.889 --> 00:36:58.530 much fun in the actual records at the moment. 00:36:58.849 --> 00:37:01.550 But I think you're just going to, there'll be 00:37:01.550 --> 00:37:03.489 some reason or other where you just, before you 00:37:03.489 --> 00:37:07.690 know it, on a podcast soon, you'll just blithely 00:37:07.690 --> 00:37:09.369 go, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, no matches, 00:37:09.469 --> 00:37:11.670 blah, blah, blah, blah, cluster, cluster. Yeah. 00:37:13.210 --> 00:37:15.929 I mean, no doubt, no doubt. I think I will get 00:37:15.929 --> 00:37:18.929 there eventually. I'm just dragging my heels 00:37:18.929 --> 00:37:20.630 and trying to find everything else I can find 00:37:20.630 --> 00:37:23.699 before that point. You mentioned at the start 00:37:23.699 --> 00:37:26.159 how much you like games and things like that. 00:37:26.260 --> 00:37:28.639 So I think you're going to really like the DNA 00:37:28.639 --> 00:37:33.280 from that sort of aspect. Really? Yes. Has it 00:37:33.280 --> 00:37:36.719 got a puzzle aspect to it? Yes, puzzles, collecting, 00:37:37.119 --> 00:37:40.739 sorting. I think it's right up your street. Okay, 00:37:40.800 --> 00:37:44.000 cool. Yeah. I guess, I mean, we've mentioned 00:37:44.000 --> 00:37:46.840 it before, but I just, in my mind, I haven't 00:37:46.840 --> 00:37:50.230 had an actual... Honest reason. Mysteries, stories, 00:37:50.510 --> 00:37:53.429 people from all over the place. Because your 00:37:53.429 --> 00:37:56.349 DNA matches, there's a very good chance you're 00:37:56.349 --> 00:37:59.190 going to get lots outside the UK. So that's fun. 00:37:59.550 --> 00:38:03.309 Not just pudsy. Not just pudsy. If you get something 00:38:03.309 --> 00:38:05.030 pudsy there, you've got to meet up with them 00:38:05.030 --> 00:38:10.550 for a drink. That'd be fun. Or dick. Yes. It 00:38:10.550 --> 00:38:13.440 sounds terrifying. Well, it depends how closely 00:38:13.440 --> 00:38:15.480 related you are. It could be terrifying, but 00:38:15.480 --> 00:38:18.340 hopefully it'll be distant enough to be fun. 00:38:18.960 --> 00:38:25.519 Cool. Yes. Not too shocking. Yes. Yeah. Well, 00:38:25.619 --> 00:38:27.119 I say keep up the good work. I think you're doing 00:38:27.119 --> 00:38:30.780 amazingly, Nathan. Yeah. It's just weird, isn't 00:38:30.780 --> 00:38:35.550 it? Like, for weeks I've been so... merrily involved 00:38:35.550 --> 00:38:38.809 in like texture and context and local history 00:38:38.809 --> 00:38:40.869 and been like i don't want facts i don't want 00:38:40.869 --> 00:38:43.309 figures and now i'm in the facts and figures 00:38:43.309 --> 00:38:46.110 and i'm absolutely loving it it just shows you 00:38:46.110 --> 00:38:48.489 how big the scope is of the job though or the 00:38:48.489 --> 00:38:51.750 task definitely this is just one strand of my 00:38:51.750 --> 00:38:56.010 fourth to get to my fifth which looks quite attainable 00:38:56.010 --> 00:38:58.309 from what i'm getting but i just want to obviously 00:38:58.309 --> 00:39:00.369 make sure all the facts match before i let anybody 00:39:00.369 --> 00:39:03.570 on my tree But it's brought in a lot of extra 00:39:03.570 --> 00:39:05.750 people just to get two more names on my tree. 00:39:05.829 --> 00:39:08.010 It's crazy. And then I've got to do that, I don't 00:39:08.010 --> 00:39:10.610 know how many times. How many fourth slash fifth 00:39:10.610 --> 00:39:16.530 times grandparents have you got? Loads. 