Hello everybody and welcome to Family Tree Talk,
your favourite family history podcast. I'm your
co -host Nathan Ward and with me as always is...
Helen Tovey. Hi Helen, you alright? I'm very,
very well. Yeah, how are you? I'm good, thank
you. Yeah. Do you know what? I had a lovely email
from a podcast listener and he said that he liked
our apparently... unscripted conversations and
I'd be like, that is definitely unscripted conversations.
Yes, our conversations are definitely unscripted.
Yes. That's why it sounds like nonsense most
of the time. Yes, but it gets worse. If we try
and script it, it only gets worse, doesn't it,
Nathan? We turn into robots, yes. Yes, we have
tried very occasionally, not for the podcast,
but we have tried for other things, doing a little
script and having a plan what we're going to
say and for whatever reason... It doesn't work
with Nathan's character or my character. We're
better off. You might think it's waffle, but
it's better than it would be otherwise. So this
is, we're doing our little best. Yep. You're
getting it unfiltered. Yes. The reader was Christopher.
Can I read you about what he was writing about?
Of course you can. So although he does love listening
to the podcast, when he says it feels like he's
having a cup of coffee with us. tuning into our
waffle he also has loads of things he loves about
the magazine as well and first on his to read
list when he gets um a copy of family tree magazine
is diane lindsey's piece he says she always cheers
him up and where does she get her inspiration
from And then he scanned through the rest of
the magazine. And then in this particular issue,
he noticed a book review by David Annell about
Professor Thierry King's new book on DNA. So
that's on his to shop for list the next time
he passes Waterstones. So it's just interesting.
Like within Family Tree, there's some really
big articles, there's some little articles, there's
reviews, there's little thought pieces, there's
all sorts of things, obviously all to do with
family history. And I just, I just. was found
it interesting, a reader's take on it, what they
find interesting first. So when you come to design
the pages, putting you on the spot now, Nathan,
do you have anything which, what sort of thing,
what catches your eye when you're putting the
pages together on the magazine? I think for me
it's always the super practical ones, like the
ones that give me facts straight away or places
to go. Like recently that Phyllis Sherwood one,
I can't even remember what it was. Which one
was it, Helen? No, you're putting me on the spot.
It was hard to find Missing Ancestors, wasn't
it? That's the one, yeah. It was brilliant. It
was just like a real practical guide. It's like
I could literally see myself going, right, I'm
going to read this and I'm going to go do it.
And I think the sort of the how -to really draws
me in. It makes me feel like I'm getting somewhere
and I like those ones. And amusingly, was it
the last issue or is it the current issue I'm
working on? There's an article about, oh, no,
it's the issue you're working on. It's all about
forenames. And there was a little section of
it saying about how some children were named
after famous battles or et cetera. And obviously,
I've got my George Horatio Nelson. So I was like,
that's very interesting. I mean, the bonus joke
is that the surname there was Nelson. So that's
cool. But yeah, that drew my attention. So those
sort of things. Quirky or factual? Everything
in there is quirky or factual, but is it? Brilliant.
Yes. I'd subscribe if I didn't have to cheat
and read it anyway. Yes. And over the years,
so Diane Lindsay's been writing her column in
Family Tree for a long, long time. I'd say decades.
And it's just one page long and it's at the back
of the magazine. And when we've done surveys
in the past, we haven't done a reader survey
for a while, but when... we have done surveys,
then she very often comes up at or near the top
of the list. I think it's because it feels as
though, and she is, she's just a dyed -in -the
-wool family historian and she's just got so
much to offer, so many reflections on family
history, what it's like doing family history.
Very much in tune with her ancestors. You get
the feeling she communes with her ancestors.
Okay. She knows a lot about them. They're very
real to her. That's lovely. Yes. Well, that's
conjuring up weird images of seances and things
for me. What I mean is they're just definitely
not just names and dates. They're all about the
stories and adventures and the mishaps and everything
that they've gone through. Yeah, that's great.
I can relate to that. It's really good, isn't
it? Yeah. So I'm sure she'll continue to be at
the top of any survey. Do you ever do a survey
again? There's also Jill Shores. Do you ever
read that? Because Jill Shores is kind of a two
-page version and it... It just looks as though
it's two pages of writing, but when you read
it, I don't know how she manages to pack so much
into those two little pages. And again, it's
just her take on family history. But I think
as family historians, we're definitely nosy.
We like to know how other people do things, don't
we? Definitely. There's always, like, different
and better ways, isn't there? And it is amazing
how we are also very different with how we do
our research or don't do our research, as the
case sometimes is. Recently, we had quite a cool
discussion in reading a... an AI brick wall club
well brick wall series of webinars over four
weeks and there was a bit of a discussion about
the impact that AI is having on our research
because obviously we get told over and over again
we've got to make sure that it's not making up
things make sure it's not leading us down the
garden path but equally it does come up with
really cool clear -minded tactics and strategies
as little humans we might not necessarily think
of. And apparently there is already evidence
coming out. This is what tutor Carol McCulloch
told us, that AI, not just in family history,
but within family history as well, is having
a positive impact on how we use our brains. And
it is making us be more strategic and methodical.
So we're learning rather than just having our
kind of scattergun human. tangled loads of thoughts
we're able able to think more clearly and able
to think better so it's not dumbing us down it's
actually giving us a little bit of a mental upgrade
right we've been a bit more focused and succinct
yes definitely more focused i don't know about
succinct because at ai it churns out so much
waffle and chat doesn't it like long answers
unless you tell it not to but if i find if i'm
asking a question if i am direct and succinct
and like really on point with it I'll get the
results I'm after. Whereas if you're a bit waffly
or a bit floaty, it might take you three or four
attempts to get to where you want to be. That's
interesting. It is interesting, isn't it? Yes.
I'm not talking about AI. Are you not? I've sat
on my soapbox too much about it already, I think.
It's not going to go away though, do you think,
is it? No, it isn't. And I need it for all my
board games that I don't understand, so it's
fine. Okay. That's a good use of it then. It
is a good use. Yes. So what, have you been up
to family history -wise this week? Well, I've
just been doing my homework for the course. That's
been the main thing. So that has been fun because
Carol's such an organised teacher. So she kind
of, she said, first of all, I thought this is
really good. So, you know, you go, oh, I've got
a brick wall. And she's saying, rather than just
saying you have a brick wall, you need to come
up with a one sentence version of what your brick
wall is. So you can just sum up in one sentence
exactly what your brick wall is. And it needs
to include the who, when, where, what. So it
needs to include those key details. And that's
actually really clarifying because rather than
thinking, oh, I've just got a waffly old brick
wall and just being generally waffly stuck, you
have to think really clearly, what precisely
am I stuck on? precisely do I want to get unstuck
on? What have I already looked at both before
and after the period I'm stuck on? What do I
know about the other people surrounding my brick
wall candidate? All these other things. So it
does, it doesn't give you a quick and easy answer,
but it does give you a really methodical set
of steps to start getting unstuck and making
checklist methodical progress. With Carol, obviously,
it's all about AI. So we're using these things,
using the AI models to help us generate research
plans and different ways of thinking about it.
But you could use it, just the sheer fact of
making a little inventory about your brick wall,
going what you're stuck on and what you need
to do and working through, coming up with a research
plan to help you move forward on it. It's good.
It's really good. It's a lot of thinking in my
head, but it is very, very good. Well, that sounds
like positive progress, doesn't it? Like you
were saying at the beginning there, if I get
a brick wall, I literally like, oh, I'm stuck.
I'll just jump somewhere else on the tree. I
won't actually analyse why I'm stuck. And even
though you might not know the answers from analysing
it, if you do have a list of things to do and
try, you're partially on your way to unstucking
yourself, aren't you? Unstucking yourself. It's
true. It's true. Partly you're on the way to
unstucking yourself. Partly you can make... concrete
progress partly if you don't find the answer
the way we're going with carol we will have a
clear set of things that we have tried you can
just write that up and go this is as good as
it gets it's a bit of a pain but at the moment
this is as good as it gets in my research which
is a bit of an annoying thing to have to say
but sometimes that's that's it isn't it right
but i haven't lost heart i think i am going to
i'm definitely going to make progress on mine
And what are you researching? Are you doing that
woman that has a fella that jumped out of a wagon?
Not that one. I'm doing the... I can't bear to
mention her name on the podcast again. It's Mary
-Anne Pickering. Woo! But is this continuing
with her? Yeah. She's become one of my favourite
ancestors, you know. Weeding through, talking
about them not being succinct, so the answers,
put the prompt in, did what Carol said, write
your prompt. a month which is my this is longer
than one sentence popped it into prompt cowboy
to get prompt cowboy to make a better version
of your prompt and me being me I was like I think
my prompt's very good but I'll put it into prompt
cowboy because Carol said that's what you have
to do and I don't want to disobey the orders
so I popped it into prompt cowboy and I said
oh yes Carol is completely right my prompt wasn't
very good at all and now this is a much much
better prompt that I can then go off and use
in any of the other using any of the AI models
and what's brilliant is you just you've put in
your scruffy prompt so you've made it as good
as you possibly can do put it into prompt cowboy
you can't envisage how it could be better because
you'd already think you've done such a thorough
job prompt cowboy makes it clear to you you haven't
done a very good job comes up with a better prompt
more comprehensive lengthier but usefully so
And then when you press copy, just in the bottom
right -hand corner, it automatically will give
you the options of whether you want to paste
to chat, Claude, Complexity, Gemini. It's amazing.