64. So 00:39:16.530 --> 00:39:23.829 you've got 16, two times greats. 32, three times 00:39:23.829 --> 00:39:27.309 greats. 64, four times greats. Wow. That's a 00:39:27.309 --> 00:39:29.809 lot, isn't it? So if each one of them brings 00:39:29.809 --> 00:39:33.320 me eight other... in just to get back to my fifth. 00:39:34.039 --> 00:39:39.980 That's a lot of people. Yes. Yes. Cool. Oh, yeah, 00:39:40.019 --> 00:39:41.679 I'm going to get my tree completely finished 00:39:41.679 --> 00:39:44.400 by next week. I think you might do. Completely 00:39:44.400 --> 00:39:48.820 finished. It's impossible, guys. You can't do 00:39:48.820 --> 00:39:52.380 it. No, I do think you'd want to, Nathan. Well, 00:39:52.400 --> 00:39:54.199 it's not possible, is it? It's not possible. 00:39:54.400 --> 00:39:56.780 You can get stuck, like literally totally stuck. 00:39:57.460 --> 00:39:59.800 Yes. Even that seems quite hard work when there's 00:39:59.800 --> 00:40:02.099 so many people to go at. Yeah, there's always 00:40:02.099 --> 00:40:03.500 something else to do, even if you're stuck on 00:40:03.500 --> 00:40:07.460 one bit. There is. Yes. The tough thing is, right, 00:40:07.519 --> 00:40:09.059 I'm enjoying doing this and I want to keep doing 00:40:09.059 --> 00:40:12.199 this on everyone else, but I'm already, like 00:40:12.199 --> 00:40:14.460 I've mentioned a few times, I'm very interested 00:40:14.460 --> 00:40:17.980 in Elijah and his Christmas Day birth and being 00:40:17.980 --> 00:40:20.800 in the Navy and stuff. I guess I'll just give 00:40:20.800 --> 00:40:22.699 myself a side quest just to learn a bit about 00:40:22.699 --> 00:40:26.260 him. And that sounds great. I mean, what a lovely 00:40:26.260 --> 00:40:28.280 flow you've got there. You're doing some more 00:40:28.280 --> 00:40:30.760 tree building. You're getting another generation 00:40:30.760 --> 00:40:33.739 and all of those branches. You're working out 00:40:33.739 --> 00:40:36.519 a bit of a blended family. You're learning about 00:40:36.519 --> 00:40:39.860 a new geographical area that you haven't found 00:40:39.860 --> 00:40:43.300 ancestors in before. So that's your kind of regular 00:40:43.300 --> 00:40:46.840 tree building stuff, plus dipping back a bit 00:40:46.840 --> 00:40:49.300 further in time to new records you're not familiar 00:40:49.300 --> 00:40:52.940 with. And I actually feel you've built that up. 00:40:53.179 --> 00:40:55.460 as securely and fully as you want to for the 00:40:55.460 --> 00:40:57.659 moment, then, as you say, you can have your side 00:40:57.659 --> 00:41:01.380 quest into Victorian naval records. It's brilliant. 00:41:01.699 --> 00:41:04.900 What a great side quest. Yeah? Yeah, no, it does 00:41:04.900 --> 00:41:08.300 sound good. It's fascinating, though, isn't it? 00:41:08.300 --> 00:41:11.039 Like, what brings you, what draws you into different 00:41:11.039 --> 00:41:14.460 people? And then, like, we were just discussing 00:41:14.460 --> 00:41:16.900 the potential of James dying and there being 00:41:16.900 --> 00:41:20.449 another James. I'm going to then spend some time 00:41:20.449 --> 00:41:22.570 looking for that. And I already will spend time 00:41:22.570 --> 00:41:24.989 looking