It's so kind of integrated. Yeah, that sounds
really cool. I've not heard of that before. That's
a Carol McCulloch thing. She told us about it
in AI Bootcamp back in January, but I haven't
really used it very much because I've been so
cocksure that I was absolutely... good with my
prompts and then now i'm like helen you're not
just just stop thinking you know things when
you don't so i've been using that that's been
really good and then i've been actually i've
been pasting my prompt into all of the models
just to compare and contrast the answers they
give me just as a little learning exercise yeah
nice this all takes time because so far the answers
that they've given me just simple put put the
prompt into these four different models and then
I've now got this is why they're not succinct
I've asked them to come up with like a research
plan a checklist of places I can look and whatever
whatever like summarize the lie of the land and
they have done but between them it's 11 ,000
words which I love this because what it's between
them there's going to be some overlap they're
going to come up with some different points and
we're busy wading through this finding out what
they're doing what they're suggesting similar
what they're suggesting different, but it does
feel like a personalised tutorial to help me
get better at doing this bit of my family history.
It feels really good. That is cool. Can you put
those four examples into a different AI and say,
can you just collect this for me and remove anything
that's duplicated? Yes, I could do that, but
I want to use my human brain first and then do
that afterwards with the AI brain. Yeah, human
brain. I'm just too old -fashioned. I just need
to keep checking it, peeping over its shoulder.
I'm just a bit of a backseat driver. I just need
to think about it. Yeah? Yeah, yeah. Control
freak, I think, is the word you're looking for.
I think I am a control freak, yes. Anyway, it
is very, very interesting. So that's me just
pottering around doing those things. Cool. That
sounds really useful and really practical. Yes.
Can I tell you the absolute gem that Carol suggested
today? Please do. So you're doing your research.
You've got all these, for me, for instance, those
11 ,000 words of information back from the AI
models. And she said at the end of each research
session, then ask the AI model that you're using.
Let's say I'm... Let's say I was just using one.
Anyway, ask it to summarise the conversation
you've had into a succinct summary, maybe of
four or five sentences, which is suitable for
putting in your research blog. Genius, isn't
it? That's brilliant. Yes. I'm instantly jealous
of this idea. That sounds like saving myself
work. Yes. Well, honestly, in the chat on the
course, there was a lot of positive. Everyone
was like, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant. Loads
of people loved it. So that is definitely going
to be... being taken up by the course people
and anyone else who listens to this. And Carol
said it's one of those things that after using
AI, the more you use it, the more you think,
hey, I think I could use it for that. I think
I could use it for that. So all credit to her.
We shall be using it. The Carol McCulloch AI
summary research log tip. That's brilliant. I
like that. I like that a lot. Exactly. It's good,
isn't it? Yeah. It feels like a practical use.
I've done similar things, but I only... I don't
really use AI seriously. I only mess around with
it. And then once a blue moon, I will ask AI
what it knows about me and to summarize our conversations.
For no other reason than I'm curious as to what
I think AI knows. And yeah, it's pointless. But
actually, if you're using it practically, that's
brilliant. Intriguing. I might have to take my
family tree on to chat. But what are the caveats
you have to watch out for if you're going to
be doing family history within an AI model? What
are they? Yes. It's going to lie to you. It's
going to make names up. It's going to get confused.
And it's going to, what do you call it, embellish
all the facts. Well, it may do that, but that's
not the biggest problem. The main thing you mustn't
do is put in the details of living people. Oh,
living people. Yeah. Okay. Yes. I wouldn't do
that. No, exactly. So it's all safe. Or anonymise
them in some way, whatever. Yeah. Anyway, how
about you? How's your family history going? It's
going okay. I'd like to say it's going better
than it is. But I didn't have as much time as
I wanted. It's not, I'm not stuck. I just haven't
had as much time this week. So I set myself a
little task to do. And as with all family history
related things, you just lose yourself in it
and it goes off on a bit of a tangent. I'll try
and go through it now, but I've drawn a picture
of a hedgehog. I just started doodling and I've
accidentally drawn a hedgehog over my information.
Right. Okay. So. When we last spoke, I was looking
at John Hearn, who is my fourth time's great
-grandfather. Mm -hmm. And I was looking into
his marriage to Elizabeth, who I had him married
to her on the 18... Well, he was with her on
1861. and maybe the 1871 and on the 18... Oh,
I can't say she was on the 1841 because we both
know I've not looked at the 1841. Anyway, she
wasn't on the 1851, so that was my challenge.
I thought, where's she gone? I'll look for her
on that. I haven't done that at all. There's
just been so much other bits. Oh, what have I
done? So I went to... I did go to find... Oh,
do you know what, Helen? Back up and give her
brother room. I actually have found her on the
1841, so I'm lying to you. I have done something
I've never done before. So I found her on the
1841. Oh, my God. So is she married to John at
that point? I feel like I need to do a super
recap. This would have been really helpful if
we were in AI. So... Quick flashback to last
week. I was looking for John Hearn and I found
a document saying he married someone called Elizabeth
in 1831. At that point, I wasn't 100 % sure that
that was the correct marriage for my John. Now
I feel it is. So he married Elizabeth, surname
Thing, in 1831. But I also found a marriage for
John Hearn in 1821. to a woman called Jane Scopes.
So my mission was to find out what had gone on
with Jane. I haven't done that either, but it's
on my list of things to do. So the marriage to
Elizabeth, I found a reference to it. It was
in Suffolk and it was in a place called Creting.
And I don't know if you remember last week, we
actually saw... one of the children on one of
the sentences was born in Cretan. So I was like,
ooh, common name, et cetera, blah, blah, blah.
It all was tying up quite nicely. So I thought
I'd do a little bit of a search on Elizabeth
to get me further everywhere else. But all I've
done is got myself further lost in Elizabeth.
I still haven't found her on the 1851, but that's
because I just haven't looked yet. I'm quite
excited to do that. I will do. I found her on
the 1841. With John. And then I also, on this
1841, she was with two children that I knew of,
David and Thomas, who were also on the 1851 with
them. But then there was also a John and a James.
Now, last week, I mentioned that I'd found this
John Hearn Jr. That's why I call him Jr. But
I wasn't 100 % sure it was related to my John.
And he was born in 1831. So now I think it is
because everything's lining up, everything's
matching. So they got married the same year this
child was born. So that's cool. So I can follow
that path a bit. But also in 1841, there's a
James, a son called James, who is 17 years old.
So he was born prior to the marriage by a long
way. which would then obviously then mean that
that child has come from a different marriage.
Oh, that's done quite tight. Oh, no, it does.
In 1841, James is 17. I have John Senior marrying
this Jane Scopes in 1821. So potentially James
is the child from that marriage. Potentially.
So I need to dive in on that one as well. I basically
have lots more questions. Every time I'm digging
more stuff, I'm obviously getting more and more
questions, but they're all quite fun and quite
intriguing questions and not necessarily yet
too hard for me to work out, but I'm enjoying
it. I've also found Elizabeth Hearn as a widow
in 1881, living with her son -in -law, but her
son -in -law is married. To someone called Sarah.
I do not have a Sarah as a daughter. So either
there's a Sarah as a daughter I've not yet found
or this son -in -law married. Well, at the moment,
I've only got one female. I've got Emma. So this
son -in -law might have married Emma and Emma's
died and somehow she's like got a good relationship
with him and now lives with him. So I might be
overcomplicating that, but that is a potential
angle that I'm thinking. That's interesting too.
So how old is Sarah in 1881? In 1881, she's 45.
So she would have been on the 1841 census, you
would have thought, if she was Elizabeth's daughter.
But then the son -in -law, I don't know who he
is. But again, I've only got Emma, so I need
to follow Emma's line for a bit and see if I
can find if she got married and if that's that
guy. It's quite a nice little jigsaw, this little
family. There's lots going on. And also, Elijah,
who I mentioned last week, he was in the Royal
Navy. He's fast becoming one of my favourites.
And I don't know anything about him, but he was
born on Christmas Day in 1843. I just think that's
cool. So... I'm building quite the character
for this guy even before I've actually met him
in the documentation form. So with this kind
of potential blended family, with first of all
the children of Jane and John and then the children
of Elizabeth and John, so how many kids are you
up to in that family unit? Including James, one,
two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Eight
children. That's pretty good. And they're all
born and showing up on the 41 and 51. Any other
censuses? James and John are on the 1841 with
family. They then disappear. 1851, everybody
else is there. Yeah. Yeah. And then 1861, there's
another James. That's confusing. Different ages.
Yes, how old's that James then? That James is...
Brief interlude. I'm going to have to open a
census up here because I don't have that to hand.
I might have had it to hand. It might just look
like a hedgehog now. Whatever. Hot tip. Don't
draw hedgehogs on your family tree research.
No, don't. I mean, it's quite a nice looking
hedgehog. I've done something wrong on my tree.
This is an aside now. I've done something wrong
on my tree because... I thought I'd put Elizabeth
Thing's parents on because I'd found them. They're
not appearing, so I don't know. I don't know.
Oh, do you know what? It's gone nuts, actually.