for that because I need to find out about 00:41:24.989 --> 00:41:28.710 his mother and that potential marriage. So suddenly 00:41:28.710 --> 00:41:31.190 spending a little bit more time with a very select 00:41:31.190 --> 00:41:34.250 few people, whereas I've mentioned there's like 00:41:34.250 --> 00:41:36.730 eight children and I'm only really focusing on 00:41:36.730 --> 00:41:38.550 maybe two or three of them. The other ones I'm 00:41:38.550 --> 00:41:41.130 ignoring for now. It's interesting what pulls 00:41:41.130 --> 00:41:44.519 you in. And then also, because then at another 00:41:44.519 --> 00:41:47.300 point you might revisit that branch and there'll 00:41:47.300 --> 00:41:48.960 be one of those children you never looked at 00:41:48.960 --> 00:41:50.760 before. And for whatever reason, maybe you've 00:41:50.760 --> 00:41:54.320 subsequently seen them mentioned in a will or 00:41:54.320 --> 00:41:57.280 there'll be some reason which draw your attention 00:41:57.280 --> 00:41:59.579 to them, even if they're not a direct line. And 00:41:59.579 --> 00:42:01.840 you'll think, how did I not look at Emily before? 00:42:01.920 --> 00:42:05.440 I mean, her story is incredible. Yeah. Yeah, 00:42:05.539 --> 00:42:07.900 definitely. Making up there's an Emily, you know, 00:42:07.900 --> 00:42:11.849 whatever. I got you. I got you. Yeah. Yeah. And 00:42:11.849 --> 00:42:13.230 this hedgehog that they've got in the family, 00:42:13.309 --> 00:42:17.389 he's lovely. Yes. Well, it's very important to 00:42:17.389 --> 00:42:20.190 look after the hedgehogs, isn't it? It is. I 00:42:20.190 --> 00:42:23.409 saw one last week. I was sat out in the garden 00:42:23.409 --> 00:42:27.369 late at night and just having a chat. And this 00:42:27.369 --> 00:42:29.409 little hedgehog came sniffing around. It was 00:42:29.409 --> 00:42:32.690 lovely. It is very exciting. We've got a hedgehog 00:42:32.690 --> 00:42:35.590 near us, or maybe two hedgehogs. I'm kind of 00:42:35.590 --> 00:42:38.190 hoping it's two. I have seen two at one time, 00:42:38.190 --> 00:42:39.750 so there were two. So hopefully they're both 00:42:39.750 --> 00:42:42.610 still alive. It's exciting. I've been giving 00:42:42.610 --> 00:42:45.070 them water and giving them dog food, but they 00:42:45.070 --> 00:42:47.570 don't like our dog's current dog food. So they 00:42:47.570 --> 00:42:49.190 can't be that hungry because they're leaving 00:42:49.190 --> 00:42:53.010 some of the dog's dog food. They're very specific 00:42:53.010 --> 00:42:55.090 in what they eat. They are. They don't like this 00:42:55.090 --> 00:42:56.750 one. They don't like the dog food which has jelly 00:42:56.750 --> 00:42:59.909 in it. They're like... I can't blame them. Yeah. 00:43:00.769 --> 00:43:03.250 Cool. It was nice to see one. I haven't seen 00:43:03.250 --> 00:43:06.309 one for years. Yeah. I just think our ancestors 00:43:06.309 --> 00:43:08.829 would have seen so many of them. Whereas we, 00:43:08.929 --> 00:43:11.980 sadly, we've had... Loads of them, which we've 00:43:11.980 --> 00:43:15.619 run over with our automobiles. And then now they're 00:43:15.619 --> 00:43:18.480 getting dehydrated because of our climate change. 