My tree's gone nuts. I've got Elizabeth Thing
married to John Hearn. This is an aside. I do
apologise. But also, it's got a potential match
of Elizabeth Thing. You know, like when Ancestry
gives you its own matches. It doesn't think my
Elizabeth thing is its Elizabeth thing. So now
it's making it look like... It's making it look
like there's two Elizabeth things and one of
them isn't real. Grumble. Right. Ignore me, but
that's just something for me to sort. What did
I just say I'm looking at? 1851 census. Yeah.
It's just interesting because whenever we look
at one census, you see the parents there with...
sort of a modern day number of children three
or five children or whatever and then you think
you've got everyone and I just love it when we
look at the censuses before and after whichever
particular censuses we were looking at and then
you find even more children and you wait a minute
this is it's not just how we have it that you
have a few kids and they live in the house and
then they at some point they leave home there
you have lots of kids over many decades and they
might leave home at all different ages so you're
James who's not there in the 1851 he hopefully
has left and is gainfully employed somewhere
but then the fact you've got another James turning
up I'm like oh no maybe you're going to be having
to check in the death records for that James
as well just to make sure or what else is going
on there so many things each clue has another
little to do task off the back of it doesn't
it that's what I'm enjoying but equally This
one's bringing me lots of little to -dos and
little checks to go on. But yeah, the James on
the 1851 is five years old. But then you're like,
well, if they've named another child James, is
that in honour of the first James? Has he died?
It could be. I think you need to be finding out
about... First of all, look for James Hearns
between 1841. I think it was taken in... June
wasn't it so between June 1841 and how old did
you say this little lad was five or six in 1851
it's five in 1851 yeah yeah so between June 1841
and then 1846 47 just have a search and see if
you can find a young James Hearn yeah won't hopefully
there's something else going on but Yeah, the
other one should be 27. But equally, that's from
a potential first marriage that I still have
to explore as well. Yes. Maybe Elizabeth just
really wanted a son called James and she didn't
care that I already had one. So many options.
So many options, yes. You said you've got her
dad. What was her dad's name? Well, I said I've
got a dad, but like I've just said, it hasn't
logged it. Oh, it has. Oh, I need to tidy this.
It's gone a bit crazy. So her dad's called John
Thing and her mum's called Mary Thing. What a
great surname. Absolutely love it. Yeah, and
I love it as well that the surname has come to
be kind of true. I have to say, when you said
she was called Elizabeth Thing, I was like, really?
But it is proving to be a proper surname. Yeah.
Yes. I have cheated a little bit, but I've been
talking about it. I was like, let's find out
about the thing surname. And it says that it
is potentially can have several origins, but
one of them is a place name surname originating
from Shropshire or Suffolk. Suffolk name. It's
pretty cool, isn't it? Perfect tie in that. That
makes me feel even more confident. Yeah. Yeah.
I mean, I've not done any of the map research
that you told me to go do, which. I think I'm
going to have to do, because clearly I'm going
to be hanging around in Suffolk for a bit. Yeah,
that's good. I'm a little bit confused by what
Ancestry's done to me, though. It hasn't created
duplicate entries. It just hasn't registered
Elizabeth as the natural spouse. Let's have a
look, then. Can you share your screen? I can
share my screen. Can you see my screen? I can
see your screen, yes. This is Elizabeth. She's
very naughtily got parents John Thing and Mary
Thing. I need to find Mary Things. You need to
edit Mary Thing's surname away. Oh, I just love
it. Do it now, naughty Nathan. And you can do
that Krista Cowan hack. You can just put five
underscores in there because then it means you
can search for everyone. It means you've actively
know. Let's say you didn't put any surname in
there. then you might just think you forgot to
add it in. Whereas if you add in five underscores,
you're showing that that maiden name hasn't been
findable for that ancestor so far. But get rid
of the word thing as well. Get rid of the word
thing. Remove the word thing. Oh, my good God.
Maiden name. But what if I have two Marys in
my tree at some point and they're both Mary with
five underscores? Okay, leave it in then. That
could be your system. I'm just going to put it
back. It's a thing. I mean, what are the chances
of having someone called Mary in your tree anyway?
They're everywhere. Right. So if I go to my actual
tree, you normally have your person and then
their potential wife or husband. It hasn't put
Elizabeth thing in the potential wife or husband.
It's put her as like a second marriage. I mean,
she's a second marriage, but... Ancestry still
firmly believes that Elizabeth Thing is the wife.
Would you want to click on that potential one
and see what it's going to tell you? Found the
mother of David Hearn. Review details. Yeah,
yeah, all these facts match with everything I've
got. I think it's the same person. Maybe I'll
delete my Elizabeth. No, just put, um, just click
yes. I'm not clicking yes. Not without all the
facts. It's all matching up to everything you've
just been talking about. I know, okay. But this
is the 1841 census. Yes. Okay. Well. You can't
see me right now because this is a podcast, but
I have my hands over my eyes as I press yes.
And then merge them. Merge them? Oh, look. Mary
Hall. It thinks her name's Mary Hall. And who
does it think that your other Elizabeth Thing's
parents are then? Because it's got them. So click
on her and see. John. Oh, sugar. John Thing and
Mary Thing. That was the closest I've ever come
to swearing on a podcast. It doesn't even have
an up arrow for her to have parents yet. I've
got John Thing and Mary underscore. It's because
she wasn't your main line on the book you'd selected.
I think you had her husband. So her little side
branch of the tree was just showing their tiny,
wasn't it? It's just annoying because I've put
in one, two, three, four, five sources already.
It doesn't even have all the kids either, does
it? I am vexed. Merge. Do I merge here or do
I merge the proper one? I don't think it matters.
Okay, you're dangerous. Maybe I'm in a bit of
a dangerous mood today, aren't I? There's no
logical reason to think why you haven't got them
both. Maybe you shouldn't trust me. Maybe I'm
in a strange mood. I do need to do this. I do
agree with you. I just won't do it live. Let's
not rush. Okay. Let's be methodical. Okay. You're
dangerous, right? Yeah. Yeah. Feeling a bit reckless.
You don't have to be reckless with someone else's
family tree, is it? I'm sorry about that, Nathan.
It's fine, it's fine. It's a good job I resisted
the urge. Yes. I do have one question. I know
I've probably asked this question before, but
looking at Elizabeth Thing... Yes. She is my
fourth -time great -grandmother. Yes. But so
is Jane Scopes. She's not on the tree yet. She's
the marriage that I haven't fully... Sorted out,
yeah. Which one of those women is my fourth time's
great -grandmother? The one who is the mother
of your third great -grandparent. Yeah, I realised
as I said it. Yes. Which would be David, right?
Yes. And that was the child. Right, roger that.
That makes total sense. I don't know why I couldn't
work that out. No, so you can put on Jane. That's
completely fine. And you can even put on Jane's
children. You can put on Jane's grandchildren
or great -grandchildren. Because you're looking
at your tree on ancestry, so you can see all
the siblings for all of the branches and all
of the people. But then let's say you had added
Jane and all of her many children and grandchildren,
great -grandchildren. If you switch the view
so that you saw it going horizontally, so you're
just seeing a traditional kind of pedigree layout
of just your actual... direct lines your parents
grandparents great -grandparents etc then you
wouldn't see um jane visible you're only going
to see elizabeth and your your main event people
yeah yeah yeah that makes sense and both both
some people can't stand the other way because
it's too confusing seeing all of those siblings
and then some people don't like this way i say
some people me i don't like this way i like seeing
all the relations I like the vertical tree more
than the horizontal tree, but I will actively
go and hide all siblings so I just see direct
line. And then when I'm feeling that urge to
get a bit more interested and whimsical, then
I'll let some of the siblings out of the cage.
But yeah, I'm enjoying this little bit of research.
It's cool. It's lots of days and facts, but it's...
It's intriguing. It's little bits of puzzles
and everyone's connected to the other one and
I can't get the fact I want without finding out
about five other people beforehand. Saying that
out loud sounds tiring, but actually that's part
of the thrill of the chase, isn't it? It's like
I need this one fact and then it's going to let
me say 100 % yes and I like that. That really
excites me. And also I find this really interesting
because for ages... In quite a lot of podcasts,
you go, I'm not touching 1841 census. It's pretty
much as bad as DNA. I'm just not touching it.
And then now you've just blithely been using
it. You've been looking at records that predate
it and just happy, happy. You haven't even worried
about it. I mean, yeah. I wouldn't say I'm happy
with it, but I've used it. I was quite excited
to find what I wanted from it. I've made notes,
though, that I need to add people because the
1841, like you've said before, won't let you
add wholesale. You've got to go in individually
to each person. So, like, for this James and
this John that only appear in the 1841, I don't
actually have them on my tree yet because when
I added Elizabeth from 1841, it didn't pull them
in. I need to go back and do that. I think that's
just it. I'm just really lazy. So that's what
the 1841... Makes me feel... But yeah, it has
been good. It spurred me on to try and get further
back and not be scared of the records. Like,
I've had a lot of baptism records appear that
predate the 1841 and a few wedding certificates
which are completely different out there to what
we're used to, which is quite fun to see. I've
enjoyed that. I say I've enjoyed it. It has given
me a little bit of terror, but... It looks like
someone's just written something on a piece of
paper. This is a fact, have it? That is exactly
what's happened. They have just written it on
a piece of paper. Just a very special piece of
paper. Yeah. I'm slowly sort of having a bit
more faith and believing that it is real. But
yeah, that's been good. Yeah, I think it's impressive.