00:43:18.860 --> 00:43:22.300 Yeah. It's bad news to be a hedgehog. It is. 00:43:22.340 --> 00:43:24.039 Well, we've put a bowl of water out for it, so. 00:43:24.400 --> 00:43:27.980 Good. Can I quickly chip in there? This is back 00:43:27.980 --> 00:43:29.300 to Christopher's emails because they were so 00:43:29.300 --> 00:43:31.739 funny. So, you know, we were talking about your 00:43:31.739 --> 00:43:36.119 Airfix models the other day. Yes. talking about 00:43:36.119 --> 00:43:38.599 them, brought back Christopher's memories of 00:43:38.599 --> 00:43:41.440 him removing the accumulated dust off his Airfix 00:43:41.440 --> 00:43:44.039 kits. He used to have to stand on the bed with 00:43:44.039 --> 00:43:46.400 a paintbrush in his hand. Health and safety risk. 00:43:46.840 --> 00:43:49.039 In the early days, the ceilings were papered 00:43:49.039 --> 00:43:51.320 so it was easy to push a pin between the paper 00:43:51.320 --> 00:43:53.679 and the ceiling with cotton thread attached and 00:43:53.679 --> 00:43:56.440 then you could suspend your Airfix models from 00:43:56.440 --> 00:44:00.179 the ceiling. Nice. It's really good, isn't it? 00:44:00.699 --> 00:44:04.760 It is cool. I don't like dusting. I do feel the 00:44:04.760 --> 00:44:09.019 dusting. It's irritating. I don't like the dusting, 00:44:09.019 --> 00:44:12.860 but I like the Airfix models. I use a toothbrush 00:44:12.860 --> 00:44:16.920 now on mine. Do you? I've got the Lego models 00:44:16.920 --> 00:44:19.719 now, but I'll sit and happily spend an afternoon 00:44:19.719 --> 00:44:24.260 with a toothbrush scrubbing it. Whatever. It's 00:44:24.260 --> 00:44:27.300 very therapeutic, actually. Yes, it's satisfying, 00:44:27.519 --> 00:44:30.500 isn't it? Yes, I clearly need to get out more. 00:44:31.489 --> 00:44:35.349 No, I think it's fine to have happy, simple pleasures. 00:44:37.210 --> 00:44:38.829 You've got family history, some of your other 00:44:38.829 --> 00:44:40.289 pleasures, because that's not so simple, so you 00:44:40.289 --> 00:44:41.889 need to have some really simple pleasures. I 00:44:41.889 --> 00:44:44.210 mean, happy and simple, it's two things that 00:44:44.210 --> 00:44:46.889 describe me nicely. And then you can mull over 00:44:46.889 --> 00:44:48.949 family history stuff while you're doing the dusting. 00:44:49.409 --> 00:44:52.230 You can, you can indeed. It's just good, isn't 00:44:52.230 --> 00:44:54.190 it? I'm excited to have names that I'm interested 00:44:54.190 --> 00:44:57.130 in. I was so worried for a long time that I was 00:44:57.130 --> 00:44:59.409 never going to have that intrigue factor again. 00:45:00.529 --> 00:45:03.070 George Horatio. I love him to death. Blah, blah, 00:45:03.110 --> 00:45:04.710 blah, blah, blah. I talk about him all the time. 00:45:04.889 --> 00:45:08.329 I was so drawn into his life and I just didn't 00:45:08.329 --> 00:45:11.210 know how that happened. And I didn't think it 00:45:11.210 --> 00:45:14.530 could necessarily happen again in just searching 00:45:14.530 --> 00:45:17.230 for a bunch of names, but apparently it does. 00:45:17.670 --> 00:45:19.949 That's funny, isn't it? I agree with you. I don't 00:45:19.949 --> 00:45:23.250 think you can, you can't put a finger on why 00:45:23.250 --> 00:45:28.269 you warm or don't warm. or curiosity peaked to 00:45:28.269 --> 00:45:31.690 some ancestors in other ways. It's strange. Yeah. 00:45:31.869 --> 00:45:34.409 Just, what are you doing? There are three or 00:45:34.409 --> 00:45:36.110 four on my tree that I've already got, but there 00:45:36.110 --> 00:45:37.829 are definitely lines where I've just gone back 00:45:37.829 --> 00:45:40.250 and they are literally just names and dates. 00:45:40.269 --> 00:45:42.710 Like, previously I had moaned to you about saying 00:45:42.710 --> 00:45:45.809 I'm finding it a bit boring just finding names 00:45:45.809 --> 00:45:47.949 and dates, and it's because none of them pulled 00:45:47.949 --> 00:45:50.909 me in. And I don't know, again, what's happened 00:45:50.909 --> 00:45:53.309 here, but... I guess a little bit of mystery 00:45:53.309 --> 00:45:55.250 and intrigue does pull you in. Oh, I need to 00:45:55.250 --> 00:45:58.150 find out where this is and where it lies. Suddenly 00:45:58.150 --> 00:46:02.389 I'm in this tree. It's cool. So yeah, so my task 00:46:02.389 --> 00:46:05.190 is to somehow carry on with this. I don't think 00:46:05.190 --> 00:46:07.170 I'm going to investigate Elijah yet. He will 00:46:07.170 --> 00:46:10.349 be safe for a rainy day. I need to shore up all 00:46:10.349 --> 00:46:13.130 the details. That's my challenge for next week. 00:46:13.170 --> 00:46:14.809 And I think that'll be more than enough to keep 00:46:14.809 --> 00:46:18.449 me busy. And you can find out as well whether 00:46:18.449 --> 00:46:20.710 you did go ahead and do that merge with duplicate 00:46:20.710 --> 00:46:23.559 or not. I'll definitely do that because I can 00:46:23.559 --> 00:46:26.619 feel that irritating me already. I'm just, yeah, 00:46:26.699 --> 00:46:29.280 it's making me feel a bit twitchy. Sweaty, some 00:46:29.280 --> 00:46:35.179 might say. Yes. So my list, I've got the marriage 00:46:35.179 --> 00:46:38.800 to Jane Scopes. I have got the potential of Elizabeth 00:46:38.800 --> 00:46:42.900 living with her son -in -law and finding out 00:46:42.900 --> 00:46:46.659 who this Sarah is. I need to find out what happened 00:46:46.659 --> 00:46:50.000 to James in case he died. That's it. That's my 00:46:50.000 --> 00:46:53.719 tasks. They're my three tasks. Anything else 00:46:53.719 --> 00:46:56.699 is a bonus. Sounds really good. I think that's 00:46:56.699 --> 00:46:58.400 enough. I think that'll be a lot, and I think 00:46:58.400 --> 00:47:00.539 I'll end up with probably another 26 people on 00:47:00.539 --> 00:47:04.079 my tree just doing that. I look forward to hearing 00:47:04.079 --> 00:47:07.800 how you get on next week, Nathan. Yes. Okay, 00:47:07.900 --> 00:47:10.539 thanks for listening then, everybody. I've just 00:47:10.539 --> 00:47:12.360 been there without saying what I'm going to do 00:47:12.360 --> 00:47:13.659 over the next week, but I do know what I'm going 00:47:13.659 --> 00:47:16.059 to do, but I'm not going to say it. I did wonder 00:47:16.059 --> 00:47:19.039 what you were like, oh, we're going now. We're 00:47:19.039 --> 00:47:21.139 going to go now. I'm just going to carry on with 00:47:21.139 --> 00:47:26.079 my AI homework. Yeah. Okay. Okay. But thanks 00:47:26.079 --> 00:47:28.119 for listening, everybody. And we look forward 00:47:28.119 --> 00:47:30.460 to you tuning in next week. And thanks, Nathan, 00:47:30.559 --> 00:47:33.400 for sharing all of your lovely discoveries. They 00:47:33.400 --> 00:47:35.840 do sound good. No problem. And happy researching, 00:47:35.920 --> 00:47:37.019 everybody. Bye.