Next week, DNA. Do you know, I think you might
actually do that. No, let's not be silly. I mean,
maybe you won't because you're just having too
much fun in the actual records at the moment.
But I think you're just going to, there'll be
some reason or other where you just, before you
know it, on a podcast soon, you'll just blithely
go, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, no matches,
blah, blah, blah, blah, cluster, cluster. Yeah.
I mean, no doubt, no doubt. I think I will get
there eventually. I'm just dragging my heels
and trying to find everything else I can find
before that point. You mentioned at the start
how much you like games and things like that.
So I think you're going to really like the DNA
from that sort of aspect. Really? Yes. Has it
got a puzzle aspect to it? Yes, puzzles, collecting,
sorting. I think it's right up your street. Okay,
cool. Yeah. I guess, I mean, we've mentioned
it before, but I just, in my mind, I haven't
had an actual... Honest reason. Mysteries, stories,
people from all over the place. Because your
DNA matches, there's a very good chance you're
going to get lots outside the UK. So that's fun.
Not just pudsy. Not just pudsy. If you get something
pudsy there, you've got to meet up with them
for a drink. That'd be fun. Or dick. Yes. It
sounds terrifying. Well, it depends how closely
related you are. It could be terrifying, but
hopefully it'll be distant enough to be fun.
Cool. Yes. Not too shocking. Yes. Yeah. Well,
I say keep up the good work. I think you're doing
amazingly, Nathan. Yeah. It's just weird, isn't
it? Like, for weeks I've been so... merrily involved
in like texture and context and local history
and been like i don't want facts i don't want
figures and now i'm in the facts and figures
and i'm absolutely loving it it just shows you
how big the scope is of the job though or the
task definitely this is just one strand of my
fourth to get to my fifth which looks quite attainable
from what i'm getting but i just want to obviously
make sure all the facts match before i let anybody
on my tree But it's brought in a lot of extra
people just to get two more names on my tree.
It's crazy. And then I've got to do that, I don't
know how many times. How many fourth slash fifth
times grandparents have you got? Loads. 64. So
you've got 16, two times greats. 32, three times
greats. 64, four times greats. Wow. That's a
lot, isn't it? So if each one of them brings
me eight other... in just to get back to my fifth.
That's a lot of people. Yes. Yes. Cool. Oh, yeah,
I'm going to get my tree completely finished
by next week. I think you might do. Completely
finished. It's impossible, guys. You can't do
it. No, I do think you'd want to, Nathan. Well,
it's not possible, is it? It's not possible.
You can get stuck, like literally totally stuck.
Yes. Even that seems quite hard work when there's
so many people to go at. Yeah, there's always
something else to do, even if you're stuck on
one bit. There is. Yes. The tough thing is, right,
I'm enjoying doing this and I want to keep doing
this on everyone else, but I'm already, like
I've mentioned a few times, I'm very interested
in Elijah and his Christmas Day birth and being
in the Navy and stuff. I guess I'll just give
myself a side quest just to learn a bit about
him. And that sounds great. I mean, what a lovely
flow you've got there. You're doing some more
tree building. You're getting another generation
and all of those branches. You're working out
a bit of a blended family. You're learning about
a new geographical area that you haven't found
ancestors in before. So that's your kind of regular
tree building stuff, plus dipping back a bit
further in time to new records you're not familiar
with. And I actually feel you've built that up.
as securely and fully as you want to for the
moment, then, as you say, you can have your side
quest into Victorian naval records. It's brilliant.
What a great side quest. Yeah? Yeah, no, it does
sound good. It's fascinating, though, isn't it?
Like, what brings you, what draws you into different
people? And then, like, we were just discussing
the potential of James dying and there being
another James. I'm going to then spend some time
looking for that. And I already will spend time
looking for that because I need to find out about
his mother and that potential marriage. So suddenly
spending a little bit more time with a very select
few people, whereas I've mentioned there's like
eight children and I'm only really focusing on
maybe two or three of them. The other ones I'm
ignoring for now. It's interesting what pulls
you in. And then also, because then at another
point you might revisit that branch and there'll
be one of those children you never looked at
before. And for whatever reason, maybe you've
subsequently seen them mentioned in a will or
there'll be some reason which draw your attention
to them, even if they're not a direct line. And
you'll think, how did I not look at Emily before?
I mean, her story is incredible. Yeah. Yeah,
definitely. Making up there's an Emily, you know,
whatever. I got you. I got you. Yeah. Yeah. And
this hedgehog that they've got in the family,
he's lovely. Yes. Well, it's very important to
look after the hedgehogs, isn't it? It is. I
saw one last week. I was sat out in the garden
late at night and just having a chat. And this
little hedgehog came sniffing around. It was
lovely. It is very exciting. We've got a hedgehog
near us, or maybe two hedgehogs. I'm kind of
hoping it's two. I have seen two at one time,
so there were two. So hopefully they're both
still alive. It's exciting. I've been giving
them water and giving them dog food, but they
don't like our dog's current dog food. So they
can't be that hungry because they're leaving
some of the dog's dog food. They're very specific
in what they eat. They are. They don't like this
one. They don't like the dog food which has jelly
in it. They're like... I can't blame them. Yeah.
Cool. It was nice to see one. I haven't seen
one for years. Yeah. I just think our ancestors
would have seen so many of them. Whereas we,
sadly, we've had... Loads of them, which we've
run over with our automobiles. And then now they're
getting dehydrated because of our climate change.
Yeah. It's bad news to be a hedgehog. It is.
Well, we've put a bowl of water out for it, so.
Good. Can I quickly chip in there? This is back
to Christopher's emails because they were so
funny. So, you know, we were talking about your
Airfix models the other day. Yes. talking about
them, brought back Christopher's memories of
him removing the accumulated dust off his Airfix
kits. He used to have to stand on the bed with
a paintbrush in his hand. Health and safety risk.
In the early days, the ceilings were papered
so it was easy to push a pin between the paper
and the ceiling with cotton thread attached and
then you could suspend your Airfix models from
the ceiling. Nice. It's really good, isn't it?
It is cool. I don't like dusting. I do feel the
dusting. It's irritating. I don't like the dusting,
but I like the Airfix models. I use a toothbrush
now on mine. Do you? I've got the Lego models
now, but I'll sit and happily spend an afternoon
with a toothbrush scrubbing it. Whatever. It's
very therapeutic, actually. Yes, it's satisfying,
isn't it? Yes, I clearly need to get out more.
No, I think it's fine to have happy, simple pleasures.
You've got family history, some of your other
pleasures, because that's not so simple, so you
need to have some really simple pleasures. I
mean, happy and simple, it's two things that
describe me nicely. And then you can mull over
family history stuff while you're doing the dusting.
You can, you can indeed. It's just good, isn't
it? I'm excited to have names that I'm interested
in. I was so worried for a long time that I was
never going to have that intrigue factor again.
George Horatio. I love him to death. Blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah. I talk about him all the time.
I was so drawn into his life and I just didn't
know how that happened. And I didn't think it
could necessarily happen again in just searching
for a bunch of names, but apparently it does.
That's funny, isn't it? I agree with you. I don't
think you can, you can't put a finger on why
you warm or don't warm. or curiosity peaked to
some ancestors in other ways. It's strange. Yeah.
Just, what are you doing? There are three or
four on my tree that I've already got, but there
are definitely lines where I've just gone back
and they are literally just names and dates.
Like, previously I had moaned to you about saying
I'm finding it a bit boring just finding names
and dates, and it's because none of them pulled
me in. And I don't know, again, what's happened
here, but... I guess a little bit of mystery
and intrigue does pull you in. Oh, I need to
find out where this is and where it lies. Suddenly
I'm in this tree. It's cool. So yeah, so my task
is to somehow carry on with this. I don't think
I'm going to investigate Elijah yet. He will
be safe for a rainy day. I need to shore up all
the details. That's my challenge for next week.
And I think that'll be more than enough to keep
me busy. And you can find out as well whether
you did go ahead and do that merge with duplicate
or not. I'll definitely do that because I can
feel that irritating me already. I'm just, yeah,
it's making me feel a bit twitchy. Sweaty, some
might say. Yes. So my list, I've got the marriage
to Jane Scopes. I have got the potential of Elizabeth
living with her son -in -law and finding out
who this Sarah is. I need to find out what happened
to James in case he died. That's it. That's my
tasks. They're my three tasks. Anything else
is a bonus. Sounds really good. I think that's
enough. I think that'll be a lot, and I think
I'll end up with probably another 26 people on
my tree just doing that. I look forward to hearing
how you get on next week, Nathan. Yes. Okay,
thanks for listening then, everybody. I've just
been there without saying what I'm going to do
over the next week, but I do know what I'm going
to do, but I'm not going to say it. I did wonder
what you were like, oh, we're going now. We're
going to go now. I'm just going to carry on with
my AI homework. Yeah. Okay. Okay. But thanks
for listening, everybody. And we look forward
to you tuning in next week. And thanks, Nathan,
for sharing all of your lovely discoveries. They
do sound good. No problem. And happy researching,
everybody. Bye.